From One Strange Religion to Another

by Thomas A. Droleskey

There was a time when the Sillon, as such, was truly Catholic. It recognized but one moral force - Catholicism; and the Sillonists were wont to proclaim that Democracy would have to be Catholic or would not exist at all. A time came when they changed their minds. They left to each one his religion or his philosophy. They ceased to call themselves Catholics and, for the formula "Democracy will be Catholic" they substituted "Democracy will not be anti-Catholic", any more than it will be anti-Jewish or anti-Buddhist. This was the time of "the Greater Sillon". For the construction of the Future City they appealed to the workers of all religions and all sects. These were asked but one thing: to share the same social ideal, to respect all creeds, and to bring with them a certain supply of moral force. Admittedly: they declared that “The leaders of the Sillon place their religious faith above everything. But can they deny others the right to draw their moral energy from whence they can? In return, they expect others to respect their right to draw their own moral energy from the Catholic Faith. Accordingly they ask all those who want to change today's society in the direction of Democracy, not to oppose each other on account of the philosophical or religious convictions which may separate them, but to march hand in hand, not renouncing their convictions, but trying to provide on the ground of practical realities, the proof of the excellence of their personal convictions. Perhaps a union will be effected on this ground of emulation between souls holding different religious or philosophical convictions.” And they added at the same time (but how could this be accomplished?) that “the Little Catholic Sillon will be the soul of the Greater Cosmopolitan Sillon.”

Recently, the term “Greater Sillon” was discarded and a new organization was born without modifying, quite the contrary, the spirit and the substratum of things: “In order to organize in an orderly manner the different forces of activity, the Sillon still remains as a Soul, a Spirit, which will pervade the groups and inspire their work.” Thus, a host of new groups, Catholic, Protestant, Free-Thinking, now apparently autonomous, are invited to set to work: “Catholic comrades will work between themselves in a special organization and will learn and educate themselves. Protestant and Free-Thinking Democrats will do likewise on their own side. But all of us, Catholics, Protestants and Free-Thinkers will have at heart to arm young people, not in view of the fratricidal struggle, but in view of a disinterested emulation in the field of social and civic virtues.”

These declarations and this new organization of the Sillonist action call for very serious remarks.

Here we have, founded by Catholics, an inter-denominational association that is to work for the reform of civilization, an undertaking which is above all religious in character; for there is no true civilization without a moral civilization, and no true moral civilization without the true religion: it is a proven truth, a historical fact. The new Sillonists cannot pretend that they are merely working on “the ground of practical realities” where differences of belief do not matter. Their leader is so conscious of the influence which the convictions of the mind have upon the result of the action, that he invites them, whatever religion they may belong to, “to provide on the ground of practical realities, the proof of the excellence of their personal convictions.” And with good reason: indeed, all practical results reflect the nature of one’s religious convictions, just as the limbs of a man down to his finger-tips, owe their very shape to the principle of life that dwells in his body.

This being said, what must be thought of the promiscuity in which young Catholics will be caught up with heterodox and unbelieving folk in a work of this nature? Is it not a thousand-fold more dangerous for them than a neutral association? What are we to think of this appeal to all the heterodox, and to all the unbelievers, to prove the excellence of their convictions in the social sphere in a sort of apologetic contest? Has not this contest lasted for nineteen centuries in conditions less dangerous for the faith of Catholics? And was it not all to the credit of the Catholic Church? What are we to think of this respect for all errors, and of this strange invitation made by a Catholic to all the dissidents to strengthen their convictions through study so that they may have more and more abundant sources of fresh forces? What are we to think of an association in which all religions and even Free-Thought may express themselves openly and in complete freedom? For the Sillonists who, in public lectures and elsewhere, proudly proclaim their personal faith, certainly do not intend to silence others nor do they intend to prevent a Protestant from asserting his Protestantism, and the skeptic from affirming his skepticism. Finally, what are we to think of a Catholic who, on entering his study group, leaves his Catholicism outside the door so as not to alarm his comrades who, “dreaming of disinterested social action, are not inclined to make it serve the triumph of interests, coteries and even convictions whatever they may be”? Such is the profession of faith of the New Democratic Committee for Social Action which has taken over the main objective of the previous organization and which, they say, “breaking the double meaning which surround the Greater Sillon both in reactionary and anti-clerical circles”, is now open to all men “who respect moral and religious forces and who are convinced that no genuine social emancipation is possible without the leaven of generous idealism.” (Pope Saint Pius X, Notre Charge Apostolique, August 15, 1910.)

