Trying to Redeem False Premises

by Thomas A. Droleskey

Evidently responding to criticism that the conciliar novelty of ecumenism leads to indifferentism and that the "inter-religious" dialogue that is part and parcel of ecumenism leads to syncretism, Benedict XVI/Joseph Ratzinger has stated that "inter-religious" dialogue is not synonymous with syncretism (the combination of various religious beliefs into one). As try as he might, however, it is impossible to redeem the false premises upon which "inter-religious" dialogue is founded. The belief that it is necessary to engage in "dialogue" with those who believe in false religions (or no religion at all) is bound of its very perverse nature to lead to syncretism. This is inevitable. It is inexorable. Why?

Well, quite simply put, you see, the conciliarist belief in "inter-religious" dialogue contends, sometimes, in a contradictory and paradoxical manner, that the "church" has something to "learn" from false beliefs, which are contended to have some truth within them and thus are said to originate in God Himself. This is pure Modernism condemned by Pope Saint Pius X in Pascendi Dominci Gregis, September 8, 1907:

However, this Agnosticism is only the negative part of the system of the Modernists: the positive part consists in what they call vital immanence. Thus they advance from one to the other. Religion, whether natural or supernatural, must, like every other fact, admit of some explanation. But when natural theology has been destroyed, and the road to revelation closed by the rejection of the arguments of credibility, and all external revelation absolutely denied, it is clear that this explanation will be sought in vain outside of man himself. It must, therefore, be looked for in man; and since religion is a form of life, the explanation must certainly be found in the life of man. In this way is formulated the principle of religious immanence. Moreover, the first actuation, so to speak, of every vital phenomenon -- and religion, as noted above, belongs to this category -- is due to a certain need or impulsion; but speaking more particularly of life, it has its origin in a movement of the heart, which movement is called a sense. Therefore, as God is the object of religion, we must conclude that faith, which is the basis and foundation of all religion, must consist in a certain interior sense, originating in a need of the divine. This need of the divine, which is experienced only in special and favorable circumstances. cannot of itself appertain to the domain of consciousness, but is first latent beneath consciousness, or, to borrow a term from modern philosophy, in the subconsciousness, where also its root lies hidden and undetected.

It may perhaps be asked how it is that this need of the divine which man experiences within himself resolves itself into religion? To this question the Modernist reply would be as follows: Science and history are confined within two boundaries, the one external, namely, the visible world, the other internal, which is consciousness. When one or other of these limits has been reached, there can be no further progress, for beyond is the unknowable. In presence of this unknowable, whether it is outside man and beyond the visible world of nature, or lies hidden within the subconsciousness, the need of the divine in a soul which is prone to religion excites -- according to the principles of Fideism, without any previous advertence of the mind -- a certain special sense, and this sense possesses, implied within itself both as its own object and as its intrinsic cause, the divine reality itself, and in a way unites man with God. It is this sense to which Modernists give the name of faith, and this is what they hold to be the beginning of religion.

But we have not yet reached the end of their philosophizing, or, to speak more accurately, of their folly. Modernists find in this sense not only faith, but in and with faith, as they understand it, they affirm that there is also to be found revelation. For, indeed, what more is needed to constitute a revelation? Is not that religious sense which is perceptible in the conscience, revelation, or at least the beginning of revelation? Nay, is it not God Himself manifesting Himself, indistinctly, it is true, in this same religious sense, to the soul? And they add: Since God is both the object and the cause of faith, this revelation is at the same time of God and from God, that is to say, God is both the Revealer and the Revealed.

From this, Venerable Brethren, springs that most absurd tenet of the Modernists, that every religion, according to the different aspect under which it is viewed, must be considered as both natural and supernatural. It is thus that they make consciousness and revelation synonymous. From this they derive the law laid down as the universal standard, according to which religious consciousness is to be put on an equal footing with revelation, and that to it all must submit, even the supreme authority of the Church, whether in the capacity of teacher, or in that of legislator in the province of sacred liturgy or discipline.

In all this process, from which, according to the Modernists, faith and revelation spring, one point is to be particularly noted, for it is of capital importance on account of the historicocritical corollaries which they deduce from it. The unknowable they speak of does not present itself to faith as something solitary and isolated; hut on the contrary in close conjunction with some phenomenon, which, though it belongs to the realms of science or history, yet to some extent exceeds their limits. Such a phenomenon may be a fact of nature containing within itself something mysterious; or it may be a man, whose character, actions, and words cannot, apparently, be reconciled with the ordinary laws of history. Then faith, attracted by the unknowable which is united with the phenomenon, seizes upon the whole phenomenon, and, as it were, permeates it with its own life. From this two things follow. The first is a sort of transfiguration of the phenomenon, by its elevation above its own true conditions, an elevation by which it becomes more adapted to clothe itself with the form of the divine character which faith will bestow upon it. The second consequence is a certain disfiguration -- so it may be called -- of the same phenomenon, arising from the fact that faith attributes to it, when stripped of the circumstances of place and time, characteristics which it does not really possess; and this takes place especially in the case of the phenomena of the past, and the more fully in the measure of their antiquity. From these two principles the Modernists deduce two laws, which, when united with a third which they have already derived from agnosticism, constitute the foundation of historic criticism. An example may be sought in the Person of Christ. In the Person of Christ, they say, science and history encounter nothing that is not human. Therefore, in virtue of the first canon deduced from agnosticism, whatever there is in His history suggestive of the divine must be rejected. Then, according to the second canon, the historical Person of Christ was transfigured by faith; therefore everything that raises it above historical conditions must be removed. Lastly, the third canon, which lays down that the Person of Christ has been disfigured by faith, requires that everything should be excluded, deeds and words and all else, that is not in strict keeping with His character, condition, and education, and with the place and time in which He lived. A method of reasoning which is passing strange, but in it we have the Modernist criticism.

It is thus that the religious sense, which through the agency of vital immanence emerges from the lurking-places of the subconsciousness, is the germ of all religion, and the explanation of everything that has been or ever will be in any religion. This sense, which was at first only rudimentary and almost formless, under the influence of that mysterious principle from which it originated, gradually matured with the progress of human life, of which, as has been said, it is a certain form. This, then, is the origin of all. even of supernatural religion. For religions are mere developments of this religious sense. Nor is the Catholic religion an exception; it is quite on a level with the rest; for it was engendered, by the process of vital immanence, and by no other way, in the consciousness of Christ, who was a man of the choicest nature, whose like has never been, nor will be. In hearing these things we shudder indeed at so great an audacity of assertion and so great a sacrilege. And yet, Venerable Brethren, these are not merely the foolish babblings of unbelievers. There are Catholics, yea, and priests too, who say these things openly; and they boast that they are going to reform the Church by these ravings! The question is no longer one of the old error which claimed for human nature a sort of right to the supernatural. It has gone far beyond that, and has reached the point when it is affirmed that our most holy religion, in the man Christ as in us, emanated from nature spontaneously and of itself. Nothing assuredly could be more utterly destructive of the whole supernatural order. For this reason the Vatican Council most justly decreed: "If anyone says that man cannot be raised by God to a knowledge and perfection which surpasses nature, but that he can and should, by his own efforts and by a constant development, attain finally to the possession of all truth and good, let him be anathema."

