Francis The Impure
by Thomas A. Droleskey
Jorge Mario Bergoglio/Francis is an impure, indecent man masquerading both as a member in good standing of the Catholic Church and as the "Bishop" of Rome.
Jorge Mario Bergoglio/Francis cares nothing for the integrity of the Sacred Deposit of Faith or for the purity of her Sacred Liturgy as he has spat on the former as unimportant and called the latter nothing other than an vestige of Pelagianism.
Jorge Mario Bergoglio/Francis has given us nearly six months' worth of endless revolutionary screeds that he has sought to present most blasphemously as an authentic proclamation of the Holy Gospel of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.
In full continuity with his predecessors and in complete fidelity to precepts of the conciliar revolution, Jorge Mario Bergoglio/Francis has bowed and scraped to the leaders and representatives of various false religions.
Adding a new twist to the deconstruction of what is considered to be the "Petrine Ministry" in the counterfeit church of conciliarism, Jorge Mario Bergoglio has dispensed with almost all of what remained of papal decorum and dignity, and that is a lot given the fact that Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II, who will be "canonized" on Low Sunday, April 27, 2014, barring a nuclear catastrophe, did a whole lot all by himself to such papal decorum and dignity as a conciliar pretender to the Throne of Saint Peter.
Jorge Mario Bergoglio/Francis has undermined "conservative" Catholics, who believe that they are "fighting within the structures to 'save' a church that is not what they think it to be," by refusing to speak out forcefully against the daily slaughter of the innocent preborn by chemical and surgical means and by treating public officials who support and promote this slaughter with respect, hugs and even kisses.
Jorge Mario Bergoglio/Francis has even added impetus to the growing cancer of the "homosexual collective" by dismissing the odious sin of Sodom, one of the four sins that cry out to Heaven for vengeance, as something that he is unable to "judge." This alone has empowered the purveyors of indecency and impurity to champion their demonic cause with even greater abandon than before.
Indeed, an organization that is opposed, at least nominally, by the conciliar "archbishop" of that bastion of the homosexual collective, the Archdiocese of San Francisco, Salvatore Cordileone, has been emboldened enough by Jorge Mario Bergoglio/Francis's "Who I am to judge?" rhetoric to produce a video series entitled Who Are We To Judge?
ROME, September 3, 2013 (LifeSiteNews.com) – A series of videos sponsored by the Jesuit Roman Catholic religious order, titled “Who are we to judge,” in reference to a comment made earlier this year by Pope Francis about homosexual priests, has come under fire for promoting the idea that there is no conflict between being a faithful Catholic and being an active homosexual.
The video series was produced by the Ignatian News Network, a YouTube channel that is a joint project of the US Jesuits and Loyola Productions in Los Angeles, to feature videos about the work and mission of the American Jesuits.
Prominently featured in the series is Arthur Fitzmaurice, the head of the Catholic Association for Lesbian and Gay Ministry (CALGM), a group that is currently under censure by their local Catholic bishop for misrepresenting Catholic teaching. Fitzmaurice says in the videos that his “coming out” experience as a homosexual “strengthened my faith journey”. At first he said he had asked God, “how do I leave this cross behind me, how do I become a straight man?” which he said changed in time to “a realisation that God made me to be this gay person”.
Fitzmaurice says that his group only wants “to create a Church where all are welcome at all parishes. And once they’re there, not just being welcomed, but a place where they’re going to thrive.”
However, in June of last year, Bishop Salvatore Cordileone of Oakland, where CALGM is based, issued a statement saying that the group cannot be regarded as “authentically Catholic” due to their opposition to Catholic teaching.
In letters to the GALGM board, Cordileone requested that each member “strive to clearly present Catholic doctrine on homosexuality in its fullness” and “profess personally to hold and believe, and practice all that the holy Catholic Church teaches, believes and proclaims to be true, whether from the natural moral law or by way revelation from God through Scripture and tradition”. The group’s leadership twice told Cordileone they refused to sign such a declaration. (Series of Videos Sponsored by Jesuits Promotes Perversity.)
Do you think that a man who entered the Society of Jesus as a novice on March 11, 1958, and subsequently became indoctrinate in the ways of the conciliar revolution is going to put the Ignatian News Network out of business for the new video series?
Hardly.
It's free-for-all time in the counterfeit church of conciliarism.
Indeed, Jorge Mario Bergoglio/Francis, who believes in social work first, social work last and social work only, is busy these days working to "reconcile" Father Leonardo Boff's syncretism of Marxism and Christianity, known as "Liberation Theology" with the "official blessing" of the counterfeit church of conciliarism:
The Vatican and the Liberation Theology movement have made peace. After all the condemnations in the 80’s, the exaggerations and misunderstandings, the Church has finally granted the Theology of Liberation movement full citizenship. This peaceful handshake is being witnessed within the context of the new climate set by the Catholic Church’s first Latin American Pope and the resumption of the bishop and martyr Oscar Romero’s beatification process.
The reconciliation process actually began towards the end of Benedict XVI’s pontificate. Indeed, it was Benedict XVI who chose German archbishop Gerhard Ludwig Müller as his second successor to the leadership of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. Ratzinger knew Müller well. The archbishop had spent many a holiday going to work with Latin American campesinos and also cultivated an in-depth dialogue with Peruvian Dominican priest, Gustavo Gutiérrez, the Liberation Theology movement’s most important and influential theologian.