 

The spirit of The Sillon, condemned by Pope Saint Pius X in Notre Charge Apostolique, August 15, 1910, is the spirit of conciliarism. Much like the leaders of The Sillon, who had the full support of one Father Angelo Roncalli, Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI and his "bishops" in the counterfeit church of conciliarism express their respect for false religions, engaging in the canonically condemned practice of inter-religious prayer services and offending God most directly by demonstrating their esteem for the symbols of false religions while praising their nonexistent "ability" to contribute to the "betterment" of the world.

Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II spent his twenty-five years as head of the counterfeit church of conciliarism by violating the precepts of the First Commandment on a regular basis, scandalizing the faithful and accustoming them to accept religious indifferentism (the belief that one religion is as good as enough) even while he and other conciliar officials criticized such indifferentism. Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI has continued this sorry tradition, being enabled by desperate Catholics in the conciliar structures, eager to "save the day" for Summorum Pontificum, who used to foam at the mouth whenever Wojtyla/John Paul II held his Assisi events or entered a mosque or a synagogue or otherwise violated the First Commandment.

This demonstrates just how diabolically-inspired Summorum Pontificum is as we can never accept a Faustian bargain from a lifelong enemy of the official philosophy of the Catholic Church, Scholasticism, in order to "liberate" a modernized version of the Immemorial Mass of Tradition that is premised upon an abject misrepresentation that the Missale Romanum of Pope Saint Pius V and the Protestant and Masonic Novus Ordo service of Giovanni Montini/Paul VI are but "two forms" of the "one Roman Rite." The honor and glory and majesty of God must be defended. It is never permitted to keep one's mouth quiet as God is offended. And it is not possible for a legitimate Vicar of Jesus Christ to offend God as repeatedly and as blithely has He has been offended by the conciliar "pontiffs."

Each of us, as I noted in Under The Bus, must come to the realization that Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ gave us the papacy so that we, the sheep of His true flock that is the Catholic Church, would not be deceived on matters pertaining to Faith and Morals. Legitimate Successors of Saint Peter cannot offend God as systematically and regularly as have the heads of the counterfeit church of conciliarism in the past fifty years.

Although anti-sedevacantist authors point out repeatedly that there has never been a period in the history of the Church where there has been a vacancy in the See of Peter for five decades, it is also the case that there has never been a period before in the history of the Church when men claiming to be the Sovereign Pontiff have engaged in the sort of scandalous behavior with false religions that had been condemned without any equivocation whatsoever over the centuries by one pope after another prior to 1958, the sort of scandalous behavior that millions upon millions of Catholics gave up their lives rather than to give even the appearance of accepting as consonant with the Catholic Faith.

Something unprecedented is indeed happening at the present time: either the See of Peter has been vacant because those who claimed to hold it defected had defected from the Faith by virtue of violating the Divine Positive Law or the jaws of Hell have prevailed against Holy Mother Church as Catholics and non-Catholics alike have been "taught" by the words and deeds of the conciliar "pontiffs" that God Himself esteems false religions that He, in point of all truth, loathes and wants eradicated from the face of the earth as their adherents are converted to the Catholic Faith and every single last vestige of their false worship is abolished. Sedevacantism is, as even the late Mario Francesco "Cardinal" Pompedda noted in 2005, the canonical doctrine of the Catholic Church. It is, in other words, a possibility. It is impossible for true popes to do and to say the things that have been done and said by the conciliar "pontiffs" in the past fifty years.

A thoughtful correspondent noted this very truth to me few days in a very prescient set of remarks:

I find I can no longer ignore the overwhelming evidence that the Chair of St. Peter is indeed vacant.  Solely by the grace of God, I tenaciously cling to His promise to provide a perpetual line of infallible pontiffs to sanctify, teach, and rule the members of the Church Militant on earth. Most certainly, legitimate vicars of Jesus Christ exercising their most holy office cannot lead souls astray.  Not only is it clear that this is the de fide teaching of the Church, it is simply impossible for an intellect which is made to serve truth to hold the contradictory beliefs that a man could be a legitimate pope and at the same time through his words and actions lead his flock into behaviors and beliefs which the Church has taught from the beginning will damn their souls to hell.  The fact that the current claimant to the papal throne has scheduled yet another junket in which he plans to openly worship as a Mohammedan and as a Jew is simply more than this Catholic conscience can bear.

 

This is very well-put. It cannot be that the conciliar "pontiffs" have been correct in their esteeming of false religions and that the true popes of the Catholic Church were wrong to condemn such behavior. It cannot be, as has been maintained by the "inventive" theologians of the Society of Saint Pius X, that there can be a "conflict" between the "authentic magisterium" and the "governing magisterium," a proposition that has no support in the writings of the Fathers or in any decrees of any dogmatic councils whatsoever.