 

The "Second" Vatican Council's Nostra Aetate, October 28, 1965, is the perfect incarnation of the proposition condemned repeatedly by the Catholic Church, including by Pope Pius IX in the Syllabus of Errors and Pope Saint Pius X in Pascendi, that false religions, can be instruments of the "common good." One can see the contrast in Nostra Aetate with Pascendi Dominci Gregis :

Men expect from the various religions answers to the unsolved riddles of the human condition, which today, even as in former times, deeply stir the hearts of men: What is man? What is the meaning, the aim of our life? What is moral good, what sin? Whence suffering and what purpose does it serve? Which is the road to true happiness? What are death, judgement and retribution after death? What, finally is the ultimate inexpressible mystery which encompasses our existence: whence do we come, and where are we going? 2.

From ancient times down to the present, there is found among various peoples a certain perception of that hidden power which hovers over the course of things and over the events of human history; at times some indeed have come to the recognition of a Supreme Being, or even of a Father. This perception and recognition penetrates their lives with a profound religious sense. Religions, however, that are bound up with an advanced culture have struggled to answer the same questions by means of more refined concepts and a more developed language. Thus in Hinduism, men contemplate the divine mystery and express it through an inexhaustible abundance of myths and through searching philosophical inquiry. They seek freedom from the anguish of our human condition either through ascetical practices or profound meditation or a flight to God with love and trust. Again, Buddhism, in its various forms, realizes the radical insufficiency of this changeable world; it teaches a way by which men, in a devout and confident spirit, may be able either to acquire the state of perfect liberation, or attain, by their own efforts or through higher help, supreme illumination. Likewise, other religions found everywhere try to counter the restlessness of the human heart, each in its own manner, by proposing "ways," comprising teachings, rules of life, and sacred rites.

The Catholic Church rejects nothing that is true and holy in these religions. She regards with sincere reverence those ways of conduct and of life, those precepts and teachings which, though differing in many aspects from the ones she holds and sets forth, nonetheless often reflect a ray of that Truth which enlightens all men. Indeed, she proclaims, and ever must proclaim Christ, "the way the truth, and the life" (John 14, 6), in whom men may find the fullness of religious life, in whom God has reconciled all things to Himself (4). The Church therefore, exhorts her sons, that through dialogue and collaboration with the followers of other religions, carried out with prudence and love and in witness to the Christian faith and life, they recognize, preserve and promote the good things, spiritual and moral, as well as the socio-cultural values found among these men.

The Church regards with esteem also the Moslems. They adore the one God, living and subsisting in Himself, merciful and all-powerful, the Creator of heaven and earth (5), who has spoken to men; they take pains to submit wholeheartedly to even His inscrutable decrees, just as Abraham, with whom the faith of Islam takes great pleasure in linking itself, submitted to God. Though they do not acknowledge Jesus as God, they revere Him as a prophet. They also honor Mary, His virgin mother; at times they even call on her with devotion. In addition, they await the day of judgement when God will render their deserts to all those who have been raised up from the dead. Finally, they value the moral life and worship God especially through prayer, almsgiving and fasting. Since in the course of centuries not a few quarrels and hostilities have arisen between Christians and Moslems, this Sacred Synod urges all to forget the past and to work sincerely for mutual understanding and to preserve as well as to promote together for the benefit of all mankind social justice and moral welfare, as well as peace and freedom.

 

Here we see Modernism very much at work. The Catholic Church does not have a mission to engage in "dialogue" and "collaboration with the followers of other religions." This is false. The Catholic Church has an unequivocal mission to seek the unconditional conversion of all men without any concession to the legitimacy of false religions, admitting that language and symbols familiar to people in false religions can be employed in the effort to seek their unconditional conversion to the Catholic Church, outside of which there is no salvation. "Dialogue" and "collaboration" with false religions, each of which comes from the devil and leads souls only to Hell, has never been part of the mission of the Catholic Church. It is a very important mission insofar as the counterfeit church of conciliarism is concerned. The counterfeit church of conciliarism is NOT the Catholic Church.

Benedict/Ratzinger's recent statement to the new Ukrainian ambassador to the Vatican concerning the "proper" understanding of "inter-religious" dialogue is in every respect supportive of the condemned propositions contained in Nostra Aetate. Benedict/Ratzinger, who is about to throw open the door of the "big tent" of the counterfeit church of conciliarism so that all conciliar priests, including those whose ordinations are of dubious validity (which means most conciliar priests) can offer the modernized version of the Immemorial Mass of Tradition that was authorized by John XXIII in 1961, stated on March 30, 2007, that "inter-religious" dialogue leads to the advancement of the common good, meaning he continues to contend with all of his conciliar might that false beliefs can contribute to the betterment of societies, a thoroughly condemned proposition. This is the Zenit report, dated March 30, 2007:

VATICAN CITY, MARCH 30, 2007 ( Zenit.org).- Benedict XVI says that dialogue between cultures and religions is fundamental, but it must not fall into syncretism, which puts every sort of belief on the same level.

Lasting peace and development depend on this, he said today in an audience with the new Ukrainian ambassador to the Holy See, Tetiana Izhevska.

The Holy Father stated: "In our world, evermore conditioned by the urgencies of globalization, a deep and demanding dialogue is necessary between cultures and religions. But this is not to diminish them with an impoverishing syncretism; rather, it is to enable them to develop in a climate of reciprocal respect so that each one works, according to its own charism, for the common good.

"This perspective surely will permit the lessening of ever possible causes of tension and disagreements between groups or nations, and guarantee for all the conditions of lasting peace and development."

Benedict XVI recognized that Ukraine is a "door between the East and the West because of its geographical location." He encouraged "productive exchange … between the two cultural lungs that have forged European history and in particular characterized its Christian history."