They co-authored a book published in Germany in 2004. But Müller was just a German bishop at the time, he was not yet the “custodian” of Catholic Orthodoxy. The fact that this book has now been published in Italy and is due to be presented by the two authors at the Festivaletteratura literature festival in the Italian city of Mantua this coming Sunday, means Müller – who now heads the Congregation which back in the 80’s condemned some of the Liberation Theology movement’s excesses – still considers his contributions to be fully valid and current. The Italian edition is entitled “Dalla parte dei poveri. Teologia della liberazione, teologia della chiesa”( “Taking the Side of the Poor - Liberation Theology” co-published by Edizioni Messaggero Padova and Editrice Missionaria Italiana, pp.92, Euro 15).
So this is not something that just happened, it is a carefully thought out move which aims or at least intends to put an end to past theological conflicts. Gutiérrez’s work in the days Ratzinger was Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, were examined for a long time without ever being censored or condemned.
In actual fact the Holy See only condemned Marxist strains of Liberation Theology, not the entire movement. In one of the essays published in the book, Müller himself describes the political and geopolitical factors which over the years came to condition certain accusations made against the Theology of Liberation Movement, at a time when a certain strain of capitalism felt itself to have gained the final victory. Not to mention the secret document which Ratzinger’s successor also mentions in the book; that is the document which the Committee of Santa Fé prepared for President Ronald Reagan in 1980, four years before the Vatican issued its first Instruction on the Liberation Theology movement. The document requested that the U.S. government take aggressive action against the movement, which was accused of transforming the Catholic Church into “a political weapon against private property and productive capitalism.”
With the arrival of the Pope “from the other side of the world” the reconciliation between the Vatican and the Liberation Theology movement is complete. Although this is a Pope who has never been keen on ideologies and the intellectual approach taken by a certain Marxist-inspired theology, in his days as archbishop Bergoglio regularly visited Buenos Aires’ slums unaccompanied and is now speaking of “a poor Church for the poor”. With the book co-authored by the Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and Fr. Gutiérrez, this reconciliation is complete. This shows that in the Church, to speak of the poor is not pauperism and condemning the injustices suffered by the weak does not make one a Marxist, it simply means being a Christian. (Vatican Makes Peace With Liberation Theology.)
This is utter nonsense as any form of "liberation theology" is socialism by another name. The "liberation theologians" claim to have "discovered" Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ's love for the poor even though Holy Mother Church has been solicitous of their needs from her very birth and then spread into the world. She herself is responsible for the establishments of institutions of mercy for the poor. These institutions of mercy, founded and served for the most part by men and women religious, were unheard of prior to the spread of the Holy Faith.
Time and time again, you see, the conciliar "popes" and "bishops" have identified government-created and administered income redistribution programs that are designed to make everyone in society equally poor and to create a class of people who are so permanently dependent upon the largesse of the civil state for their every need from the cradle to the grave so as to assure that the anti-Incarnational social engineers of Modernity remain in place ad infinitum. Anyone who dares to criticize, no less oppose, these programs as violations of the Natural Law principle of Subsidiarity must be denounced with all manner of revolutionary slogans that are designed to stop all rational debate and to cower opponents into submission to the "benevolence" of our "enlightened, liberated" caesars.
No "pope" and almost no "bishop" in the counterfeit church of conciliarism has pointed out that Judeo-Masonry's destruction of the family by means of divorce, contraception, abortion, "sex instruction," pornography, immodest dress, informality of addressing others and, of course, the promotion of sodomy in the name of "diversity" and "inclusiveness" has created a web of fatherless families and lost children, many of whom do not know the identity of their fathers while others spend their days unloved as they are shunted from pre-school to after-school programs and, in all too many instances, from step-parent to step-parent on alternate weekends and during the summer.
Pope Pius XI, however, condemned the total supplanting of Holy Mother Church by government conceived and administered programs, condemning also any form of socialism as being in the least bit compatible with the Catholic Faith:
We make this pronouncement: Whether considered as a doctrine, or an
historical fact, or a movement, Socialism, if it remains truly Socialism, even
after it has yielded to truth and justice on the points which we have mentioned,
cannot be reconciled with the teachings of the Catholic Church because its
concept of society itself is utterly foreign to Christian truth. . . .
120. If Socialism, like all errors, contains some truth (which, moreover, the
Supreme Pontiffs have never denied), it is based nevertheless on a theory of
human society peculiar to itself and irreconcilable with true Christianity.
Religious socialism, Christian socialism, are contradictory terms; no one can be
at the same time a good Catholic and a true socialist. (Pope Pius XI, Quadragesimo Anno, May 15, 1931.)
Quite unlike the conciliar "popes" and "bishops," Pope Pius XI also forbade any and all cooperation with Communism, thereby condemning the Ostpolitik of Giovanni Montini/Paul The Sick that continues to this very day in the conciliar Vatican's Secretariat of State, whose new head, Pietro Parolin, is a thorough-going appeaser of Communist regimes (see Conciliarism's Weapons of Mass Destruction, part three):
58. See to it, Venerable Brethren, that the Faithful do not allow themselves
to be deceived! Communism is intrinsically wrong, and no one who would save
Christian civilization may collaborate with it in any undertaking whatsoever.
Those who permit themselves to be deceived into lending their aid towards the
triumph of Communism in their own country, will be the first to fall victims of
their error. And the greater the antiquity and grandeur of the Christian
civilization in the regions where Communism successfully penetrates, so much
more devastating will be the hatred displayed by the godless. (Pope Pius XI, Divini Redemptoris, March 19, 1937.)
