Home Articles Golden Oldies Speaking Schedule About Christ or Chaos Links Donations Contact Us
November 21, 2010

 Ever Faithful to His Infidelity

 by Thomas A. Droleskey

Ever faithful to his own infidelity to the Catholic Faith, Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI, keeps reiterating as "pope" apostate themes that he outlined in Principles of Catholic Theology twenty-eight years ago. It was in Principles of Catholic Theology that the then "Cardinal" Ratzinger explained that he did not envision "unity" with the Protestant sects would require the obliteration of their false structures, which are, of course, hideous in the sight of God:

As regards Protestantism, the maximum demand of the Catholic Church would be that the Protestant ecclesiological ministers be regarded as totally invalid and that Protestants be converted to Catholicism; the maximum demand of Protestants, on the other hand, would be that the Catholic Church accept, along with the unconditional acknowledgement of all Protestant ministries, the Protestant concept of ministry and their understanding of the Church and thus, in practice, renounce the apostolic and sacramental structure of the Church, which would mean, in practice, the conversion of Catholics to Protestantism and their acceptance of a multiplicity of distinct community structures as the historical form of the Church. While the first three maximum demands are today rather unanimously rejected by Christian consciousness, the fourth exercises a kind of fascination for it – as it were, a certain conclusiveness that makes it appear to be the real solution to the problem. This is all the more true since there is joined to it the expectation that a Parliament of Churches, a "truly ecumenical council’, could then harmonize this pluralism and promote a Christian unity of action.  That no real union would result from this, but that its very impossibility would become a single common dogma, should convince anyone who examines the suggestion closely that such a way would not bring Church unity but only a final renunciation of it.  As a result, none of the maximum solutions offers any real hope of unity.


As a result, none of the maximum solutions offers any real hope of unity. In any event, church unity is not a political problem that can be solved by means of compromise or the weighing of what is regarded as possible or acceptable. What is at stake here is unity of belief, that is, the question of truth, which cannot be the object of political maneuvering. As long as and to the extent that the maximum solution must be regarded as a requirement of truth itself, just so long and to just that extent there will be no other recourse than simply to strive to convert one's partner in the debate. In other words, the claim of truth ought not to be raised where there is not a compelling and indisputable reason for doing so. We may not interpret as truth that which is, in reality, a historical development with a more or less close relationship to truth. Whenever, then, the weight of truth and its incontrovertibility are involved, they must be met by a corresponding sincerity that avoids laying claim to truth prematurely and is ready to search for the inner fullness of truth with the eyes of love. (Joseph "Cardinal" Ratzinger, Principles of Catholic Theology, pp. 197-198.)


"None of the maximum solutions offers any real hope of unity," not even the immutable teaching of the Catholic Church that all non-Catholics, including Protestants, must convert unconditionally to the Catholic Faith in order to be save?

No, this is not "Pope" Benedict XVI's "vision" of "unity," something that he noted three days ago in an address to the "Pontifical" Council for Promoting Christian Unity in terms that are almost identical to the apostasy he published twenty-eight years ago:

Dear friends, despite the presence of new problematic situations or difficult points for the dialogue, the aim of the ecumenical path remains unchanged, as does the firm commitment in pursuing it. It is not, however, a commitment according to political categories, so to speak, in which the ability to negotiate or the greater capacity to find compromises come into play, from which could be expected, as good mediators, that, after a certain time, one will arrive at agreements acceptable to all. Ecumenical action has a twofold movement. On one hand there is the convinced, passionate and tenacious search to find full unity in truth, to excogitate models of unity, to illumine oppositions and dark points in order to reach unity. And this in the necessary theological dialogue, but above all in prayer and in penance, in that spiritual ecumenism which constitutes the throbbing heart of the whole path: The unity of Christians is and remains prayer, it resides in prayer. On the other hand, another operative movement, which arises from the firm awareness that we do not know the hour of the realization of the unity among all the disciples of Christ and we cannot know it, because unity is not "made by us," God "makes" it: it comes from above, from the unity of the Father with the Son in the dialogue of love which is the Holy Spirit; it is a taking part in the divine unity. And this should not make our commitment diminish, rather, it should make us ever more attentive to receive the signs of the times of the Lord, knowing how to recognize with gratitude that which already unites us and working to consolidate it and make it grow. In the end, also in the ecumenical path, it is about leaving to God what is only his and of exploring, with seriousness, constancy and dedication, what is our task, being aware that to our commitment belongs the binomial of acting and suffering, of activity and patience, of effort and joy.
We confidently invoke the Holy Spirit, so that he will guide our way and that each one will feel with renewed vigor the appeal to work for the ecumenical cause. I encourage all of you to continue your work; it is a help that you render to the Bishop of Rome in fulfilling his mission at the service of unity. As a sign of affection and gratitude, I impart to you my heartfelt apostolic blessing. (Papal Words to Members of Christian Unity Council.)