Pope Gregory XVI, writing in Singulari Nos, June 25, 1834, explained that the Catholic Church can be tarnished by no kinds of errors and that she never promotes any kinds of innovations whatsoever:

As for the rest, We greatly deplore the fact that, where the ravings of human reason extend, there is somebody who studies new things and strives to know more than is necessary, against the advice of the apostle. There you will find someone who is overconfident in seeking the truth outside the Catholic Church, in which it can be found without even a light tarnish of error. Therefore, the Church is called, and is indeed, a pillar and foundation of truth. You correctly understand, venerable brothers, that We speak here also of that erroneous philosophical system which was recently brought in and is clearly to be condemned. This system, which comes from the contemptible and unrestrained desire for innovation, does not seek truth where it stands in the received and holy apostolic inheritance. Rather, other empty doctrines, futile and uncertain doctrines not approved by the Church, are adopted. Only the most conceited men wrongly think that these teachings can sustain and support that truth.

 

Remember, Pope Saint Pius X asked the following questions in Notre Charge Apostolique:

What are we to think of this respect for all errors, and of this strange invitation made by a Catholic to all the dissidents to strengthen their convictions through study so that they may have more and more abundant sources of fresh forces? What are we to think of an association in which all religions and even Free-Thought may express themselves openly and in complete freedom?

 

Indeed, what are we to think of this respect for all errors and of an association in which all religions may express themselves openly and in complete freedom? We do not need to do anything other than to listen to what Holy Mother Church has taught us.

For when the liberty of all "religions" is indiscriminately asserted, by this very fact truth is confounded with error and the holy and immaculate Spouse of Christ, the Church, outside of which there can be no salvation, is set on a par with the sects of heretics and with Judaic perfidy itself. For when favour and patronage is promised even to the sects of heretics and their ministers, not only their persons, but also their very errors, are tolerated and fostered: a system of errors in which is contained that fatal and never sufficiently to be deplored HERESY which, as St. Augustine says (de Haeresibus, no.72), "asserts that all heretics proceed correctly and tell the truth: which is so absurd that it seems incredible to me." (Pope Pius VII, Post Tam Diuturnas, April 28, 1814.)

This shameful font of indifferentism gives rise to that absurd and erroneous proposition which claims that liberty of conscience must be maintained for everyone. It spreads ruin in sacred and civil affairs, though some repeat over and over again with the greatest impudence that some advantage accrues to religion from it. "But the death of the soul is worse than freedom of error," as Augustine was wont to say. When all restraints are removed by which men are kept on the narrow path of truth, their nature, which is already inclined to evil, propels them to ruin. Then truly "the bottomless pit" is open from which John saw smoke ascending which obscured the sun, and out of which locusts flew forth to devastate the earth. Thence comes transformation of minds, corruption of youths, contempt of sacred things and holy laws -- in other words, a pestilence more deadly to the state than any other. Experience shows, even from earliest times, that cities renowned for wealth, dominion, and glory perished as a result of this single evil, namely immoderate freedom of opinion, license of free speech, and desire for novelty. (Pope Gregory XVI, Mirari Vos, August 15, 1832.)

From which totally false idea of social government they do not fear to foster that erroneous opinion, most fatal in its effects on the Catholic Church and the salvation of souls, called by Our Predecessor, Gregory XVI, an "insanity," viz., that "liberty of conscience and worship is each man's personal right, which ought to be legally proclaimed and asserted in every rightly constituted society; and that a right resides in the citizens to an absolute liberty, which should be restrained by no authority whether ecclesiastical or civil, whereby they may be able openly and publicly to manifest and declare any of their ideas whatever, either by word of mouth, by the press, or in any other way." But, while they rashly affirm this, they do not think and consider that they are preaching "liberty of perdition;" and that "if human arguments are always allowed free room for discussion, there will never be wanting men who will dare to resist truth, and to trust in the flowing speech of human wisdom; whereas we know, from the very teaching of our Lord Jesus Christ, how carefully Christian faith and wisdom should avoid this most injurious babbling."  (Pope Pius IX, Quanta Cura, December 8, 1864.)

15. Every man is free to embrace and profess that religion which, guided by the light of reason, he shall consider true. -- Allocution "Maxima quidem," June 9, 1862; Damnatio "Multiplices inter," June 10, 1851.

16. Man may, in the observance of any religion whatever, find the way of eternal salvation, and arrive at eternal salvation. -- Encyclical "Qui pluribus," Nov. 9, 1846.

17. Good hope at least is to be entertained of the eternal salvation of all those who are not at all in the true Church of Christ. -- Encyclical "Quanto conficiamur," Aug. 10, 1863, etc.

18. Protestantism is nothing more than another form of the same true Christian religion, in which form it is given to please God equally as in the Catholic Church. -- Encyclical "Noscitis," Dec. 8, 1849.  (Pope Pius IX, The Syllabus of Errors, December 8, 1864.)