The Pope added: "I am certain that Ukraine, deeply imbued with the Gospel in its life, culture and institutions, ever since its baptism more than 1,000 years ago in Kiev, will concern itself with bringing the dynamism of its identity to other nations, maintaining its original characteristics."
ZE07033004

False religions and false philosophical ideas can never work for the common good "according to its own charism." The only "guarantee for all the conditions of lasting peace and development" is the conversion of men and nations to the Catholic Faith. This is what motivated countless missionaries to risk their very lives in the search for souls. Consider this moving account of Saint Francis Solano's zeal for souls at the end of the Sixteenth Century amongst the Indians of Argentina:

The mayor was right. Within six months the people of Rioja were enjoying a new and wonderful security. Gratefully they realized the reason for this: that now the pagan Indians of the locality would never rise up to massacre and destroy because under Francis' leadership they had settled down into a model Christian community just outside the town. Here they were learning many useful things, including how to till the soil better and how to produce good crops. Even more wonderful. By now all of them had been baptized, and there was not one who was not eager to learn everything possible about the religion which Father Francis preached.

Yes, all was peaceful within Rioja's new reduction, and it was with happy hearts that the recent converts presently prepared to celebrate the great feast of Easter. Each evening during Holy Week they came together to listen to Francis's explanation of the Passion and Death of Christ. Then, before Mass in the morning, there was a simple description of the ceremonies that were about to follow.

But at dawn on Holy Thursday, just as Francis was preparing to give his customary little talk, panic seized the entire congregation. Off in the distance, faint but unmistakable, was the ominous beat of war drums!

At once Peter Cotero [the chief of the tribe that had been converted by Saint Francis Solano] sprang to his feet, knowing full well what had happened. Pagan Indians from the mountainous regions west of Rioja had come down to attack the Reduction. They had heard numerous tales of the good life there, and of how Indians and Spaniards now lived on friendly terms with one another. Enraged by what they considered to be treachery, they were out to seek revenge on both groups. Even now they were beginning their frenzied war dances.

The elderly warrior looked about fearfully. He and his people had come to church that morning to pray and to listen to Father Francis, not to do battle. There was not one man among them who was armed. But since the enemy was still some distance away. . .

"Kneel down, Peter," said a calm voice suddenly. "Don't even think of getting weapons."

Peter turned. Father Francis had appeared from nowhere and was standing at his side. "But you don't understand!" cried the old chief desperately. "Those. . .those others are coming here, Father! They know we're Christians now and they want to offer us in special sacrifice to their gods!"

An old woman fell on her knees at Francis' feet. "Yes, and they'll torture us first! she sobbed. "They'll put out our eyes and then burn us to death!"

They'll cut off our fingers, too!" wailed another. clutching frantically at the missionary's grey habit. "Oh, Father! Can't we get away while there's still time?"

Francis looked at the agonized faces before him--the men, grim and silent, who would dash for weapons in a minute if he would but grant his permission--the women, tears streaming down their cheeks, their terrified children clutched fiercely to their breasts. It was a heartrending scene, made even more fearful by the insistent beating of the drums in the hills above the town. But in half an hour, an hour at the most, it would be far worse. Then the enemy would have arrived--hundreds of them, perhaps thousands--armed to the teeth with knives, with poisoned spears and arrows! And not only would they massacre those living in the Reduction. They would go on to Rioja itself, where even now the Spanish residents must be half out of their wits with terror.

For an instant Francis closed his eyes, apparently heedless of the impending danger. But the next minute his voice was ringing out in firm, clear tones. No one was to be afraid. No one was to leave for weapons. No one was to do anything but recite the Our Father--slowly, carefully, with confidence in God.

"As for me, I'll take a large crucifix and go to meet our brothers," he said. "God willing, they'll be glad to listen to some news I have for them."

Peter Cotero and his followers could hardly believe their ears. Father Francis called the bloodthirsty tribes brothers?And he was going out alone to meet them? Why, they would take him captive at once! As for any news. . .

"Begin to say the Our Father," ordered Francis again. "And don't stop praying until I give the word. Above all, remember that you're God's children now. As you as you love Him and want to serve Him, nothing can really hurt you."

So it was that the Indians of Rioja began to pray as Francis had bidden, bowing their heads to receive his blessing as he passed among them. But he had been gone only a few minutes when fresh panic broke out. By now the beat of the war drums had become so much faster--and clearer! And the air was filling with bloodcurdling screams as the pagan tribes plunged through the hills in the direction of Rioja. IN just a little while. . .

"We must keep on praying!" cried Peter Cotero, torn between the duty of obeying Father Francis and the natural desire to pit his strength and skill against the approaching enemy. "We must!"

With groans and sighs the terrified Indians resumed their prayers as best they could. Where was Father Francis now? Had the enemy seized him? Were they torturing him?

". . . .hallowed be Thy Name, Thy Kingdom come, Thy Will be done on earth as it is in Heaven. . . ."

Perhaps he was being tied to a stake! Perhaps a fire was being built. . .perhaps sharp knives were being made still sharper. . .

". . .forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us. . ."

Suddenly new terror filled every heart. Without warning the beating of the war drums had ceased, as had the bloodcurdling screams from the hills above the hills above the town. Peter Cotero and his followers asked themselves fearfully, almost forgetting to continue with their prayers. What dreadful things were the cruel mountain tribes plotting? Above all, what had they done to Father Francis?

Within an hour these questions were answered, and more happily than anyone had dared to hope. For the silencing of the war drums had not meant that bloodthirsty mountain tribes were plotting fresh tortures for the citizens of Rioja. No indeed. It had meant just the opposite.

"I don't understand," Peter told his wife that night. "They say that Father Francis met those furious warriors on the road and made them sit down to listen to one of his sermons. Can you imagine that? Especially when they were on their way here to kill us?"

Peter's wife was also finding it hard to realize the amazing event. "There were twenty thousand of them!" she exclaimed incredulously."And now nine thousand of them have been converted--and were baptized this very day! Why, they're even planning to stay here and celebrate Easter with us. . ."

Before many weeks had passed the whole story was being told again and again in town and reduction  At Rioja, early on Holy Thursday morning, and by a single sermon, Father Francis Solano had converted some nine thousand Indians--many chieftains and their respective followings of warriors! This fact in itself was astounding, of course, especially since these Indians had been bent on murder, destruction and plunder within Rioja when Father Francis had come upon them. But even more astounding was the fact that he had preached to them in one language and been understood by all, though they spoke various languages and knew only their own language. That is, all heard him speak in their own language, though he spoke only one.

"It sounds just like one of those thrilling stories from the Acts of the Apostles," declared a Spanish trader from Cordoba when the wonder was related to him. "But I'm not too surprised. I heard Father Francis preach one, and there's no doubt about it. he has a really marvelous way with souls." (Mary Fabyan Windeatt, Saint Francis Solano, Wonder-Worker of the New World and Apostle of Argentina and Peru, reprinted by TAN Books and Publishers, pp. 136-142.)