"Excogitate models of unity"? This is the talk of an insane man. This is craziness. This is absurdity.

Our true popes have told us what all non-Catholics, including Protestants, need to do to be united with the true Church that Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ founded upon the Rock of Peter, the Pope:

It is for this reason that so many who do not share 'the communion and the truth of the Catholic Church' must make use of the occasion of the Council, by the means of the Catholic Church, which received in Her bosom their ancestors, proposes [further] demonstration of profound unity and of firm vital force; hear the requirements [demands] of her heart, they must engage themselves to leave this state that does not guarantee for them the security of salvation. She does not hesitate to raise to the Lord of mercy most fervent prayers to tear down of the walls of division, to dissipate the haze of errors, and lead them back within holy Mother Church, where their Ancestors found salutary pastures of life; where, in an exclusive way, is conserved and transmitted whole the doctrine of Jesus Christ and wherein is dispensed the mysteries of heavenly grace.

It is therefore by force of the right of Our supreme Apostolic ministry, entrusted to us by the same Christ the Lord, which, having to carry out with [supreme] participation all the duties of the good Shepherd and to follow and embrace with paternal love all the men of the world, we send this Letter of Ours to all the Christians from whom We are separated, with which we exhort them warmly and beseech them with insistence to hasten to return to the one fold of Christ; we desire in fact from the depths of the heart their salvation in Christ Jesus, and we fear having to render an account one day to Him, Our Judge, if, through some possibility, we have not pointed out and prepared the way for them to attain eternal salvation. In all Our prayers and supplications, with thankfulness, day and night we never omit to ask for them, with humble insistence, from the eternal Shepherd of souls the abundance of goods and heavenly graces. And since, if also, we fulfill in the earth the office of vicar, with all our heart we await with open arms the return of the wayward sons to the Catholic Church, in order to receive them with infinite fondness into the house of the Heavenly Father and to enrich them with its inexhaustible treasures. By our greatest wish for the return to the truth and the communion with the Catholic Church, upon which depends not only the salvation of all of them, but above all also of the whole Christian society: the entire world in fact cannot enjoy true peace if it is not of one fold and one shepherd. (Pope Pius IX, Iam Vos Omnes, September 13, 1868.)

So, Venerable Brethren, it is clear why this Apostolic See has never allowed its subjects to take part in the assemblies of non-Catholics: for the union of Christians can only be promoted by promoting the return to the one true Church of Christ of those who are separated from it, for in the past they have unhappily left it. To the one true Church of Christ, we say, which is visible to all, and which is to remain, according to the will of its Author, exactly the same as He instituted it. During the lapse of centuries, the mystical Spouse of Christ has never been contaminated, nor can she ever in the future be contaminated, as Cyprian bears witness: "The Bride of Christ cannot be made false to her Spouse: she is incorrupt and modest. She knows but one dwelling, she guards the sanctity of the nuptial chamber chastely and modestly."The same holy Martyr with good reason marveled exceedingly that anyone could believe that "this unity in the Church which arises from a divine foundation, and which is knit together by heavenly sacraments, could be rent and torn asunder by the force of contrary wills." For since the mystical body of Christ, in the same manner as His physical body, is one, compacted and fitly joined together, it were foolish and out of place to say that the mystical body is made up of members which are disunited and scattered abroad: whosoever therefore is not united with the body is no member of it, neither is he in communion with Christ its head. (Pope Pius XI, Mortalium Animos, January 6, 1928.)


There is no other model of "unity" other than the unconditional conversion of non-Catholics to the Catholic Faith.

Ratzinger/Benedict rejects the "relevance" of the missionary work of the likes of Saint Fidelis of Sigmaringen and of Saint Francis de Sales and Saint Peter Canisius, each of preached to Protestants about their errors and the necessity of their converting to the true Faith. Saint Fidelis gave up his life in this effort as he was killed by the miserable creatures known as Calvinists on April 24, 1622, just about eighteen and one-half months before Saint Josaphat Kuntseych was murdered by a group of Orthodox thugs in Vitsebsk, Belarus (then the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth) on November 16, 1623, for the sort of missionary work among them that is now forbidden by the counterfeit church of conciliarism. This is all "irrelevant" now that the conciliar revolutionaries have embraced the "new way" of ecumenical "dialogue" and "inter-religious prayer services" to advance the kind of "spiritual ecumenism" that was specifically condemned by Pope Pius XI in Mortalium Animos, January 6, 1928. (See the Appendix A below for a brief reminder concerning the "spiritual ecumenism" of the late Abbe Paul Couturier, whose life and work were noted by Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II in footnote fifty of Ut Unum Sint, May 25, 1995, and by Ratzinger/Benedict XVI in Cologne, Germany, on August 19, 2005.)