That's all so very "yesterday" for the avant-garde Bergoglio/Francis, an aged Jesuit hippie who will turn seventy-seven years of age on December 17, 2013, but thinks all of his "with-it" talk and actions will win admirers for his "liberated gospel"
Well, this is what Pope Saint Pius X had to say about Jorge Mario Bergoglio/Francis's "liberated gospel" of social work:
To reply to these fallacies is only to easy; for whom will they make believe
that the Catholic Sillonists, the priests and seminarists enrolled in their
ranks have in sight in their social work, only the temporal interests of the
working class? To maintain this, We think, would be an insult to them. The truth
is that the Sillonist leaders are self-confessed and irrepressible idealists; they claim to regenerate the working class by first elevating the conscience of
Man; they have a social doctrine, and they have religious and philosophical
principles for the reconstruction of society upon new foundations; they have a
particular conception of human dignity, freedom, justice and brotherhood; and,
in an attempt to justify their social dreams, they put forward the Gospel, but
interpreted in their own way; and what is even more serious, they call to
witness Christ, but a diminished and distorted Christ. Further, they teach these
ideas in their study groups, and inculcate them upon their friends, and they
also introduce them into their working procedures. Therefore they are really
professors of social, civic, and religious morals; and whatever modifications
they may introduce in the organization of the Sillonist movement, we have the
right to say that the aims of the Sillon, its character and its action belong to
the field of morals which is the proper domain of the Church. In view of all
this, the Sillonist are deceiving themselves when they believe that they are
working in a field that lies outside the limits of Church authority and of its
doctrinal and directive power. (Pope Saint Pius X, Notre Charge Apostolique, August 15, 1910.)
Yet, according to Jorge Mario Bergoglio/Francis, his false church, which he believes is the Catholic Church, has not divested itself enough of its past and of the vestiges of triumphalism that have as yet survived, albeit corrupted, in the counterfeit church of conciliarism. It is necessary for what he thinks is the Catholic Church to "undress" in the mode of a single incident in the holy life of Saint Francis of Assisi, who led a life of unquestioned purity of conduct and whose love for the purity and integrity of doctrine was second to the none in his day as he hated heresy and falsehood, as the "theme" for his upcoming visit to Assisi, Italy, on October 4, 2014, the Feast of Saint Francis of Assisi:
“Just after he was elected Pope I sent him a letter on behalf of the diocese, reminding him that as Bishop of Assisi I live in the place where Francis undressed before a speechless Fr. Pietro di Bernardone eight centuries ago, to free himself entirely for God and for his brothers,” Mgr. Sorrentino said. “Then I spoke to him and reminded him of this and I remember him being really touched by this,” he added.
“So I took the liberty to say to Francis: “So Father, it would be great if among your many other commitments today, you came here at least to say the Our Father, as Francis did 800 years ago.” The Pope’s answer really threw me. He said: “The Our Father? But I want to talk about how the Church should undress and somehow repeat that gesture Francis made and the values inherent in this gesture.”
“We expect the Pope to give us confirmation and indications regarding the lifestyle we try to adopt in order to make the most of the charism God gave us, so that we can be prolific and of service to the entire Church,” Fr. Gambetti said. (Bergoglio Desires An Undressed Church.)
What an impure man to dwell on this single incident in the life of Saint Francis of Assisi, which the saint who would bear the brand marks of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ on his holy did for but a moment to renounce his father's wealth and protection before hiding immediately within the cloak of his bishop. This is the lesson of the life of Saint Francis of Assisi for what Jorge Mario Bergoglio/Francis thinks is the Catholic Church? This?
Let's face facts here.
The counterfeit church of conciliarism has fostered a whole ambiance of false worship that not only accepts but celebrates Catholics who sport clothing, if it can be called such, that flaunt immodesty and indecency.
Undress?
Well, the young Catholics who assembled at World Youth Day in Rio de Janeiro Brazil, from July 21, 2013, to July 28, 2013, certainly knew all about "undressing" as many of them were as close to stark naked as possible. Yet is that Jorge Mario Bergoglio/Francis is still celebrating this hideous event (see Francis on WYD Rio 2013: welcoming, celebration, mission) even though his false church has left these young people truly naked, bereft of true bishops and true bishops and true sacraments and robbed of any and all authentic Catholic doctrine and pastoral praxis.
Many have been the "papal" liturgies, especially during the false pontificate of the soon-to-be "Pope Saint John Paul the Great" (what will Albino Luciani be called?---"Pope Saint John Paul the Less"?), wherein African and Pacific men and women have appeared half naked. So-called "papal" audiences at the Paul the Sick Audience Hall in the Vatican have featured all manner of ugly, disgusting displays of gymnastics and dance that have been nothing other than pornographic. Some of these took place in front of a very interested ogler, Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI.
While it is true that there are different cultural standards
from time to time and from place to place, a Catholic's sense of decorum
concerning what it appropriate to wear at Holy Mass, which is nothing other than ineffable Sacrifice of the Cross perpetuated in an unbloody manner at the hands of an alter Christus, should be such as
to know impropriety when he sees it. Conciliarists, for example, have
used the fallacious argument of the "inculturation of the Gospel" to
justify half-naked women serving as lectors and "gift bearers" at
"papal" Masses in Africa. Some aboriginal tribesman from New Zealand
"performed" half-naked during a putative Mass at the Basilica of Saint
Peter for Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II around 1998 or so, which prompted
me to ask the question at the time,"Did these aboriginal people board
the flight from New Zealand in their half-naked costumes or did they
dress down for the occasion of the "papal Mass"?