 

Conciliarism and its chief apologist, Joseph Ratzinger, do not believe that such conversions are either possible or desirable. After all, "modern man" would not respond to such an response. This Modernist concern for "modern man," critiqued so well by Pope Saint Pius X in Pascendi Dominci Gregis and by Pope Pius XII in Humani Generis, August 12, 1950, would have us believe that the descendants of those who were once evangelized by Catholic missionaries are incapable of responding to a clear exhortation to convert without delay to the true Church in order to sanctity and thus to save their immortal souls, made in the image and likeness of the Blessed Trinity and redeemed by the shedding of the Most Precious Blood of the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity, Who was made Man in Our Lady's Virginal and Immaculate Womb by the power of the Holy Ghost, on the wood of the Holy Cross. The Modernist, conciliarist rejection of efforts to seek with urgency the conversion of all men and all nations implies, whether or not the Modernists realize it, that the graces won for all men by Our Lord on Good Friday and that flow into the souls of men by the working of the Holy Ghost in the sacraments and through the loving hands of Our Lady, the Mediatrix of All Graces, are no longer sufficient to impel men to convert now as they did previously. Indeed, the rejection of efforts to seek with urgency the conversion of all men and all nations to the true Faith more than implicitly rejects all such past efforts to convert men as having been "simple-minded" and "culturally insensitive." After all, how can "modern man" justify "forcing" "native peoples" to worship at the Immemorial Mass of Tradition without "inculturating" parts of their own "traditions" into the liturgy?

Thus it is, you see, that Benedict's protestations that inter-religious dialogue does not imply an acceptance of syncretism is a self-contradicting oxymoron. Inter-religious dialogue is a novelty in the history of the Catholic Church that implies that there is no peril to souls or to nations by leaving men in states of Original or Mortal Sin for long periods of time without seeking their unconditional conversion to the true Faith, thus providing them access to the Deposit of Faith that has been entrusted by Our Lord exclusively to the Catholic Church and providing them with access to the supernatural helps found only in the Sacraments that Our Lord similarly entrusted exclusively to the Catholic Church. (Yes, some of the Orthodox heretics and schismatics have true sacraments because of Apostolic succession. Those Sacraments, however, were not entrusted by Our Lord to the Orthodox Church but to the Catholic Church, and it is because the Orthodox churches have split off from the Catholic Church but retain Apostolic Succession that some of them still have true sacraments.)

The inter-religious dialogue, which fosters the "common good" in an inter-denominational way, promoted by Benedict and his fellow conciliarists is just a continuation of the philosophy of The Sillon that was condemned by Pope Saint Pius X in Notre Charge Apostolique, August 15, 1910:

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". . . .

Alas! yes, the double meaning has been broken: the social action of the Sillon is no longer Catholic. The Sillonist, as such, does not work for a coterie, and “the Church”, he says, “cannot in any sense benefit from the sympathies that his action may stimulate.” A strange situation, indeed! They fear lest the Church should profit for a selfish and interested end by the social action of the Sillon, as if everything that benefited the Church did not benefit the whole human race! A curious reversal of notions! The Church might benefit from social action! As if the greatest economists had not recognized and proved that it is social action alone which, if serious and fruitful, must benefit the Church! But stranger still, alarming and saddening at the same time, are the audacity and frivolity of men who call themselves Catholics and dream of re-shaping society under such conditions, and of establishing on earth, over and beyond the pale of the Catholic Church, "the reign of love and justice" with workers coming from everywhere, of all religions and of no religion, with or without beliefs, so long as they forego what might divide them - their religious and philosophical convictions, and so long as they share what unites them - a "generous idealism and moral forces drawn from whence they can" When we consider the forces, knowledge, and supernatural virtues which are necessary to establish the Christian City, and the sufferings of millions of martyrs, and the light given by the Fathers and Doctors of the Church, and the self-sacrifice of all the heroes of charity, and a powerful hierarchy ordained in heaven, and the streams of Divine Grace - the whole having been built up, bound together, and impregnated by the life and spirit of Jesus Christ, the Wisdom of God, the Word made man - when we think, I say, of all this, it is frightening to behold new apostles eagerly attempting to do better by a common interchange of vague idealism and civic virtues. What are they going to produce? What is to come of this collaboration? A mere verbal and chimerical construction in which we shall see, glowing in a jumble, and in seductive confusion, the words Liberty, Justice, Fraternity, Love, Equality, and human exultation, all resting upon an ill-understood human dignity. It will be a tumultuous agitation, sterile for the end proposed, but which will benefit the less Utopian exploiters of the people. Yes, we can truly say that the Sillon, its eyes fixed on a chimera, brings Socialism in its train.

We fear that worse is to come: the end result of this developing promiscuousness, the beneficiary of this cosmopolitan social action, can only be a Democracy which will be neither Catholic, nor Protestant, nor Jewish. It will be a religion (for Sillonism, so the leaders have said, is a religion) more universal than the Catholic Church, uniting all men become brothers and comrades at last in the "Kingdom of God". - "We do not work for the Church, we work for mankind."

And now, overwhelmed with the deepest sadness, We ask Ourselves, Venerable Brethren, what has become of the Catholicism of the Sillon? Alas! this organization which formerly afforded such promising expectations, this limpid and impetuous stream, has been harnessed in its course by the modern enemies of the Church, and is now no more than a miserable affluent of the great movement of apostasy being organized in every country for the establishment of a One-World Church which shall have neither dogmas, nor hierarchy, neither discipline for the mind, nor curb for the passions, and which, under the pretext of freedom and human dignity, would bring back to the world (if such a Church could overcome) the reign of legalized cunning and force, and the oppression of the weak, and of all those who toil and suffer.

 

Inter-religious dialogue has produced nothing of the sort of conversions to the Faith as those made by Saint Peter on Pentecost Sunday and by Saint Patrick in Ireland and by Saint Vincent Ferrer in his preaching to Jews and Mohammedans and by Saint Dominic amongst the Albigenses and Saint Hyacinth in Eastern Europe and Saint Josaphat amongst the Orthodox and Saint Francis Solano, among others, in the New World of the Americas. Inter-religious dialogue has been part and parcel of the overthrow of the Social Reign of Christ the King wrought by the Protestant Revolt and the rise of Judeo-Masonry and it is part and parcel of the "new ecclesiology" that has been critiqued so well by Bishop Donald Sanborn. (See The New Ecclesiology: An Overview and The New Ecclesiology: Documentation.) Inter-religious dialogue is not interested in such conversions as it has indeed produced a synthetic, syncretist Faith that seeks "continuity in discontinuity" and "unity in pluiformity," to use the phrase that Benedict uttered when speaking to Protestants in Cologne, Germany, on August 19, 2005.