Ratzinger/Benedict also rejects those past papal pronouncements that interferes with the conciliar agenda, dismissing them with a wave of the hand by means of his philosophically absurd and dogmatically condemned "hermeneutic of continuity and discontinuity." His blithe acceptance, for example, of the "structures" and "traditions" of the heretical Anglican sect as the foundation of his overture to "conservative" Anglo-Catholics in Anglicanorum Coetibus, November 9, 2009, signifies that these "structures" and "traditions" have somehow gained "legitimacy" with the passage of time. Even Mr. Rowan Williams, who plays the part of an "archbishop" in Anglican sect, noted just two days ago how he appreciates the false "pontiff's" acceptance of his false church's "traditions" as found in Anglicanorum Coetibus even though he, Rowan Williams, regrets that some members of his own sect are shifting their allegiances from one part of the One World Ecumenical Church to another:

In regard to those who have described the creation of ordinariates for former Anglicans in the Catholic Church as a "prophetic gesture," the archbishop of Canterbury said, "I believe that the ordinariate helps people to value the Anglican heritage and patrimony. I am happy to praise God for this reason.

"I don't think it's an aggressive act oriented to destabilizing the relations of the churches and it only remains to be seen the extent of the movement of which we are speaking."
"But prophetic?" Archbishop Williams asked. "Perhaps, in the sense that the Catholic Church says in this way that there are ways of being Christian in the Western Church that are not restricted by historical Catholic-Roman identity. It's something we can talk about." (Anglican Leader Notes Positives in New Ordinariates.)


Gone with wind, therefore, is Pope Saint Pius V's declaration of the heretical nature of the Anglican books that are being accepted by the conciliar authorities:

Prohibiting with a strong hand the use of the true religion, which after its earlier overthrow by Henry VIII (a deserter therefrom) Mary, the lawful queen of famous memory, had with the help of this See restored, she has followed and embraced the errors of the heretics. She has removed the royal Council, composed of the nobility of England, and has filled it with obscure men, being heretics; oppressed the followers of the Catholic faith; instituted false preachers and ministers of impiety; abolished the sacrifice of the mass, prayers, fasts, choice of meats, celibacy, and Catholic ceremonies; and has ordered that books of manifestly heretical content be propounded to the whole realm and that impious rites and institutions after the rule of Calvin, entertained and observed by herself, be also observed by her subjects. She has dared to eject bishops, rectors of churches and other Catholic priests from their churches and benefices, to bestow these and other things ecclesiastical upon heretics, and to determine spiritual causes; has forbidden the prelates, clergy and people to acknowledge the Church of Rome or obey its precepts and canonical sanctions; has forced most of them to come to terms with her wicked laws, to abjure the authority and obedience of the pope of Rome, and to accept her, on oath, as their only lady in matters temporal and spiritual; has imposed penalties and punishments on those who would not agree to this and has exacted then of those who persevered in the unity of the faith and the aforesaid obedience; has thrown the Catholic prelates and parsons into prison where many, worn out by long languishing and sorrow, have miserably ended their lives. All these matter and manifest and notorious among all the nations; they are so well proven by the weighty witness of many men that there remains no place for excuse, defense or evasion. (Regnans in Excelsis, the decree issued by Pope Saint Pius V on March 5, 1570, excommunicating Queen Elizabeth I.)


False ministers. Abolition of the sacrifice of the Mass, prayers, fasts, choice of meats, and Catholic ceremonies? Um, sounds like a perfect description of the work of the late Annibale Bugnini's Consilium and its final produce, the Protestant and Masonic Novus Ordo service (and its false rites of episcopal consecration and priestly ordination).

There is no need to "search" for unity. Such a search is preposterous on its very face.

Not content with praising the nefarious work of false ecumenism on the occasion of the fiftieth anniversary of the "pontifical" council that was headed between February 21, 2001, and July 1, 2010, by the notorious Walter "Cardinal" Kasper (see Forever Prowling the World Seeking the Ruin of Souls, part 1 and Forever Prowling the World Seeking The Ruin of Souls, part 2), the busy "pontiff," now in the eighth month of the sixth year of his false "pontificate," also met this past week with leaders of the one of the many disparate "movements" that exist within the "big tent" of the counterfeit church of conciliarism, praising the work of "The Neocatechumenal Way" as he charged them with the mission to be agents of the "new evangelization" of Europe (see Benedict Meets With Neocatechumenal Way Initiators).