For the Modernist believer, on the contrary, it is an established and certain fact that the reality of the divine does really exist in itself and quite independently of the person who believes in it. If you ask on what foundation this assertion of the believer rests, he answers: In the personal experience of the individual. On this head the Modernists differ from the Rationalists only to fall into the views of the Protestants and pseudo-mystics. The following is their manner of stating the question: In the religious sense one must recognize a kind of intuition of the heart which puts man in immediate contact with the reality of God, and infuses such a persuasion of God's existence and His action both within and without man as far to exceed any scientific conviction. They assert, therefore, the existence of a real experience, and one of a kind that surpasses all rational experience. If this experience is denied by some, like the Rationalists, they say that this arises from the fact that such persons are unwilling to put themselves in the moral state necessary to produce it. It is this experience which makes the person who acquires it to be properly and truly a believer.

How far this position is removed from that of Catholic teaching! We have already seen how its fallacies have been condemned by the Vatican Council. Later on, we shall see how these errors, combined with those which we have already mentioned, open wide the way to Atheism. Here it is well to note at once that, given this doctrine of experience united with that of symbolism, every religion, even that of paganism, must be held to be true. What is to prevent such experiences from being found in any religion? In fact, that they are so is maintained by not a few. On what grounds can Modernists deny the truth of an experience affirmed by a follower of Islam? Will they claim a monopoly of true experiences for Catholics alone? Indeed, Modernists do not deny, but actually maintain, some confusedly, others frankly, that all religions are true. That they cannot feel otherwise is obvious. For on what ground, according to their theories, could falsity be predicated of any religion whatsoever? Certainly it would be either on account of the falsity of the religious .sense or on account of the falsity of the formula pronounced by the mind. Now the religious sense, although it maybe more perfect or less perfect, is always one and the same; and the intellectual formula, in order to be true, has but to respond to the religious sense and to the believer, whatever be the intellectual capacity of the latter. In the conflict between different religions, the most that Modernists can maintain is that the Catholic has more truth because it is more vivid, and that it deserves with more reason the name of Christian because it corresponds more fully with the origins of Christianity. No one will find it unreasonable that these consequences flow from the premises. But what is most amazing is that there are Catholics and priests, who, We would fain believe, abhor such enormities, and yet act as if they fully approved of them. For they lavish such praise and bestow such public honor on the teachers of these errors as to convey the belief that their admiration is not meant merely for the persons, who are perhaps not devoid of a certain merit, but rather for the sake of the errors which these persons openly profess and which they do all in their power to propagate.  (Pope Saint Pius X, Pascendi Dominici Gregis, September 8, 1907.)

Let them [the bishops and priests of the Catholic Church] combat novelties of words, remembering the admonitions of Leo XIII: "It is impossible to approve in Catholic publications a style inspired by unsound novelty which seems to deride the piety of the faithful and dwells on the introduction of a new order of Christian life, on new directions of the Church, on new aspirations of the modern soul, on a new social vocation of the clergy, on a new Christian civilization, and many other things of the same kind." (Pope Saint Pius X, Pascendi Dominici Gregis, September 8, 1907.)

 

Did these popes have it all wrong? Did the Third Person of the Most Blessed Trinity, God the Holy Ghost, permit these true popes to mislead Catholics consistently? Is not Pope Leo XIII's criticism of those who want to introduce a "new order of Christian life," "new directions of the Church" and "new aspirations of the modern soul" a direct contradiction of the very spirit of Angelo Roncalli/John XXIII's vision for the "Second" Vatican Council that is embraced to this very day by Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI, who has tried so fruitlessly over the course of his priesthood to find a "synthesis of faith" that could appeal to the mythical entity known as "modern man"?

Some might protest that what is contained in papal encyclical letters is not binding on the consciences of Catholics unless it defines an article of the Faith by virtue of a solemn, ex cathedra pronouncement, that whatever is not ex cathedra is subject to contradiction by some future pope. This is not so. Pope Pius XII taught us this very clearly in Humani Generis, August 12, 1950:

Nor must it be thought that what is expounded in Encyclical Letters does not of itself demand consent, since in writing such Letters the Popes do not exercise the supreme power of their Teaching Authority. For these matters are taught with the ordinary teaching authority, of which it is true to say: "He who heareth you, heareth me"; and generally what is expounded and inculcated in Encyclical Letters already for other reasons appertains to Catholic doctrine. But if the Supreme Pontiffs in their official documents purposely pass judgment on a matter up to that time under dispute, it is obvious that that matter, according to the mind and will of the same Pontiffs, cannot be any longer considered a question open to discussion among theologians.