I digress.
The real point of Jorge Mario Bergoglio/Francis's desire for what he thinks is the Catholic Church to "undress" is to advance the cause of the Gallicanism that is near and dear to the heart of every true, full-blooded conciliar revolutionary.
Consider the words of Pope Pius VI in introduction to Auctorem Fidei, August 28, 1794:
They
knew the
capacity of innovators in the art of deception. In order not to
shock the ears of Catholics, the innovators sought to hide the
subtleties of their tortuous maneuvers by the use of seemingly
innocuous words such as would allow them to insinuate error into
souls in the most gentle manner. Once the truth had been compromised,
they could, by means of slight changes or additions in phraseology,
distort the confession of the faith that is necessary for our
salvation, and lead the faithful by subtle errors to their eternal
damnation. This manner of dissimulating and lying is vicious, regardless
of the circumstances under which it is used. For very good reasons
it can never be tolerated in a synod of which the principal glory
consists above all in teaching the truth with clarity and excluding
all danger of error.
Moreover, if all this is sinful, it cannot be excused in the way that one sees it being done, under
the erroneous pretext that the seemingly shocking affirmations in one
place are further developed along orthodox lines in other places, and
even in yet other places corrected; as if allowing for the
possibility of either affirming or denying the statement, or of
leaving it up the personal inclinations of the individual – such has
always been the fraudulent and daring method used by innovators to
establish error. It allows for both the possibility of promoting
error and of excusing it.
It is as if the innovators pretended that they always intended to
present the alternative passages, especially to those of simple faith
who eventually come to know only some part of the conclusions of
such discussions, which are published in the common language for
everyone's use. Or again, as if the same faithful had the ability on
examining such documents to judge such matters for themselves without
getting confused and avoiding all risk of error.
It is a most reprehensible technique for the insinuation of
doctrinal errors and one condemned long ago by our predecessor St.
Celestine
who found it used in the writings of Nestorius, bishop of
Constantinople, and which he exposed in order to condemn it with the
greatest possible severity. Once these texts were examined
carefully, the impostor was exposed and confounded, for he expressed
himself in a plethora of words, mixing true things with others that
were obscure; mixing at times one with the other in such a way that
he was also able to confess those things which were denied while at
the same time possessing a basis for denying those very sentences which
he confessed.
In order to expose such snares, something which becomes necessary
with a certain frequency in every century, no other method is
required than the following:
Whenever it becomes necessary to expose statements that
disguise some suspected error or danger under the veil of ambiguity,
one must denounce the perverse meaning under which the error opposed
to Catholic truth is camouflaged. The more freely We
embraced a program of complete moderation, the more we foresaw that,
in order to reconcile souls and bring them to the unity of spirit in the
bond of peace (which, we are glad to say, has by God’s favor already
happily occurred in many), it would be of enormous assistance to be
prepared in case pertinacious sectarians of the synod – if any, God
forbid, still remain, – should be free in the future to bring in as
allies Catholic schools and make them partners of their own just
condemnation in order to set in motion new disturbances: They
endeavor to entice to their side the clearly unwilling and resistant
schools by a kind of distorted likeness of similar terms, even though
the schools profess expressly different opinions. Then, if any
previously imagined, milder opinion about the synod has hitherto
escaped the notice of these imprudent men, let every opportunity of
complaining still be closed to them. If they are sound in doctrine, as
they wish to seem, they cannot take it hard that the teachings
identified in this manner– teachings that exhibit errors from which
they claim to be entirely distant – stand condemned
Yet We did not think that We had sincerely proved our mildness, or
more correctly, the charity that impels us toward our brother, whom
we wish to assist by every means , if We may still be able.
Indeed, We are impelled by the charity that moved our predecessor
Celestine. He did not refuse to wait with a greater patience
than what seemed to be called for, even against what the law
demanded, for priests [bishops] to mend their ways. For we, along
with Augustine and the Fathers of Milevis, prefer and desire that men
who teach perverse things be healed in the Church by pastoral care
rather than be cut off from Her without hope of salvation, if
necessity does not force one to act.
Therefore, so as it should not appear that any effort to win over a
brother was
overlooked, before We progressed further, We thought to summon the
aforementioned bishop to Us by means of very cordial letters written
to him at our request, promising that we would receive him with good
will and that he would not be barred from freely and openly declaring
what seemed to him to meet the needs of his interests. In truth, We had
not lost all hope of the possibility that, if he possessed that
teachable mind, which Augustine, following the Apostle, required
above all else in a bishop, as soon as the chief points of doctrine
under dispute, which seemed worthy of greater consideration, were
proposed to him simply and candidly, without contention and rancor, then
almost beyond a doubt he could, upon reflection, more reasonably
explain what had been proposed ambiguously and openly repudiate the
notions displaying manifest perversity.
And so, with his name held in high regard amid the delighted acclaim
of all good men, the turmoil aroused in the Church would be
restrained as peaceably as possible by means of a much-desired
correction.
But now since he, alleging ill health, has decided
not to make use of the kindness offered to him, We can no longer
postpone fulfilling our apostolic duty. It is not a matter of the
danger of only one or another diocese: Any novelty at all assails the Universal Church.