Fathers Dominic and Francisco Radecki, C.M.R.I., quote Father Francis Connell in their Tumultuous Times on the error of this "unity-in-diversity" that is a constituent part of "inter-religious" dialogue:

"To characterize the relation between Catholics and Protestants as 'unity-in-diversity' is misleading, inasmuch as it implies that essentially Catholics are one with heretics, and that their diversities are only accidental. Actually, the very opposite is the true situation. For, however near an heretical sect may seem to be to the Catholic Church in its particular beliefs, a wide gulf separates them, insofar as the divinely established means whereby the message of God is to be communicated to souls--the infallible Magisterium of the Church--is rejected by every heretical sect. By telling Protestants that they are one with us in certain beliefs, in such wise as to give the impression that we regard this unity as the predominant feature of our relation with them, we are actually misleading them regarding the true attitude of the Catholic Church toward those who do not acknowledge Her teaching authority. (Father Francis Connell, Father Connell Answers Moral Questions, published in 1959 by Catholic University of America Press, p. 11; quoted in Fathers Dominic and Francisco Radecki, C.M.R.I. TUMULTUOUS TIMES, p. 348.)

 

Fathers Dominci and Francisco Radecki provide a practical illustration of the fundamental logical errors of ecumenism and "inter-religious dialogue," quoting Monsignor Paul Glenn's Ethics, published by Herder Book Company in 1953, as follows:

"Suppose an office manager said, 'We have many different systems of bookkeeping here; there is confusion, trouble and frequent arguments but that doesn't matter. All the clerks are working for the welfare of the business and so all are working for the same end.' 'As we examine further,' the manager explains, 'It is true that our systems are not all proper. Some of our clerks like to add some like to subtract, some to multiply and unfortunately, some will only divide. But we do a great deal of figuring among us, one way or another, and so we'll all be sure to come out right in the end for we all have the good of the business at heart.'" (Quoted in Tumultuous Times, p. 349)

 

The Fathers Radecki go on to point out in their own text:

This type of reasoning would never be tolerated in the business world and yet these same principles are applied to religion, which deals with matters of utmost importance: our eternal salvation and where will spend our eternity.

Ecumenism has poisoned the minds of many clergy, religious and laity who believe that all religions are more or less praiseworthy and are just different roads to the same end. Those who accept religious indifferentism ignore the inherent contradictions that are found in these false religions. (Tumultuous Times, p. 349.)

 

Inter-religious "dialogue" certainly has roots in the Modernist mindset critiqued and condemned by Pope Saint Pius X in Pascendi Dominci Gregis, September 8, 1907, and condemned by Pope Pius XI in Mortalium Animos, January 6, 1928, as follows:

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.

Furthermore, in this one Church of Christ no man can be or remain who does not accept, recognize and obey the authority and supremacy of Peter and his legitimate successors. Did not the ancestors of those who are now entangled in the errors of Photius and the reformers, obey the Bishop of Rome, the chief shepherd of souls? Alas their children left the home of their fathers, but it did not fall to the ground and perish for ever, for it was supported by God. Let them therefore return to their common Father, who, forgetting the insults previously heaped on the Apostolic See, will receive them in the most loving fashion. For if, as they continually state, they long to be united with Us and ours, why do they not hasten to enter the Church, "the Mother and mistress of all Christ's faithful"? Let them hear Lactantius crying out: "The Catholic Church is alone in keeping the true worship. This is the fount of truth, this the house of Faith, this the temple of God: if any man enter not here, or if any man go forth from it, he is a stranger to the hope of life and salvation. Let none delude himself with obstinate wrangling. For life and salvation are here concerned, which will be lost and entirely destroyed, unless their interests are carefully and assiduously kept in mind."

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."

 

One of the chief defenders of "meeting culture where it is" rather than to seek the conversion of men and nations to the Catholic Church made his voice heard at the "Second" Vatican Council. The voice belonged to the Archbishop of Krakow, Karol Wojtyla , and is described as follows in Tumultuous Times:

His [Wojtyla's] stand on atheism puzzled many of the bishops, especially those from Communist countries. Archbishop Wojtyla believed that the human person should find the truth on their own and that conversion was unnecessary:

"Wojtyla was deeply convinced that personalist ethics--which stresses the uniqueness and inviolability of the human personality--would never allow the imposing of ideas on anyone. He took the same line when the council discussed the problems of atheism--a question that vexed the Council Fathers almost from the beginning to the end of Vatican II. 'It is not the Church's role to lecture unbelievers,' Wojtyla declared on taking the floor on October 21, 1964. 'We are involved a quest along with our fellow men. ...Let us avoid moralizing or suggesting that we have a monopoly on the truth.' ...Talk at the council of actual 'relations with atheism' meant dialogue with Marxists." (Carl Bernstein and Marco Politi, His Holiness, pp. 102-103, quoted in Tumultuous Times, p. 540.)

 

These were revolutionary ideas, especially at a time when the West braced for nuclear war and when much of the world was held captive under Communist tyranny. He further expressed his ecumenical and Modernist persuasions a week later.

"He began with several previously expressed comments on the Church and the world and the president of the session was on the point of stopping him, when he quickly and skillfully captivated his audience and silenced all the noise in the auditorium. In a loud and distinct voice, he clearly explained that the Church should no longer pose as the sole dispenser of Truth and Goodness... She should, he went on, be in the world but not above it. ...The Church must alter her teaching; she should encourage Revelation and no longer dictate it." (Catherine and Jacques Legrand, John Paul II, p. 68.)

"Although he was only forty-two when the council opened, Wojtyla made eight oral interventions in the council hall, a rather high number, and often spoke in the name of large groups of bishops from Eastern Europe. (Altogether he made 22 interventions, oral and written.) He was an unusually active member of various drafting groups for Gaudium et Spes, and even a chief author of what was called the 'Polish draft.' His voice as crucial to the passage of the document on religious liberty.''"(William Madges and Michael Daly, Vatican II: Forty Personal Stories, p. 33)

 

The Modernists Yves Congar, Henri de Lubac and Jean Danielou worked closely with Archbishop Wojtyla to draft the Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World [Gaudium et Spes]. In his speeches of September 23 and 28, 1965, Wojtyla championed the heresy of religious liberty and encouraged dialogue with atheists.

"Archbishop Wojtyla then took up the question of atheism as a pastoral issue, as part of the Church's 'dialogue with everyone.' ...The Church's dialogue with atheism should begin not with arguments or proofs about the existence of God, but with a conversation about the human person's interior liberty." (Tumultuous Times, pp. 540-541.)

 

Yes, the late Karol Wojtyla and his successor in the counterfeit church of conciliarism, Joseph Ratzinger, believe in novelties that have been condemned by the Catholic Church and leave countless billions of souls alive in the world at any one time to wander about aimlessly in life without ever being exhorted to convert to the true Faith the way that Saint Peter sought to convert the Jews on Pentecost Sunday and the way that Saint Francis Solano sought to convert the mountain tribes on Holy Thursday morning in Argentina, thus worsening the lot of men individually and collectively, contributing in no small measure to problems within and among nations.