 

Endless numbers of Catholic theologians and spiritual writers were consistent over the course of the centuries in their condemnation of any respect being shown for false religions. Bishop George Hay's reiteration of this consistent teaching is even reflected in the Code of Canon Law of the Catholic Church issued by Pope Benedict XV in 1917:

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.)

 

Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI believes that he is not bound by this perennial teaching. No, he knows better. So did his predecessor, Wojtyla/John Paul II, a man who indemnified "bishops" and "priests" whose perversity was proved to him beyond any question at all, thereby being directly responsible for the abuse committed against the souls and against the bodies of untold numbers of victims whose spiritual and temporal safety were deemed expendable in order to protect malefactors who were fully committed to the doctrinal and liturgical revolutions of conciliarism. Wojtyla/John Paul II had no sense of the offense he gave to God by treating non-Catholic "ministers" as his co-equals and by entering into the halls of false worship and praising their "qualities," thus demonstrating that he himself had fallen from the Catholic Faith and was an imposter in papal robes.

Ratzinger/Benedict is continuing the sad legacy of his immediate predecessor as the head of the counterfeit church of conciliarism, being enabled by truckloads of "conservatives" and "Motarians" who live in the fear that the least bit of defense of the honor and majesty and glory of God and of the integrity of His Catholic Faith might cause the poor "pope" mental anguish as he is attacked by ultra-progressives who do not realize or accept that he, Ratzinger/Benedict, is trying to institutionalize the doctrinal and liturgical revolutions of concilairism, not do away with them as they suppose to be the case.

Oh, yes, the "mental anguish" of the great "restorer" of tradition. What about the honor and majesty and glory of God, He Who is Our Creator, Our Redeemer, and Our Sanctifier? Does not God's honor and glory and majesty deserve a public defense as Catholics worldwide wake up and recognize that Ratzinger/Benedict's behavior with respect to false religions is the absolute embodiment of the "damnable sin" referred to by Bishop George Hay, the Apostolic Administrator of the Scottish Lowland Region, over two hundred years ago now?

Once again, good readers, consider these words of Bishop George Hay and contrast them with the news story contrasting Ratzinger/Benedict's upcoming visits to a mosque in Jordan:

 

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.)

AMMAN, Jordan (AP) — Pope Benedict XVI will visit Jordan's largest mosque during his first papal tour of the Holy Land in May, a local Roman Catholic priest said Tuesday.

The pope's stop at the Hussein bin Talal Mosque in Amman will be his second visit to a Muslim place of worship since becoming pope in 2005, said Rifat Bader, a Catholic priest in Jordan who is the spokesman for the Jordanian leg of the pope's Holy Land tour. In 2006, Benedict prayed at Turkey's famous Blue Mosque in Istanbul.

"He will also meet there with Muslim leaders and religious scholars at the mosque, underlining the coexistence between religions," Bader told The Associated Press.

The mosque, built in outskirts of Amman nearly four years ago, is named after the late King Hussein, who died in 1999.

Jordan will be the pope's first stop on the Holy Land tour from May 8-15, Bader said. He will also travel to Israel and the West Bank, making stops in cities including Jerusalem and Bethlehem. Bader said discussions were under way to possibly add Gaza on the pope's itinerary.

During his three-day stay in Jordan, the pope will also visit biblical sites including Mount Nebo, where Moses is said to have first seen the promised land, and a spot on the Jordanian River, where Jesus is believed to have been baptized, Bader said.

The pope also plans to hold a public Mass in Jordan, where 3 percent of the country's 5.8 million people are Christians.

Benedict will then travel to Israel, where President Shimon Peres is expected to escort him. Bader said the pope will stop at the recently renovated Yad Vashem Holocaust Museum during his visit to Jerusalem and will meet with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas in the West Bank.

The late Pope John Paul II came to the Holy Land in a 2000 pilgrimage, visiting Jordan, Israel and the Palestinian territories.

The visit to the Mideast comes at a time of strained relations between the Vatican and Israel. The fragile relations worsened last month when the German pope reinstated an excommunicated bishop who has questioned the extent of the Holocaust. Benedict later condemned the bishop's remarks and spoke out against anti-Semitism.

Relations between the Vatican and the Muslim world have also been tense in recent years. In 2006, Benedict made remarks on Islam and holy war during a speech in Germany that angered many Muslims, leading him to backtrack and declare himself "deeply sorry." (Benedict to visit Jordan mosque during Holy Land tour.)

 

It is impossible to reconcile Bishop George Hay's reiteration of the constant, immutable teaching of the Catholic Church concerning the "great and damnable" sin of venerating the shrines and the symbols and beliefs of false religions with Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI's constant, unremitting, ceaseless shows of respect for false religions, each of which is abhorred by God: Father, Son, and Holy Ghost.