Now for a long time, from every side, the judgment of the supreme
Apostolic See has not only been awaited but earnestly demanded by
unremitting, repeated petitions. God forbid that the voice of Peter
ever be silent in that See, where, living and presiding perpetually,
he presents the truth of the faith to those in search of it.
A lengthier forbearance in such matters is not safe, because it is
almost just as much of a crime to close one’s eyes in such cases, as
it is to preach such offenses to religion.
Therefore, such a wound must be cut away, a wound by which not one
member is hurt, but the entire body of the church is damaged.
And with the aid of divine piety, We must take care that, with
the dissensions removed, the Catholic faith be preserved inviolate,
and that those whose faith has been proved may be fortified by our
authority once those who defend perverse teachings have been recalled
from error. (Novus
Ordo Watch's World Exclusive, First-Ever English Translation of the
Introductory Text to Pope Pius VI's Auctorem Fidei, August 28, 1794.)
Mind you, that was only part of Pope Pius VI's introductory text of Auctorem Fidei. Pope Pius VI used the text of the encyclical letter, which condemned the propositions of the illegal Synod of Pistoia, to specify each proposition condemned. One see from a careful examination of the following few condemnations found in Auctorem Fidei that Pope Pius VI was condemning prophetically Jorge Mario Bergoglio/Francis's call for an "undressed church" as this is really nothing new whatsoever:
The Suitable Order to Be Observed in Worship
31. The proposition of the synod enunciating that it is fitting, in accordance with the order of divine services and ancient custom, that there be only one altar in each temple, and therefore, that it is pleased to restore that custom,—rash, injurious to the very ancient pious custom flourishing and approved for these many centuries in the Church, especially in the Latin Church.
32. Likewise, the prescription forbidding cases of sacred relics or flowers being placed on the altar,— rash, injurious to the pious and approved custom of the Church.
33. The proposition of the synod by which it shows itself eager to remove the cause through which, in part, there has been induced a forgetfulness of the principles relating to the order of the liturgy, "by recalling it (the liturgy) to a greater simplicity of rites, by expressing it in the vernacular language, by
uttering it in a loud voice"; as if the present order of the liturgy, received and approved by the Church, had emanated in some part from the forgetfulness of the principles by which it should be regulated,—rash, offensive to pious ears, insulting to the Church, favorable to the charges of heretics against it. (Pope Pius VI, Auctorem Fidei, August 28, 1794.)
Moreover, Pope Pius VI also condemned prophetically Jorge Mario Bergoglio/Francis's rejection of saying a prescribed number of prayers that the conciliar "pontiff" has mocked as "Pelagianism" when it is pure and simple Catholicism:
The doctrine which notes as universally superstitious "any efficacy which is placed in a fixed number of prayers and of pious salutations"; as if one should consider as superstitious the efficacy which is derived not from the number viewed in itself, but from the prescript of the Church appointing a certain number of prayers or of external acts for obtaining indulgences, for fulfilling penances and, in general, for the performance of sacred and religious worship in the correct order and due form,—false, rash, scandalous, dangerous, injurious to the piety of the faithful, derogatory to the authority of the Church, erroneous. (Pope Pius VI, Auctorem Fidei, August 28, 1894.)
The whole Conciliar Enterprise, if a term can be coined that borrows a bit from the language of an anti-sedevacantist writer, has been condemned from beginning to end, and not one little bit of it can come from the Catholic Church, she who is the virginal, immaculate mystical spouse of her Divine Founder and Invisible Head, Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.
Alas, there is really not much more that is left for the lords of conciliarism to "undress" as they have destroyed, whether by means of outright denial or by the methods outlined by Pope Pius VI in Auctorem Fidei or by Pope Saint Pius X in Pascendi Dominci Gregis, September 8, 1907, and The Oath Against Modernism, September 1, 1910, or by Pope Pius XII in Humani Generis, August 12, 1950, Catholic doctrine, Catholic worship and Catholic pastoral praxis to such an extent that most Catholics have absolutely no authentic sensus Catholicus left by which they can recognize and reject the errors of the day as coming from figures of Antichrist himself.
After all, the surrender of Catholicism to the exigencies of Talmudic Judaism is a fait accompli as one conciliar "pope" after another, including Francis the Impure of Doctrine and thus of heart, fall all over themselves to prove that their false church is not "anti-Semitic" and is not seeking to convert Jews to Catholicism:
(Vatican Radio) Pope Francis on Monday wished Jews around the world a sweet and peaceful year 5774, called for increased dialogue among the world’s religious communities and opposed fundamentalism in any faith. During his first private audience with an international Jewish leader since being elected Catholic pontiff in March, Francis asked World Jewish Congress (WJC) President Ronald S. Lauder to convey his New Year message to Jewish communities world-wide and said he also needed a sweet year because of the important decisions lying ahead. Using the Hebrew words for ‘Happy New Year’, Pope Francis wished a "Shana Tova" and asked the WJC to share that message with the Jewish people worldwide. Lauder presented the pope with a Kiddush cup and a honey cake.
At their meeting, which was held in an informal atmosphere at the Vatican, Lauder and the Catholic pontiff spoke about the situation in Syria and agreed to speak out against attacks on religious minorities, such as Coptic Christians in Egypt and against trends to restrict well-established religious practices such as circumcision. The pope specifically expressed concern about the bans on kosher slaughter in Poland and directed Cardinal Kurt Koch, the president of the Vatican’s Commission for Relations with the Jews, to investigate and host a follow-up meeting as early as next week.