The "new evangelization," of course, is an indoctrination program in conciliarism, and the fact that Ratzinger/Benedict chose the members of the "The Neocatechumenal Way" to conduct this indoctrination is indeed revealing as this "movement" even deviates from the "official" teaching of the conciliar church in many areas (see a critique of the Neo-Catechumenal Way, made from the "resist but recognize" perspective of the Society of Saint Pius X, which can be found in Appendix B below).

Mind you, this is not even to mention Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI's comments, made in a new book that is the product of interviews he gave to journalist Peter Seewald, on the use of a certain type of prophylactic by men engaged in immoral activity so as to "prevent" the transmission of a disease that is contracted principally by means of sins committed against the Sixth and Ninth Commandments. Commentary on that will be reserved until I can read those comments in the context of the book.

We do not, however, need to refer to Ratzinger/Benedict's comments to Peter Seewald or to write extensive commentaries on the use of part of the crypt church of the beautiful Basilica di San Carlos al Corso into a nightclub, "GP2" for Giovanni Paolo il Secondo (see Church Joins the Club Scene) to have proof of his commitment to one condemned apostasy after another. Ratzinger/Benedict and his cohorts are really screaming at us that they're not Catholic as they remain ever faithful to their own infidelity.

The great Feast of the Presentation of the Blessed Virgin Mary is commemorated today, the Twenty-sixth and Last Sunday after Pentecost. Our Lady is dishonored, if not blasphemed, in most of Protestantism. Today's great feast will thus go unnoticed by most people, including most Catholics, in the world this day, including the world of the Novus Ordo, where today is the substantially altered Feast of Christ the King (the change in this feast was discussed most recently in We Proclaim Anew What Protestants and Conciliarists Alike Reject: The Social Reign of Christ the King). We know, however, that to dishonor the Blessed Mother is dishonor her Divine Son. It cannot be this way with us. We must honor Our Lady as we pray to her, especially by means of her Most Holy Rosary, that she will present us to her Divine Son at the moment of our deaths.

Dom Prosper Gueranger, O.S.B., wrote the following about the history of this great feast day in his The Liturgical Year, teaching us that the King of France, Charles V, understood that nations must give public honor and glory to the Mother of God, something that is rejected by "Pope" Benedict XVI, who, though making reference to Our Lady during his recent journey to Spain, never once--as in not a single time--mentioned her Most Holy Rosary:

The East had been celebrating for seven centuries at least the entrance of the Mother of God into the temple of Jerusalem, when in 1372 Gregory XI permitted it to be kept for the first time by the Roman court at Avignon. Mary in return broke the chains of captivity that had bound the Papacy for seventy years; and soon the successor of St. Peter returned to Rome. The feast of the Visitation, as we saw on July 2, was in like manner inserted into the Western calendar to commemorate the re-establishment of unity after the schism which followed the exile.

In 1373, following the example of the Sovereign Pontiff, Charles V of France introduced the feast of the Presentation into the chapel of his palace. By letters dated November 10, 1374, the masters and students of the college of Navarre, he expressed his desire that it should be celebrated throughout the kingdom: "Charles, by the grace of God king of the Franks, to our dearly beloved: health in Him who ceases not to honour His Mother on earth. Among other objects of our solicitude, of our daily care and diligent meditation, that which rightly occupies our first thoughts is, that the blessed Virgin and most Holy Empress be honoured by us with very great love and praise as becomes the veneration due to her. For it is our duty to glorify her; and we, who raise the eyes of our soul to her on high, know what an incomparable protectress she is to all, how powerful a mediatrix with her blessed Son, for those who honour her with a pure heart. . . . Wherefore, wishing to excite our faithful people to solemnize the said feast, as we ourselves propose to do by God's assistance every year of our life, we send this Office to your devotion, in order to increase your joy."

Such was the language of princes in those days. Now just at the very time the wise and pious king, following up the work begun at Bretigny by our Lady of Chartres, rescued France from its from its fallen and dismembered condition. In the State, then, as well as in the Church, at this moment so critical for both our Lady in her Presentation commanded the storm, and the smile of the infant Mary dispersed the clouds.


Imagine if we had such rulers today as France had in the glories of Christendom! Public honor and glory given to the Mother of God on her feast days. That would be something worth praising! Alas, how can the rulers of today give such honor and glory when the man who is considered by almost everyone in the world is the "pope" does not believe that rulers do not have an obligation to recognize and to submit to the Social Kingship of Our Lady's Divine Son, Christ the King, no less to give, Mary our Immaculate Queen, public honor and glory?

Dom Gueranger explained the mystical significance of this day:

Through the graceful infant now mounting the temple steps He takes possession of that temple whose priests will hereafter disown Him; for this child whom the temple welcomes to-day is His 'throne.' Already His fragrance precedes and announces Him in the Mother in whose bosom He is to be 'anointed with the oil of gladness' as the Christ among His brethren; already the angels hail her as the Queen whose fruitful virginity will give birth to all those consecrated souls who keep for the divine Spouse the 'myrrh' and the incense of their holocausts, those 'daughters of kings' who are to form her court of honour.