It is also impossible to reconcile the following passage of Bishop George Hay's commentary and Pope Saint Pius X's rejection of the validity of the false religion of Talmudic Judaism with Ratzinger/Benedict's continued visits to Talmudic synagogues, two of which will host him during his upcoming trip to the Zionist State of Israel:

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.)

POPE: We are unable to favor this movement [of Zionism]. We cannot prevent the Jews from going to Jerusalem—but we could never sanction it. The ground of Jerusalem, if it were not always sacred, has been sanctified by the life of Jesus Christ. As the head of the Church I cannot answer you otherwise. The Jews have not recognized our Lord, therefore we cannot recognize the Jewish people.

HERZL: [The conflict between Rome and Jerusalem, represented by the one and the other of us, was once again under way. At the outset I tried to be conciliatory. I said my little piece. . . . It didn’t greatly impress him. Jerusalem was not to be placed in Jewish hands.] And its present status, Holy Father?

POPE: I know, it is disagreeable to see the Turks in possession of our Holy Places. We simply have to put up with it. But to sanction the Jewish wish to occupy these sites, that we cannot do.

HERZL: [I said that we based our movement solely on the sufferings of the Jews, and wished to put aside all religious issues].

POPE: Yes, but we, but I as the head of the Catholic Church, cannot do this. One of two things will likely happen. Either the Jews will retain their ancient faith and continue to await the Messiah whom we believe has already appeared—in which case they are denying the divinity of Jesus and we cannot assist them. Or else they will go there with no religion whatever, and then we can have nothing at all to do with them. The Jewish faith was the foundation of our own, but it has been superceded by the teachings of Christ, and we cannot admit that it still enjoys any validity. The Jews who should have been the first to acknowledge Jesus Christ have not done so to this day.

HERZL: [It was on the tip of my tongue to remark, “It happens in every family: no one believes in his own relative.” But, instead, I said:] Terror and persecution were not precisely the best means for converting the Jews. [His reply had an element of grandeur in its simplicity:]

POPE: Our Lord came without power. He came in peace. He persecuted no one. He was abandoned even by his apostles. It was only later that he attained stature. It took three centuries for the Church to evolve. The Jews therefore had plenty of time in which to accept his divinity without duress or pressure. But they chose not to do so, and they have not done it yet. (Marvin Lowenthal, Diaries of Theodore Herzl, pp. 427- 430.)

 

It is impossible to reconcile Catholicism with conciliarism unless, of course, one endeavors to use the Hegelian "hermeneutic of continuity and discontinuity" to do so as the principle of non-contradiction is stood on its head to make it appear as through truth and anti-truth can be reconciled. Such an effort, opposed to all natural reason and condemned dogmatically by the authority of the Catholic Church, was assessed by Pope Saint Pius X in Pascendi Dominci Gregis, September 8, 1907:

In this way, with consummate audacity, they criticize the Church, as having strayed from the true path by failing to distinguish between the religious and moral sense of formulas and their surface meaning, and by clinging vainly and tenaciously to meaningless formulas, while religion itself is allowed to go to ruin. "Blind'- they are, and "leaders of the blind" puffed up with the proud name of science, they have reached that pitch of folly at which they pervert the eternal concept of truth and the true meaning of religion; in introducing a new system in which "they are seen to be under the sway of a blind and unchecked passion for novelty, thinking not at all of finding some solid foundation of truth, but despising the holy and apostolic traditions, they embrace other and vain, futile, uncertain doctrines, unapproved by the Church, on which, in the height of their vanity, they think they can base and maintain truth itself.

 

Any questions? There is no reconciling the "hermeneutic of continuity and discontinuity" with this passage from Pascendi Dominci Gregis.

The respect shown by one false religion, the conciliarism, to other false religions, including those that deny the Sacred Divinity of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, such as Mohammedanism and Talmudic Judaism and Hinduism and Buddhism, among others, is a cornerstone of conciliarism's false, Modernist creed. This respect shown by the leaders of the counterfeit church of conciliarism to false religions has conditioned most Catholics in the world to think nothing of the spectacles of putative "pontiffs" entering into mosques or synagogues or treated the "clergy" of false religions as co-equals. It is such a conditioning that has wiped away the sensus Catholicus that is supposed to make it clear to a believing Catholic that it is a Mortal Sin against the First Commandment to do what the conciliar "pontiffs" have done in the past and what the current "pontiff" continues to do at almost every turn.

Did Our Lady show respect to the false religion of Calvinism when she told an apostate, Pierre Port-Combet, that he could go to Hell if he did not convert back to the Catholic Church?

Then the Lady said, "Where does that heretic live who cut the willow tree? Does he not want to be converted?"