Francis reiterated a statement made last June that “a Christian cannot be an anti-Semite” and said that “to be good a Christian it is necessary to understand Jewish history and traditions.” He added that Jews and Christians shared the same roots and that dialogue was the key to building a common future. Referring to the conflict in Syria, the pope called the killing of human beings unacceptable and said “world leaders must do everything to avoid war.”
After the meeting, Ronald S. Lauder praised the pope for his unwavering commitment to dialogue and said that “Pope Francis’ leadership has not only reinvigorated the Catholic Church but also given a new momentum to relations with Judaism. Never in the past 2,000 years have relations between the Catholic Church and the Jewish people been so good. The leadership of successive popes over the past five decades has helped to overcome a lot of prejudice. This allows us now to work together in defending religious freedom wherever it is under threat and whichever community is affected.” (Communication issued by the World Jewish Congress)
The conciliar "popes" and their "bishops" have said consistently that they are not interested in any organized program of converting the Jews as this would do "violence" to the newfound bond of "brotherhood" that they have forged with the Talmudic descendants of the ancient enemies of Christ the King.
Alas, that is a one-way street as Talmudists are actively seeking Christian converts in, of all places, Jorge Mario Bergoglio/Francis's very own Latin America:
They came to Mexico City from places as far flung as Colombia and Brazil. Some traveled from Guadalajara.
Among their numbers were an ex-Catholic priest and a former Christian educator. What they had in common was this: after going online and learning about Jacques Cukierkorn, a Brazilian-born rabbi who lives in Kansas City, they had either converted already or were ready to convert to Judaism.
And they traveled to Mexico City to meet the rabbi themselves for a conference that included lectures, prayer services, mingling with Jews from the United States and Mexico, and the rituals and ceremony involved in formal conversion.
The phenomenon of Latin Americans converting to Judaism has exploded over the past few years – but one small Jewish synagogue is making it its mission to seek congregants in Latin America.
Some of those who convert are descendants of Jewish ancestors who were forced to convert to Catholicism during the Inquisition in Spain and Portugal.
Known as Conversos, Crypto Jews, Anusim, Marranos, or secret Jews, they became Catholic in public but continued their forbidden Jewish practices in private. Others have no family histories, but they said they felt a pull to Judaism when they discovered, as adults, that Jesus was Jewish.
The path to Judaism has been fraught with difficulty for many, who claim they were abandoned or scorned by their church-going friends.
Some found Brit Braja, a congregation founded by Rabbi Cukierkorn, whose rabbinic thesis was on the subject of Anusim. Brit Braja focuses on encouraging Judaism among Latinos, both in the U.S. and Latin America.
“We focus on doing it in Spanish and Portuguese because so few resources are available in those languages,” Cukierkorn said.
The rabbi conducts Sabbath services over the Internet so would-be converts can participate in the religion, even if they live in remote areas across the world.
Recently he visited Mexico to meet the converts. When he arrived in Mexico City, his suitcases were filled with prayer shawls, candelabra, skullcaps, prayer books, and boxed chicken soup provided by donors and the synagogue.
The members of Brit Braja went to the Museo Memoria y Tolerancia (which opened two years ago) to experience the exhibits dedicated to the Holocaust, racism, worldwide genocide and human rights.
At the museum, they learned about the three kinds of people in the world: the perpetrators, those who are indifferent, and those who are engaged. They spoke about the discrimination they felt – not because of the color of their skin or their socioeconomic status, but because of the religion they chose to practice.
One of the men who got married right before the conference began said his parents didn’t attend because the ceremony was Jewish.
The conference included presentations about Torah; interpretation of Biblical stories; Kaballah (esoteric, mystical teachings); the middle class economic status of the Mexican Jewish mestizos; gay activism and the attitude of parents toward gay children.
Those who were ready for conversion had to go through a ritual purification by immersing themselves in water (called a mikva), a meeting with a beit din (three rabbis or knowledgeable people who ask questions), and, if they succeeded in meeting all the requirements, a ceremony where they were presented with an official certificate.
Tears trickled down many faces as the new Jews were officially welcomed into the fold.
Since he was ordained, Cukierkorn has performed close to 500 conversions in Latin America. He said 150 of those conversions were performed in the past two years.
He said membership continues to grow.
“Every year we reach more people, or rather they find us. We never push anything. In fact, we are selective,” he said. “We respond to a pent- up need that many have to learn about Judaism in those parts of the world.” (Latin American Jewish Converts Converge in Mexico City.)
Hmm.
Let me see here.
I think I can find an antidote to this.
Ah, yes, here is the antidote:
(4) And so I wanted again today to engage in that contest. For if the enemies of the
truth never have enough of blaspheming our Benefactor, we must be all the more tireless in
praising the God of all. But what am I to do? Another very serious illness calls for any
cure my words can bring, an illness which has become implanted in the body of the Church.
We must first root this ailment out and then take thought for matters outside; we must
first cure our own and then be concerned for others who are strangers.
(5) What is this disease? The festivals of the pitiful and miserable Jews are soon to
march upon us one after the other and in quick succession: the feast of Trumpets, the
feast of Tabernacles, the fasts. There are many in our ranks who say they think as we do.
Yet some of these are going to watch the festivals and others will join the Jews in
keeping their feasts and observing their fasts. I wish to drive this perverse custom from
the Church right now. My homilies against the Anomians can be put off to another time, and
the postponement would cause no harm. But now that the Jewish festivals are close by and
at the very door, if I should fail to cure those who are sick with the Judaizing disease.