But our Lady's Presentation also opens new horizons before the Church. On the Cycle of the saints, which is not so precisely limited as that of the Time, the mystery of Mary's sojourn in the sanctuary of the Old Covenant is our best preparation for the approaching season of Advent. Mary, led to the temple in order to prepare in retirement, humility, and love for her incomparable destiny, had also the mission of perfecting at the foot of the figurative altar the prayer of the human race, of itself ineffectual to draw down the Saviour from heaven. She was, as St. Bernardine of Siena says, the happy completion of all the waiting and the supplication for the coming of the Son of God; in her, as in their culminating-point, all the desires of the saints who had preceded her found their consummation and their term.

Through her wonderful understanding of the Scriptures, and her conformity, daily and hourly, to the minutest teachings and prescriptions of the Mosaic ritual, Mary everywhere found and adored the Messias hidden under the letter; she united herself to Him, immolated herself with Him in each of the many victims sacrificed before her eyes; and thus she rendered to the God of Sinai the homage hitherto vainly expected of the Law understood, practised, and made to fructify in all the fullness that beseemed its divine Legislator. Then could Jehovah truly say: 'As the rain and the snow come down from heaven and return no more thither, but soak the earth and water it, and make it to spring: . . . so shall My word be. . . it shall not return to Me void, but it shall do whatsoever I please.

Supplying thus for the deficiencies of the Gentiles as well as of the Synagogue, Mary behold in the bride of the Canticle of the Church of the future. In our name she addressed her supplications to Him whom she recognized as the Bridegroom, without, however, knowing that He was to be her own Son. Such yearnings of love, coming from her, were sufficient to obtain from the divine Word pardon for the infidelities of the past and the immorality into which the wandering world was plunging deeper and deeper. How well did this ark of the New Covenant replace that of the Jews, which had perished with the first temple! It was for her, though he knew it not, that Herod the Gentile and continued the construction of the second temple after it had remained desolate since the time of Zorobabel; for the temple, like the tabernacle before it, was but the home of the ark destined to be God's throne; but greater was the glory of the second temple which sheltered the reality, than of the first which contained but the figure.


We must never look to anyone for "advice" on First or Last Things, no matter whether they are the lords of the world or the lords of the counterfeit church of conciliarism, who cannot make these words of Dom Prosper Gueranger his own, who cannot make his own this prayer uttered by the great Benedictine of the Nineteenth Century:

'Congratulate me, all ye that love the Lord, because when I was a little one I pleased the Most High.' Such is the invitation thou addressed to  us, O Mary, in the Office chanted in thy honour; and on what feast couldst thou do so more appropriately?

When, even more little in thy humility than by thy tender age, thou didst mount, in thy sweet purity, the steps of the temple, all heaven must have owned that it was henceforth just for the Most High to take His delight in our earth. Having hitherto lived in retirement with thy blessed parents, this was thy first public act; it showed thee for a moment to the eyes of men, only to withdraw thee immediately into deeper obscurity. But as thou wast officially offered and presented to the Lord, He Himself doubtless, surrounded by the princes of His court, presented thee not less solemnly to those noble spirits as their Queen. In the fullness of the new light that then burst upon them, they understood at once thy incomparable greatness, the majesty of the temple where Jehovah was receiving a homage superior to that of their nine choirs, and the august prerogative of the Old Testament to have thee for its daughter, and to perfect, by its teachings and guidance during those twelve years, the formation of the Mother of God.

Holy Church, however, declares that we can imitate thee, O Mary, in this mystery of thy Presentation, as in all others. Deign to bless especially those privileged souls who, by the grace of their vocation, are even here below dwellers in the house of the Lord; may they be like that fruitful olive enriched by the holy Spirit, to which St. John Damascene compares thee. But is not every Christian, by reason of his Baptism, an indweller and a member of the Church. God's true sanctuary, prefigured by that of Moriah? May we through thy intercession, follow thee so closely in thy Presentation even here in the land of shadows, that we may deserve to be presented after thee to the Most High in the temple of His glory.


We must offer up our prayers and our sacrifices and humiliations and mortifications and penances to the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary, praying as many Rosaries each day as our states-in-life permit, so that every human being on the face of this earth, including the Protestants who are reaffirmed in their false beliefs time and time again by the lords of the conciliar church, will recognize in the Mother of God the Singular Vessel of Devotion without whose intercession we cannot get to Heaven.

A blessed commemorated feast of the Presentation of the Blessed Virgin Mary to you all!