As has been noted many times on this site, conciliarism's belief that the "common good" can be pursued in an inter-denominational or non-denominational way has been condemned numerous times by Popes. Catholicism and Catholicism alone is the one and only way in which the souls of men are edified and sanctified unto eternity. Catholicism and and Catholicism alone is the one and only way in which social order is to provided in nations.

Pope Leo XIII pointed this out throughout his twenty-five year pontificate, including in Sapientiae Christianae, January 10, 1890, and A Review of His Pontificate, March 19, 1902:

The chief elements of this duty consist in professing openly and unflinchingly the Catholic doctrine, and in propagating it to the utmost of our power. For, as is often said, with the greatest truth, there is nothing so hurtful to Christian wisdom as that it should not be known, since it possesses, when loyally received, inherent power to drive away error. So soon as Catholic truth is apprehended by a simple and unprejudiced soul, reason yields assent. (Paragraph 15, Sapientiae Christianae.)

Just as Christianity cannot penetrate into the soul without making it better, so it cannot enter into public life without establishing order. With the idea of a God Who governs all, Who is infinitely Wise, Good, and Just, the idea of duty seizes upon the consciences of men. It assuages sorrow, it calms hatred, it engenders heroes. If it has transformed pagan society--and that transformation was a veritable resurrection--for barbarism disappeared in proportion as Christianity extended its sway, so, after the terrible shocks which unbelief has given to the world in our days, it will be able to put that world again on the True road, and bring back to order the States and peoples of modern times. But the return of Christianity will not be efficacious and complete if it does not restore the world to a sincere love of the one Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. In the Catholic Church Christianity is Incarnate. It identifies Itself with that perfect, spiritual, and, in its own order, sovereign society, which is the Mystical Body of Jesus Christ and which has for Its visible head the Roman Pontiff, successor of the Prince of the Apostles. It is the continuation of the mission of the Savior, the daughter and the heiress of His Redemption. It has preached the Gospel, and has defended it at the price of Its blood, and strong in the Divine Assistance and of that immortality which has been promised It, It makes no terms with error but remains faithful to the Commands which It has received, to carry the Doctrine of Jesus Christ to the uttermost limits of the world and to the end of time, and to protect It in Its inviolable integrity. Legitimate dispenser of the Teachings of the Gospel It does not reveal Itself only as the consoler and Redeemer of souls, but It is still more the internal source of Justice and Charity, and the Propagator as well as the Guardian of True Liberty, and of that equality which alone is possible here below. In applying the Doctrine of Its Divine Founder, It maintains a wise equilibrium and marks the True Limits between the rights and privileges of society. The equality which It proclaims does not destroy the distinction between the different social classes. It keeps them intact, as nature itself demands, in order to oppose the anarchy of reason emancipated from Faith, and abandoned to its own devices. The liberty which it gives in no wise conflicts with the rights of Truth, because those rights are superior to the demands of liberty. Not does it infringe upon the rights of Justice, because those rights are superior to the claims of mere numbers or power. Nor does it assail the rights of God because they are Superior to the rights of humanity.(A Review of His Pontificate.)

 

Intimately connected with "inter-religious" dialogue is conciliarism's belief in a "healthy secularity," which accepts the separation of Church and State as something beneficial to the Church and to the State, a proposition condemned numerous times by the Catholic Church over the centuries, including by Pope Saint Pius X in Vehementer Nos, February 11, 1906:

That the State must be separated from the Church is a thesis absolutely false, a most pernicious error. Based, as it is, on the principle that the State must not recognize any religious cult, it is in the first place guilty of a great injustice to God; for the Creator of man is also the Founder of human societies, and preserves their existence as He preserves our own. We owe Him, therefore, not only a private cult, but a public and social worship to honor Him. Besides, this thesis is an obvious negation of the supernatural order. It limits the action of the State to the pursuit of public prosperity during this life only, which is but the proximate object of political societies; and it occupies itself in no fashion (on the plea that this is foreign to it) with their ultimate object which is man's eternal happiness after this short life shall have run its course. But as the present order of things is temporary and subordinated to the conquest of man's supreme and absolute welfare, it follows that the civil power must not only place no obstacle in the way of this conquest, but must aid us in effecting it. The same thesis also upsets the order providentially established by God in the world, which demands a harmonious agreement between the two societies. Both of them, the civil and the religious society, although each exercises in its own sphere its authority over them. It follows necessarily that there are many things belonging to them in common in which both societies must have relations with one another. Remove the agreement between Church and State, and the result will be that from these common matters will spring the seeds of disputes which will become acute on both sides; it will become more difficult to see where the truth lies, and great confusion is certain to arise. Finally, this thesis inflicts great injury on society itself, for it cannot either prosper or last long when due place is not left for religion, which is the supreme rule and the sovereign mistress in all questions touching the rights and the duties of men. Hence the Roman Pontiffs have never ceased, as circumstances required, to refute and condemn the doctrine of the separation of Church and State. Our illustrious predecessor, Leo XIII, especially, has frequently and magnificently expounded Catholic teaching on the relations which should subsist between the two societies. "Between them," he says, "there must necessarily be a suitable union, which may not improperly be compared with that existing between body and soul.-"Quaedam intercedat necesse est ordinata colligatio (inter illas) quae quidem conjunctioni non immerito comparatur, per quam anima et corpus in homine copulantur." He proceeds: "Human societies cannot, without becoming criminal, act as if God did not exist or refuse to concern themselves with religion, as though it were something foreign to them, or of no purpose to them.... As for the Church, which has God Himself for its author, to exclude her from the active life of the nation, from the laws, the education of the young, the family, is to commit a great and pernicious error. -- "Civitates non possunt, citra scellus, gerere se tamquam si Deus omnino non esset, aut curam religionis velut alienam nihilque profuturam abjicere.... Ecclesiam vero, quam Deus ipse constituit, ab actione vitae excludere, a legibus, ab institutione adolescentium, a societate domestica, magnus et perniciousus est error."

 

To contend that "inter-religious" dialogue is not meant to lead to syncretism is thus akin to partisans of the religiously indifferentist state, such as the United States of America as outlined in its Constitution, contending that atheism is not the result of the religiously indifferentist state, a logical absurdity that was exploded by Pope Leo XIII in Immortale Dei, November 1, 1885:

To hold, therefore, that there is no difference in matters of religion between forms that are unlike each other, and even contrary to each other, most clearly leads in the end to the rejection of all religion in both theory and practice. And this is the same thing as atheism, however it may differ from it in name. Men who really believe in the existence of God must, in order to be consistent with themselves and to avoid absurd conclusions, understand that differing modes of divine worship involving dissimilarity and conflict even on most important points cannot all be equally probable, equally good, and equally acceptable to God.