I am afraid that, because of their ill-suited association and deep ignorance, some
Christians may partake in the Jews' transgressions; once they have done so, I fear my
homilies on these transgressions will be in vain. For if they hear no word from me today,
they will then join the Jews in their fasts; once they have committed this sin it will be
useless for me to apply the remedy.
(6) And so it is that I hasten to anticipate this danger and prevent it. This is what
physicians do. They first check the diseases which are most urgent and acute. But the
danger from this sickness is very closely related to the danger from the other; since the
Anomians impiety is akin to that of the Jews, my present conflict is akin to my former
one. And there is a kingship because the Jews and the Anomians make the same accusation.
And what charges do the Jews make? That He called God His own Father and so made Himself
equal to God. The Anomians also make this charge-I should not say they make this a charge;
they even blot out the phrase "equal to God" and what it connotes, by their
resolve to reject it even if they do not physically erase it.
II
But do not be surprised that I called the Jews pitiable. They really are pitiable and
miserable. When so many blessings from heaven came into their hands, they thrust them
aside and were at great pains to reject them. The morning Sun of Justice arose for them,
but they thrust aside its rays and still sit in darkness. We, who were nurtured by
darkness, drew the light to ourselves and were freed from the gloom of their error. They
were the branches of that holy root, but those branches were broken. We had no share in
the root, but we did reap the fruit of godliness. From their childhood they read the
prophets, but they crucified him whom the prophets had foretold. We did not hear the
divine prophecies but we did worship him of whom they prophesied. And so they are pitiful
because they rejected the blessings which were sent to them, while others seized hold of
these blessing and drew them to themselves. Although those Jews had been called to the
adoption of sons, they fell to kinship with dogs; we who were dogs received the strength,
through God's grace, to put aside the irrational nature which was ours and to rise to the
honor of sons. How do I prove this? Christ said: "It is no fair to take the
children's bread and to cast it to the dogs". Christ was speaking to the Canaanite
woman when He called the Jews children and the Gentiles dogs.
(2) But see how thereafter the order was changed about: they became dogs, and we became
the children. Paul said of the Jews: "Beware of the dogs, beware of the evil workers,
beware of the mutilation. For we are the circumcision". Do you see how those who at
first were children became dogs? Do you wish to find out how we, who at first were dogs,
became children? "But to as many as received him, he gave the power of becoming sons
of God".
(3) Nothing is more miserable than those people who never failed to attack their own
salvation. When there was need to observe the Law, they trampled it under foot. Now that
the Law has ceased to bind, they obstinately strive to observe it. What could be more
pitiable that those who provoke God not only by transgressing the Law but also by keeping
it? On this account Stephen said: "You stiff-necked and uncircumcised in heart, you
always resist the Holy Spirit", not only by transgressing the Law but also by wishing
to observe it at the wrong time.
(4) Stephen was right in calling them stiff-necked. For they failed to take up the yoke
of Christ, although it was sweet and had nothing about it which was either burdensome or
oppressive. For he said: "Learn from me for I am meek and humble of heart", and
"Take my yoke upon you, for my yoke is sweet and my burden light". Nonetheless
they failed to take up the yoke because of the stiffness of their necks. Not only did they
fail to take it up but they broke it and destroyed it. For Jeremiah said: "Long ago
you broke your yoke and burst your bonds". It was not Paul who said this but the
voice of the prophet speaking loud and clear. When he spoke of the yoke and the bonds, he
meant the symbols of rule, because the Jews rejected the rule of Christ when they said:
"We have no king but Caesar". You Jews broke the yoke, you burst the bonds, you
cast yourselves out of the kingdom of heaven, and you made yourselves subject to the rule
of men. Please consider with me how accurately the prophet hinted that their hearts were
uncontrolled. He did not say: "You set aside the yoke", but "You broke the
yoke" and this is the crime of untamed beasts, who are uncontrolled and reject rule. (Saint John Chrysostom, Homily 1 of Eight Homilies Against the Jews.)
Here is another antidote:
On
the one hand, the Church condemns race hatred in general and hatred of
the Redeemer’s race in particular. On the other hand, the Church
insists, as we have seen, on the duty of combating naturalism in public
and private life and approves of love of native land and extols true
supernatural patriotism. We have the right and the duty to
defend our country and our nation against the unjust aggression of
another nation. This duty is still more strongly urged upon us when it
is a question of our country’s fidelity to Christ the King. We must,
therefore, combat naturalism in general always and everywhere, and we
must be vigilant in regard to the naturalism of the Jewish nation in
particular. The tireless energy with which His own nation pursues the
elimination of the influence of the supernatural life is doubly painful
to our Lord’s Sacred Heart. The combat against naturalism in general
and, therefore, against the organised naturalism of the Jewish nation,
is urged upon us, for example, by Pope Leo XIII (Tametsi, 1900) and Pope Pius XI (Quas Primas, 1925, and Quadragesimo Anno, 1931). . . .