Immaculate Heart of Mary, triumph soon!

Viva Cristo Rey! Vivat Christus Rex!

Our Lady of Fatima, 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.

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

See also: A Litany of Saints

Appendix A

The Spiritual Ecumenism of Abbe Paul Couturier: The Work of Father Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, S.J.

A third influence on Couturier was Teilhard de Chardin. Both men were scientists, and Teilhard's vision of the unity of creation and humanity expressed in the unity of Christ and the life of the Church appealed both scientifically and spiritually to Couturier. A reasoned consequence for him was that the unity of Christians was the sign for the unity of humanity, and that praying for the sanctification of Jews, Muslims and Hindus, among many others, could not fail but to lead to a new spiritual understanding of God where Christ could at last be recognised and understood. Couturier felt this keenly as he was partly Jewish and had been raised among Muslims in North Africa. It is worth noting that among Couturier's voluminous correspondents were Jews, Muslims, and Hindus, as well as every kind of Christian, all caught up in the Abbé's spirit of prayer, realising the significance and dimensions of prayer for the unity of Christians. Coincidentally, years later Mother Theresa spoke of the considerable number of Muslims who volunteered and worked at her house in Calcutta: 'If you are a Christian, I want to make you a better Christian - if you are a Muslim, I want to make you a better Muslim'. It cannot be denied that what those Muslims were seeing in Mother Theresa was Jesus Christ himself, just as the Abbe attracted so many to prayer across previously unbridgeable divides by his humility, penitence, and joyful charity in the peace of Christ.

2003-2004 also marks the 50th Anniversary of the launch of the Week of Prayer in Morocco as an act of charity and prayer among the people of Islam, a significant milestone in the experiences of today as much as then. (The Abbé Paul Couturier and Spiritual Ecumenism)


Appendix B

The Society of Saint Pius X on The Neocatechemunal Way (the 1999 version of the Society of Saint Pius X, that is)

In February 1972, a 400-page book was printed in Spain containing the advice given to the catechists of the Neo-Catechumenal Movement by Kiko Arguello and Carmen Hernandez, in charge of this Movement. This is an exceptional document revealing the reality of this association.

the Neo-Catechumenal Way, a heresy encouraged by Rome

This book is reserved to the catechists of the Movement and nobody else can acquire it. It became known, thanks to an indiscretion. The secret character of the advice given is often repeated in the book: “Don’t tell this to anybody else… If people knew this, they would go away quickly…” This is very surprising for a Movement which pretends to be Catholic. It seems, on the opposite, to be a kind of freemasonry. But let us go further.

“Traditional Christianism, with Baptism, First Communion, Sunday Mass, Commandments of God, was not a Christianism. It was dirt. We were pre-Christians.(…) God called us now to found a catechumen Movement turned towards rebirth (of real Christianism)”.

Ignoring and rejecting 2000 years of Catholic doctrine and practice of the Church, the Neo-Catechumenal way claims to rediscover the primitive and authentic Christian values. In this book, we can find at least six important points of that which is Catholic which was destroyed by this Movement.



The central point of the doctrine of Luther is that we can be saved without good works inspired by prayer, penance and charity. Faith alone is sufficient. This faith is essentially a confidence that God forgives sins because of Jesus Christ. As a consequence, the sacrament of penance is useless. (Dictionary of the Catholic Faith, D’Ales, Vol 4, p. 794, article: Reformation).

In the book of Kiko and Carmen, we read: “Man is not saved by good works (…), Jesus Christ did not come to give us a model of life, an example (…). The Holy Spirit doesn’t lead us to perfection, to good works (…), Christianism doesn’t require anything from us (…). God forgives freely the sins of those who believe that Jesus is the Savior.” Here, it is very clear!

In another place, they write that good works are the “signs of faith”, and that they are not Protestant. There is, however, such a great insistence that faith alone is essentially sufficient, that we could say that their doctrine on salvation is Protestant. In the Catholic Doctrine, good works are not only signs, but necessary means for salvation.


In the Catholic Doctrine, the Passion of Our Lord Jesus Christ was the cause of our salvation because, having been an exact reparation for all our sins, it was the price of our salvation, according to the plan of God: “For you have been bought with a great price.” (I Cor vi, 20). Kiko and Carmen write: “The notion of sacrifice entered in the Eucharist by condescension for the pagan mentality (of this time). (…) But does God need the Blood of His Son in order to be appeased?” And they explain that “by his Resurrection, Jesus showed us His Will to forgive us.” But it is no more His sacrifice of the Cross which obtained our forgiveness: “Because of the Theological renewal of Second Vatican Council, today, the dogma of Redemption is no more spoken of, but rather, the mystery of the Pasch of Jesus.”