 

All protestations that the road of "inter-religious" dialogue does not lead to syncretism ultimately ring hollow when one considers how syncretism is part and parcel of the synthetic abomination known as the Novus Ordo Missae, which, in the name of "inculturation of the Gospel" (see Paragraph 395 of the General Instruction to the Roman Missal)  features all manner of approved novelties and innovations, including the sort of demonic pagan rituals that were eradicated by missionaries such as Saint Francis Solano. Many of these demonic pagan rituals were worked into the "papal" "masses" of John Paul II precisely to set precedents for bishops and priests around the world, as conciliar Archbishop Piero Marini, an acolyte of the late revolutionary Annibale Bugnini and the longtime "master of ceremonies" for John Paul II, in the name of the "inculturation of the Gospel." And these approved innovations and novelties are going to go away when Benedict issues his "motu proprio" for the "liberation" of the modernized version of the Immemorial Mass of Tradition in a week or so. These approved innovations and novelties in the abomination known as the Novus Ordo Missae will continue to exist side-by-side with the Mass of Tradition. This is indeed the essence of syncretism and "uniformity in pluriformity."

Anyone who believes that the forthcoming motu proprio will make the Novus Ordo Missae collapse is not thinking clearly. There are some people who will pitch their tent in those places within the conciliar structures where the modernized Mass of Tradition will be offered. Some will find their way out of those structures in due course. All well and good. Others will remain in the conciliar structures, perfectly content to be silent in the face of the Vatican embrace of The Nativity Story, which blasphemed Our Lord and His Most Blessed Mother, perfectly content to be silent when Benedict calls the heretical and schismatic "patriarch" of Constantinople a "pastor" in the "Church of Christ," perfectly content to be silent when Benedict promotes religious liberty and ecumenism and inter-religious dialogue, perfectly content to remain silent when Benedict refers to the Church as a series of "concentric circles," a proposition condemned many times by the Catholic Church, including in these citations found in Bishop Donald Sanborn's The New Ecclesiology: Documentation:

From this it follows also that they cannot promise themselves any of the graces  and fruits of the perpetual sacrifice and of the sacraments which, although they are sacrilegiously administered, are nonetheless valid and serve in some measure that form and appearance of piety which St. Paul mentions (I Cor. XIII: 3) and which St. Augustine speaks of at greater length: “The form of the branch,” says the latter with great precision, “may still be visible, even apart from the vine, but the invisible life of the root can be preserved only in union with the stock. That is why the corporal sacraments, which some keep and use outside the unity of Christ, can preserve the appearance of piety. But the invisible and spiritual virtue of true piety cannot abide there any more than feeling can remain in an amputated member.” (Serm. LXXI, in Matth., 32) But since they no longer have the sacraments, with the exception of baptism, which they confer, so it is said, without ceremonies on children; a fruitful baptism for the latter, provided that once the age of reason is reached they do not embrace the schism; but deadly for those who administer it, for in conferring it they willfully act in schism. [Pope Leo XIII, Letter Eximia Nos lætitia, July 19, 1893, to the Bishop of Poitiers, on the subject of the schism of the “Petite Église.”]

Surely, Catholics desire nothing so much as the disappearance from among Christians of all schisms and dissensions, and that all should be eager to keep unity of the spirit in the bond of peace. That is why the Catholic Church prays and invites the faithful to pray to Almighty God that all those who have left the holy Roman Church may be converted to the true faith, may abjure their errors, and return in grace to her fold, outside of which there is no salvation. [Letter from the Holy Office, September 16, 1864, to the English Episcopate]

[Letter from the Holy Office, September 16, 1864, to the English Episcopate] It [this novelty] can be summed up in this proposition, that the true Church of Jesus Christ is made up of one part Roman Church, established and propagated throughout the world, and one part the schism of Photius, and the Anglican heresy, both of which have, with the Church of Rome, one same Lord, one same faith, one same baptism. [Letter from the Holy Office, September 16, 1864, to the English Episcopate]

This novelty is all the more dangerous in that it is presented under the appearances of piety and eager solicitude for the unity of Christian society. The foundation on which it is built is such that it destroys at one stroke the divine constitution of the Church. [Letter from the Holy Office, September 16, 1864, to the English Episcopate]

 

Those who desire to be "una cum" with Benedict must be "una cum" with the novelties and errors of the "Second" Vatican Council and its aftermath, including the Novus Ordo Missae. Tarcisio Cardinal Bertone, the conciliarist Vatican's Secretary of State, stated in an interview in Le Figaro (a French magazine) that the motu proprio will not mean any lessening of support for the Novus Ordo Missae. Not at all. Bertone said:

The merit of the conciliar liturgical reform is intact. . . . The authorization of the Supreme Pontiff would evidently preserve the validity of the rite of Paul VI.

 

Thus it is that those who look upon the Novus Ordo Missae as valid and that it can live "comfortably" in the name of liturgical "pluralism" within the conciliar structures must keep their mouths shut when one of the approved "movements," in this case the Shalom Community, whose statues were approved recently by Benedict XVI, when "Benediction" of what the participants believe is the Real Presence of Our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ in the Most Blessed Sacrament engages in the blasphemous, sacrilegious behavior displayed in this eight minute video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sRULNTperWE. Do not think for a single nanosecond that those in the audience at this travesty are going to give up this kind of spectacle for the solemnity and sobriety and reverence of the Immemorial Mass of Tradition. Oh, those who desire, as Cardinal Bertone told Le Figaro, " to attend Masses according to this rite, within the framework of the Missal published in 1962 by Pope John XXIII, with its own calendar" may do so, although they may be required now and again to show their "full communion" with the "pope" by assisting at the Mass he offers, that is, the Novus Ordo Missae.(See: When You Wish Upon a Star.) Those who desire the "Eucharistic worship" practiced by the Shalom Community will be able to do as they please. Ah, yes, but this is not syncretism, right?

Unlike earlier times in the Church when clerical corruption was eclipsed by the spread of asceticism practiced by various monasteries, heresy and sacrilege have never just "withered" away. Conciliarism will not "wither away" simply because traditionally-minded Catholics are given "full membership" in the counterfeit church of conciliarism. Conciliarism of its nature is opposed to Catholicism. It must, therefore, be opposed as Saint Dominic opposed the Albigenses in the Thirteenth Century and as Saint Francis Solano opposed pagan ceremonies at the end of the Sixteenth Century and the beginning of the Seventeenth Century in Argentina and Peru. To be in "full communion" with the conciliarists is to be in full communion with those who are in schism from the Catholic Church and who promote condemned heresies, not matters that have yet to be defined by the Catholic Church and are thus open to being held as theological opinions by any Catholic as a "private theologian," a point that Bishop Donald Sanborn makes very tellingly in Opinionism and that Father Anthony Cekada explained in his sermon on The Errors of the Society of St Pius X.