Given
the naturalistic messianic ambition of the Jewish nation to impose its
rule on the other nations, anti-semitism for the Jews logically means
whatever is in opposition to that ambition. The situation since the
Second World War is being cleverly exploited to prevent anyone from
opposing Jewish aims, through fear of being dubbed an “anti-Semite.” I n
my book, The Mystical Body of Christ and the Reorganisation of Society,
I pointed out that the disordered National Socialist action against the
corroding influence of Jewish naturalism on German national life led
not only to measures of repression against the Jews, with regrettable
violations of their personal rights, but also to persecution of the
Catholic Church. Comparatively little information concerning the
anti-Catholic measures ever reached the great newspaper-reading,
cinema-going public, while hardly anyone could fail to be aware of what
was done to the Jews. The term “anti-semitism,” with all its war
connotation of Nazi cruelty, is now having its comprehension widened to
include every form of opposition to the Jewish nation’s naturalistic
programme. Forgetfulness of the disorder of Jewish naturalism is keeping
Catholics blind to the consequences of accepting the term with its
Jewish comprehension. According to the leaders of the Jewish nation, to
stand for the rights of Christ the King is to be an anti-Semite. (Father Denis Fahey, The Kingship of Christ and the Conversion of the Jewish Nation.)
Judaism is a dead, superseded religion and is to be accorded no honor or respect by any Catholic, including a putative "pope." We are expected to pray for the conversion of the Jews in the spirit that Pope Pius XI noted we should have to seek the conversion of all non-Catholics to the bosom of Holy Mother Church, outside of which there is no salvation and without which there can be no true social order, less yet peace among nations:
36. This charity, intelligent and sympathetic towards those even who offend
you, does by no means imply a renunciation of the right of proclaiming,
vindicating and defending the truth and its implications. The priest's first
loving gift to his neighbors is to serve truth and refute error in any of its
forms. Failure on this score would be not only a betrayal of God and your
vocation, but also an offense against the real welfare of your people and
country. To all those who have kept their promised fidelity to their Bishops on
the day of their ordination; to all those who in the exercise of their priestly
function are called upon to suffer persecution; to all those imprisoned in jail
and concentration camps, the Father of the Christian world sends his words of
gratitude and commendation. (Pope Pius XI, Mit Brennender Sorge, March 17, 1937.)
Francis the Impure of Doctrine and thus of heart not only does not defend the truth, he runs away from by presenting blasphemous heresies and errors as representing the Catholic Faith by showing, in full violation of the First and Second Commandments, marks of respect for false religions, including those such as Talmudic Judaism and Mohammedanism that reject the Sacred Divinity of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. He is indeed an insidious little pest.
Yet it is that this impure man who wants to "undress" what little of Catholicism is left in the structures of his false church believes that the "world's religions" can all join together tomorrow to pray for peace in Syria when the adherents of these false religions are just as much at war with the Sacred Deposit of Faith of the true God of Divine Revelation, the Most Blessed Trinity, as he has been throughout the course of his career as a lay member of the Society of Jesus.
Even this, of course, has been condemned by the Catholic Church from time immemorial:
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.)
"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. . . . Let,
therefore, the separated children draw nigh to the Apostolic See, set
up in the City which Peter and Paul, the Princes of the Apostles,
consecrated by their blood; to that See, We repeat, which is 'the root
and womb whence the Church of God springs,' not with the intention and
the hope that 'the Church of the living God, the pillar and ground of
the truth' will cast aside the integrity of the faith and tolerate their
errors, but, on the contrary, that they themselves submit to its
teaching and government. Would that it were Our happy lot to do
that which so many of Our predecessors could not, to embrace with
fatherly affection those children, whose unhappy separation from Us We
now bewail. Would that God our Savior, "Who will have all men to be
saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth," would hear us when We
humbly beg that He would deign to recall all who stray to the unity of
the Church! In this most important undertaking We ask and wish that
others should ask the prayers of Blessed Mary the Virgin, Mother of
divine grace, victorious over all heresies and Help of Christians, that
She may implore for Us the speedy coming of the much hoped-for day, when
all men shall hear the voice of Her divine Son, and shall be 'careful
to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.'" (Pope Pius XI, Mortalium Animos, January 6, 1928.)
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.)
Francis the Impure may want to think that the Catholic Church has been "undressed" of this kind of "pretense." Sadly for him, however, these truths condemn him before God and men as a dangerously wicked little man whose narcissism and ostentatious displays of his pretended humility and simplicity mask a heart of steely determination to crush those in the conciliar structures who try to adhere to Catholicism as best they can without recognizing that they are not fighting "for the church" but are fighting like the Japanese after World War II on the Filipino island of Mindanao (see Francis: The Latest In A Long Line Of Ecclesiastical Tyrants).
The great renewal of the Catholic Church
will take place following the Triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary.
Our daily praying of as many Rosaries each day as our states-in-life
permit will help us to be wounded more perfectly by the ineffable love
of Love Incarnate in His Most Sacred Heart. And it is by being wounded
by this ineffable love of the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus that we, His
totally consecrated slaves through the Immaculate Heart of Mary, that we
can more perfectly make reparation for our sins and those of the whole
world, including of the conciliarists who have abandoned "that church"
for the strange new church that has offended God so greatly and harmed
souls so much over the course of five decades now.
Let us suffer well and with gratitude and with joy in
this time of apostasy and betrayal as the consecrated slaves of Our
Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ through the Sorrowful and
Immaculate Heart. Heaven awaits us if we walk our own little Via
Dolorosa without complaint
Isn't 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 worth bearing with the sufferings of the
present time?
Our Lady's Immaculate Heart will triumph. May we
play some small part in helping to plant a few seeds for this triumph by
our own daily fidelity to her Fatima Message, whose fulfillment will
bring upon us the dawning of an era of peace wherein all men everywhere
will exclaim during the Reign of Mary:
Vivat Christus Rex! Viva Cristo Rey!
Our Lady of the Rosary, pray for us.