Pierre mumbled an answer. The Lady became more serious, "Do you think that I do not know that you are the heretic? Realize that your end is at hand. If you do not return to the True Faith, you will be cast into Hell! But if you change your beliefs, I shall protect you before God. Tell people to pray that they may gain the good graces which, God in His mercy has offered to them."

Pierre was filled with sorrow and shame and moved away from the Lady. Suddenly realizing that he was being rude, Pierre stepped closer to her, but she had moved away and was already near the little hill. He ran after her begging, "Please stop and listen to me. I want to apologize to you and I want you to help me!"

The Lady stopped and turned. By the time Pierre caught up to her, she was floating in the air and was already disappearing from sight. Suddenly, Pierre realized that the Most Blessed Virgin Mary had appeared to him! He fell to his knees and cried buckets of tears, "Jesus and Mary I promise you that I will change my life and become a good Catholic. I am sorry for what I have done and I beg you please, to help me change my life…"

On August 14, 1656, Pierre became very sick. An Augustinian priest came to hear his confession and accepted him back into the Catholic Church. Pierre received Holy Communion the next day on the Feast of the Assumption. After Pierre returned to the Catholic Faith, many others followed him. His son and five daughters came back to the Catholic Church as well as many Calvinists and Protestants. Five weeks later on September 8, 1656, Pierre died and was buried under the miraculous willow tree, just as he had asked. (Our Lady of the Willow Tree.)

 

The devil himself mocks false religions that do his bidding including the various Protestant sects, of which Calvinism is one:

As the strange circumstances of Nicola's possession became known everywhere, several Calvinist preachers came with their followers, to "expose this popish cheat," as they said. On their entrance, the devil saluted them mockingly, called them by name, and told them that they had come in obedience to him. One of the preachers took his Protestant prayer book, and began to read it with a very solemn face. The devil laughed at him, and putting on a most comical look, he said: "Ho! Ho! My good friend; do you intend to expel me with your prayers and hymns? Do you think that they will cause me any pain? Don't you know that they are mine? I helped to compose them!"

"I will expel thee in the name of God," said the preacher, solemnly.

"You!" said the devil mockingly. "You will not expel me either in the name of God, or in the name of the devil. Did you ever hear of one devil driving out another?"

"I am not a devil," said the preacher, angrily, "I am a servant of Christ."

"A servant of Christ, indeed!" said Satan, with a sneer. "What! I tell you, you are worse than I am. I believe, and you do not want to believe. Do you suppose that you can expel me from the body of this miserable wretch? Ha! Go first and expel all the devils that are in your own heart!"

The preacher took his leave, somewhat discomfited. On going away, he said, turning up the whites of his eyes, "O Lord, I pray thee, assist this poor creature!"

"And I pray Lucifer," cried the evil spirit, "that he may never leave you, but may always keep you firmly in his power, as he does now. Go about your business, now. You are all mine, and I am your master."  (Exorcism of Nicola Aubrey) 

 

Yet it is that almost each and every conciliar "bishop," including the newly-appointed conciliar "archbishop" of New York, Timothy Dolan, has engaged in the sort of "great and damnable sin" of entering into the places of worship of false religions and of treated non-Catholic "clergy" as co-equals, mirroring on the local level the scandals that have been given on a universal basis by the conciliar"pontiffs." It is very difficult, humanly speaking, for the average Catholic to accept the simple truth that all places of false worship are dens of the devil and that all false religions are his means of corrupting souls and thus sowing the seeds of chaos and disorder in the world.

We must remind ourselves that the forces that control conciliarism are the same ones that control all over false religions. No amount of "strategies" or "negotiations" (such as those contemplated by Bishop Bernard Fellay of the Society of Saint Pius X) can change the course of any false religion, including conciliarism. We must, especially now on the cusp of Lent, intensify our prayers, especially those before the Most Blessed Sacrament and to the Mother of God by means of her Most Holy Rosary, our sacrifices, our voluntary penances, our fasting and our joyful embrace of all other manner of suffering, including humiliation and calumny, as we endeavor to make reparation for our sins and those of the whole world as the consecrated slaves of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary.

Saint Paul reminded us in his Epistle to the Ephesians that we must put on the armour of God as we fight the good fight of the Faith in our own lives to save our immortal souls, which is, after all, the only thing that matters when all is said and done, when all we have said and done is behind us after we our breathed our last breaths in this passing, mortal vale of tears:

Put you on the armour of God, that you may be able to stand against the deceits of the devil. For our wrestling is not against flesh and blood; but against principalities and power, against the rulers of the world of this darkness, against the spirits of wickedness in the high place.