We answer that no council of the Catholic Church can change its infallible doctrine! The doctrine of the Catholic Church is that the Sacrifice of Our Lord is together a Mystery of Justice and Love: the Divine Wisdom which was not obliged to require an exact reparation for our sins, but who chose this means to show us the gravity of sin1; the infinite love of God makes reparation in our place by the Second Person of the Holy Trinity having taken our nature; infinite love of the Son of God offering Himself on the Cross for the glory of his Father and our salvation; his esteem for His Son giving him such a difficult mission and rewarding Him by the gift of a name above all names.

(Dictionary of the Catholic Faith – Article: Redemption. Summa of St. Thomas Aquinas: Treaty of the Passion)


For Kiko and Carmen, to think that “the essential of confession consists in confessing our own sins in order to receive absolution is a magic and an individualistic conception of this sacrament, where it is a man who forgives our sins.” For them the importance of this sacrament is not the absolution because we are already forgiven in Jesus Christ; but it is the community of the Church which is the sign of Jesus Christ and which forgives (!).

Kiko and Carmen forgot these words of Our Lord Jesus Christ: “Whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven; and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven (Matthew XVI, 19)”. Our Lord spoke to His Apostles and successors (bishops and priests) and not to the community of the faithful!

The Eucharistic Miracle at Lanciano gave us the proof that Christ is really and transubstantially present in the Holy Eucharist.


The Mass, for Kiko and Carmen, is only “the memorial of the Pasch of Jesus, of his passage from death to life”, and again: “The notion of sacrifice is a condescension for the pagan mentality (…). At the beginning of the Church, in the Theology of the Mass, there was no sacrifice of Jesus, no sacrifice of the Cross, no Calvary, but only a sacrifice of praise.”

This is a typical Protestant conception of the Mass. Let us quote here some canons of the Council of Trent (22nd Session):

“If anyone say that in the Mass, a true and real sacrifice is not offered to God (…), let him be anathema (Canon 1).

If anyone says that the sacrifice of the Mass is that only of praise and thanksgiving, or that it is a mere commemoration of the sacrifice consummated on the Cross but not a propitiatory one [that is, a sacrifice to appease God – ed.] (…) let him be anathema (Canon 3).”


Kiko and Carmen ridicule the traditional practices of the Catholic Church: “the tabernacles, the Feast of Corpus Christi, the solemn expositions of the Blessed Sacrament, processions, adorations, genuflections, visits to the Blessed Sacrament, to think that by communion we put Jesus in our soul, thanksgiving after communion, private Masses without faithful (…) all these practices minimize the Eucharist and are far from the spirit of Easter.” But, what really is important for them?

“The most important thing does not consist in the Real Presence of Jesus Christ in the Eucharist, but in the Eucharist as it is the mystery of the Pasch (…). As God was present in the first Pasch, when the Hebrew fled from Egypt, so Jesus is present by his spirit, resurrected from the dead.”

To this unusual and strange definition of the Presence of Jesus in the Eucharist, dangerously similar to the Protestant doctrine, let us quote the definition given by the Catechism of Saint Pius X:

“The Holy Eucharist is a sacrament in which, by the marvelous conversion of the whole substance of bread into the body of Jesus Christ, and that of wine into His Precious Blood, is contained truly, really and substantially, the Body, the Blood, the soul and Divinity of the same Lord Jesus Christ under the appearance of bread and wine.”


Kiko and Carmen write: “The memorial Jesus left us in His resurrected Spirit from the dead (…). How did the Apostles see Jesus Christ resurrected? In themselves, made a vivifying spirit.”

Kiko and Carmen forgot that in the Catholic Church, when it is spoken of the Resurrection of Our Lord Jesus Christ, it is the resurrection of His Body.

In its commentary on the Creed, the Catechism of the Council of Trent writes: “On the morning of the third day after His death, the soul of Jesus Christ was reunited to His Body, and thus He who was dead during those three days arose, and returned again to life from which He had departed when dying.”

Kiko and Carmen forgot that the Resurrection of Our Lord Jesus Christ is a dogma of our Faith: “If Christ be not risen again, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain.” (I Cor. xv, 14)


In October 1990, “Thirty days” magazine ran as a headline: “Green light for the Neo-Catechumens. John Paul II praises the Neo-Catechumenal Way.”

Perhaps, the Pope had not received the secret book of Kiko and Carmen destined only to the catechists of the Movement: “If people knew this, they would fly quickly.”

But, this official approbation is tragic. This Movement is a seat of destruction of Catholic faith within the Church, a kind of cancer, whose metastasis are spread all over the world now. Because of the papal approbation, seminaries of this Movement for the formation of priests are being built everywhere: in Rome, New York, Madrid, Varsovia, Medellin (Colombia), Caliao (Peru).