Therefore take unto you the armour of God, that you may be able to resist in the evil day, and to stand in all things perfect. Stand therefore, having your loins girt about with truth, and having on the breastplate of justice, And your feet shod with the preparation of the gospel of peace:

In all things taking the shield of faith, wherewith you may be able to extinguish all the fiery darts of the most wicked one. And take unto you the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit (which is the word of God). By all prayer and supplication praying at all times in the spirit; and in the same watching with all instance and supplication for all the saints. (Ephesians 6: 11-18.)

 

To convert others, including those in any false religion, including that of conciliarism, we must seek to convert ourselves on a daily basis, protecting our immortal souls with the armour provided by the Brown Scapular of Our Lady of Mount Carmel and using the weapon provided by Our Lady's Most Holy Rosary, which she gave to Saint Dominic de Guzman to fight the Albigensian heresy. Those who wrap themselves in Our Lady's mantle and permit themselves to be enfolded in the crossing of her arms shall indeed fear no vexation, not even the vexation that emanates from the likes of Ratzinger/Benedict as he shamelessly esteems one false religion after another in full defiance of the dogmatic teaching and the Canon Law of the Catholic Church.

Today, apart from being the feast of the Apostle, Saint Matthias, who was chosen by lots to replace the traitor Judas Iscariot, who sold out Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ to the rabbis for his thirty pieces of silver, is the feast of the Holy Face of Jesus. What I wrote nearly six months ago is apposite once again:

One of the ways that we can help to make reparation for our own sins and those of the whole world is to promote devotion to the Holy Face of Jesus. It was to this Holy Face that the Little Flower, Saint Therese of Lisieux (Saint Therese of the Child Jesus and of the Holy Face), was so devoted. This is what Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ said to Sister Marie de Saint-Pierre, a Carmelite Sister in Tours, France, in 1843:

"By offering My Face to My Eternal Father nothing will be refused, and the conversion of many sinners will be obtained."

"It is required that all undertake to widely spread and make known this devotion to the Holy Face of Jesus."

Our Lord taught Sister Marie de Saint-Pierre the following "Golden Arrow" prayer to recite:

May the most holy, most sacred, most adorable, most incomprehensible and ineffable Name of God be forever praised, blessed, loved, adored and glorified in Heaven, on Earth, and under the Earth by all the creatures of God and by the Sacred Heart of Our Lord Jesus Christ in the Most Holy Sacrament of the Altar. Amen

Take a look at the promises that Our Lord made to Sister Marie de Saint-Pierre concerning those who promote devotion to His Holy Face in reparation for sins of blasphemy, many of which are committed by the conciliar "pontiffs" and by "pro-life" and pro-death politicians who invoke God's Holy Name in an Masonic, generic sense in their public utterances:

"By My Holy Face you shall work miracles."

"By My Holy Face you will obtain the conversion of many sinners."

"Nothing that you ask in making this offering will be refused to you."

"If you knew how pleasing the sight of My Face is to My Father."

"As in a kingdom you can procure all you wish for with coin marked with the King's effigy, so in the Kingdom of Heaven you will obtain all you desire with the Precious coin of My Holy Face."

"Our Lord has promised me that He will imprint His divine likeness on the souls of those who honour his most holy Countenance."

"All those who honour My Holy Face in a spirit of reparation, will be so doing perform the office of the pious Veronica."

"According to the care you take in making reparation to My Face disfigured by blasphemies, so will I take care of yours which has been disfigured by sin.  I will reprint therein My image and render it as beautiful as it was on leaving the Baptismal font."

"Our Lord has promised me, that all those who defend His cause in this work of reparation, by words, by prayers, or in writing.  He will defend them before His Father; at their death He will purify their souls by effacing all the blots of sin and will restore to them their primitive beauty."

Yes, even those who write in the promotion of the Faith might make a contribution in behalf of the Social Reign of Christ the King and Mary our Immaculate Queen as they attempt to make reparation for their own sins and those of the whole world to the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary. Devotions to those such as the Holy Face of Jesus will help to truly cover a multitude of sins!

We must make this Lent the best one of our lives as we cleave to true shepherds in the Catholic catacombs who make no concessions to conciliarism or to its false shepherds. Our Lady stands ready to help us to deny ourselves during these forty days of Lent (Sundays excepted, of course) before we enter into the sacred Paschal Triduum of Maundy Thursday, Good Friday and Easter Sunday. We must let her help us to spend time "in the desert" as we make reparation for our sins and those of the whole world, including the "great and damnable" sins committed by the conciliarists, that caused her Divine Son to suffer so unspeakably in His Sacred Humanity and that caused her own Immaculate Heart to be thrust through and through with those Seven Swords of Sorrow.

Isn't it time to pray a Rosary now?

Vivat Christus Rex!

Immaculate Heart of Mary, pray for us now and at the hour of our death. Amen.

 

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.

Saint Matthias, pray for us.

See also: A Litany of Saints