As for all secret organizations working against the Church, the duty of all Catholics is to make known the secret and reveal the true goal of the Neo-Catechumenal Movement which is the destruction of Faith.  (A Critique of the Neo-Catechumenal Way; it is only a matter of time before the Society of Pius X  takes it place among with the Neocatechumenal Movement as part of the counterfeit church of conciliarism, a place where unity of Faith and worship is not required for admission or retention.)

Appendix C

Bishop George Hay on Relations With Non-Catholics

Lastly, the beloved disciple St. John renews the same command in the strongest terms, and adds another reason, which regards all without exception, and especially those who are best instructed in their duty: "Look to yourselves", says he, "that ye lose not the things that ye have wrought, but that you may receive a full reward. Whosoever revolteth, and continueth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that continueth in the doctrine the same hath both the Father and the Son. If any man come to you and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, nor say to him, God speed you: for he that saith to him, God speed you, communicateth with his wicked works". (2 John, ver. 8)

Here, then, it is manifest, that all fellowship with those who have not the doctrine of Jesus Christ, which is "a communication in their evil works" — that is, in their false tenets, or worship, or in any act of religion — is strictly forbidden, under pain of losing the "things we have wrought, the reward of our labors, the salvation of our souls". And if this holy apostle declares that the very saying God speed to such people is a communication with their wicked works, what would he have said of going to their places of worship, of hearing their sermons, joining in their prayers, or the like?

From this passage the learned translators of the Rheims New Testament, in their note, justly observe, "That, in matters of religion, in praying, hearing their sermons, presence at their service, partaking of their sacraments, and all other communicating with them in spiritual things, it is a great and damnable sin to deal with them." And if this be the case with all in general, how much more with those who are well instructed and better versed in their religion than others? For their doing any of these things must be a much greater crime than in ignorant people, because they know their duty better. (Bishop George Hay, The Laws of God Forbidding All Communication in Religion With Those of a False Religion.)

The spirit of Christ, which dictated the Holy Scriptures, and the spirit which animates and guides the Church of Christ, and teaches her all truth, is the same; and therefore in all ages her conduct on this point has been uniformly the same as what the Holy Scripture teaches. She has constantly forbidden her children to hold any communication, in religious matters, with those who are separated from her communion; and this she has sometimes done under the most severe penalties. In the apostolical canons, which are of very ancient standing, and for the most part handed down from the apostolical age, it is thus decreed: "If any bishop, or priest, or deacon, shall join in prayers with heretics, let him be suspended from Communion". (Can. 44)

Also, "If any clergyman or laic shall go into the synagogue of the Jews, or the meetings of heretics, to join in prayer with them, let him be deposed, and deprived of communion". (Can. 63) (Bishop George Hay, (The Laws of God Forbidding All Communication in Religion With Those of a False Religion.)


Bishop Hay, who was the Vicar Apostolic for the Scottish Lowland District from 1778 to 1805 knew the Catholic Faith very well. There is no record that the Sovereign Pontiffs during his tenure, Popes Pius VI and Pius VII, ever once contradicted him for reiterating these truths of the Catholic Faith that he wanted the Catholics in Scotland to accept with humility and docility. That includes you, Father Michael Mary.

Appendix D

The Novus Ordo Service as a Rejection of Catholic Tradition and an Effort of "Conformism" to Protestantism

"We must strip from our Catholic prayers and from the Catholic liturgy everything which can be the shadow of a stumbling block for our separated brethren that is for the Protestants." (Annibale Bugnini, L'Osservatore Romano, March 19, 1965.)

"[T]he intention of Pope Paul VI with regard to what is commonly called the Mass, was to reform the Catholic liturgy in such a way that it should coincide with the Protestant liturgy.... [T]here was with Pope Paul VI an ecumenical intention to remove, or at least to correct, or at least to relax, what was too Catholic in the traditional sense, in the Mass, and I, repeat, to get the Catholic Mass closer to the Calvinist mass" (Dec. 19, 1993, Apropos, #17, pp. 8f; quoted in Christian Order, October, 1994. The words were spoken by Jean Guitton, a close friend of Giovanni Montini/Paul VI. The quotation and citations are found in Christopher A. Ferrara and Thomas E. Woods, Jr., The Great Facade, The Remnant Publishing Company, 2002, p. 317.)

Let it be candidly said: the Roman Rite which we have known hitherto no longer exists. It is destroyed. (Father Joseph Gelineau, an associate of Annibale Bugnini on the Consilium, 1uoted and footnoted in the work of a John Mole, who believed that the Mass of the Roman Rite had been "truncated," not destroyed. Assault on the Roman Rite)



© Copyright 2010, Thomas A. Droleskey. All rights reserved.