Yes, syncretism is the result of the efforts of Modernism and its conciliarist progeny, so offensive to God, harmful to souls and destructive of all social order just as surely as practical atheism is the result of the religiously indifferentist civil state. Those who try to redeem false premises will find themselves caught up in a maze of contradictions and paradoxes the likes of which are inimical to Catholicism but of the essence of Hegelianism and thus of the Modernist mind critiqued and condemned by Pope Saint Pius X throughout his pontificate.

At the beginning of Holy Week in the Year of Our Lord 2007, therefore, we must intensify our acts of reparation to the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary as her consecrated slaves. We are not blameless for the state of the Church and of the world. Our sins transcended time and caused Our Lord to suffer horribly in His Sacred Humanity during His Passion and Death. Our sins transcended time and caused Our Lady's Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart to be thrust through and through with Seven Swords of Sorrow. Our sins have wounded the Church Militant on earth in our own lives. The Restoration of the Faith that those who swore to the Oath Against Modernism were exhorted to pray for and the Restoration of Christendom in the world depends in large measure on the reformation of our own lives on a daly basis in cooperation with the ineffable graces won for us by the shedding of Our Lord's Most Precious Blood during His Passion and Death this very  week of weeks.

We must keep Our Lady company at the foot of the Cross each day this Holy Week, consoling her for how we have wounded Her Divine Son's Most Sacred Heart and her own Immaculate Heart, pleading with her to send us the graces to be better Catholics who are more willing to take up the cross in our daily duties, more eager to pray for and to forgive those who hate us or misunderstand us or calumniate us, more ready to see in each person, starting in our own homes, the very image of the Blessed Trinity, more courageous to oppose error openly and to withdraw from those who promote errors and novelties and abominable blasphemies and sacrileges in the name of appealing to "modern man." The final victory belongs to Our Lady's Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart. May our faithful, prayerful recitation of her Most Holy Rosary and of her Seven Dolors each day help us to be so formed in the crucible of her Divine Son's Holy Cross that we think nothing of eschewing all human respect, even among our family members and our friends, to stand fast to the Catholic Faith as it has been handed down through the centuries under the infallible protection and guidance of the Third Person of the Blessed Trinity, God the Holy Ghost, without any concession whatsoever to the ethos of conciliarsm or to the legitimacy of its false shepherds.

Our Lady of Sorrows, pray for us!

Viva Cristo Rey!

 

Our Lady of Fatima, pray for us.

 

Saint Joseph, pray for us.

Saints Peter and Paul, pray for us.

Saint John the Baptist, pray for us.

Saint Michael the Archangel, pray for us.

Saint Gabriel the Archangel, pray for us.

Saint Raphael the Archangel, pray for us.

Saint Jude, pray for us.

Saint John the Beloved, pray for us.

Saint Francis Solano, pray for us.

Saint John Bosco, pray for us.

Saint Dominic Savio, pray for us.

Saint John of God, pray for us.

Saint  Scholastica, pray for us.

Saint Benedict, pray for us.

Saint Anthony of Padua, pray for us.

Saint Francis of Assisi, pray for us.

Saint Thomas Aquinas, pray for us.

Saint Bonaventure, pray for us.

Saint Augustine, pray for us.

Saint Bernard of Clairvaux, pray for us.

Saint Francis Xavier, pray for us.

Saint Peter Damian, pray for us.

Saint Frances Xavier Cabrini, pray for us.

Saint Lucy, pray for us.

Saint Monica, pray for us.

Saint Agatha, pray for us.

Saint Philomena, pray for us.

Saint Cecilia, pray for us.

Saint John Mary Vianney, pray for us.

Saint Vincent de Paul, pray for us.

Saint Vincent Ferrer, pray for us.

Saint Athanasius, pray for us.

Saint Margaret Mary Alacoque, pray for us.

Saint Isaac Jogues, pray for us.

Saint Rene Goupil, pray for us.

Saint John Lalonde, pray for us.

Saint Gabriel Lalemont, pray for us.

Saint Noel Chabanel, pray for us.

Saint Charles Garnier, pray for us.

Saint Anthony Daniel, pray for us.

Saint John DeBrebeuf, pray for us.

Saint Alphonsus de Liguori, pray for us.

Saint Dominic, pray for us.

Saint Hyacinth, pray for us.

Saint Basil, pray for us.

Saint Vincent Ferrer, pray for us.

Saint Sebastian, pray for us.

Saint Tarcisius, pray for us.

Saint Bridget of Sweden, pray for us.

Saint Gerard Majella, pray for us.

Saint John of the Cross, pray for us.

Saint Teresa of Avila, pray for us.

Saint Bernadette Soubirous, pray for us.

Saint Genevieve, pray for us.

Saint Vincent de Paul, pray for us.

Pope Saint Pius X, pray for us

Pope Saint Pius V, pray for us.

Saint Rita of Cascia, pray for us.

Venerable Anne Catherine Emmerich, pray for us.

Venerable Pauline Jaricot, pray for us.

Father Miguel Augustin Pro, pray for us.

Francisco Marto, pray for us.

Jacinta Marto, pray for us.

Juan Diego, pray for us.

 

The Longer Version of the Saint Michael the Archangel Prayer, composed by Pope Leo XIII, 1888

O glorious Archangel Saint Michael, Prince of the heavenly host, be our defense in the terrible warfare which we carry on against principalities and powers, against the rulers of this world of darkness, spirits of evil.  Come to the aid of man, whom God created immortal, made in His own image and likeness, and redeemed at a great price from the tyranny of the devil.  Fight this day the battle of our Lord, together with  the holy angels, as already thou hast fought the leader of the proud angels, Lucifer, and his apostate host, who were powerless to resist thee, nor was there place for them any longer in heaven.  That cruel, that ancient serpent, who is called the devil or Satan who seduces the whole world, was cast into the abyss with his angels.  Behold this primeval enemy and slayer of men has taken courage.  Transformed into an angel of light, he wanders about with all the multitude of wicked spirits, invading the earth in order to blot out the Name of God and of His Christ, to seize upon, slay, and cast into eternal perdition, souls destined for the crown of eternal glory.  That wicked dragon pours out. as a most impure flood, the venom of his malice on men of depraved mind and corrupt heart, the spirit of lying, of impiety, of blasphemy, and the pestilent breath of impurity, and of every vice and iniquity.  These most crafty enemies have filled and inebriated with gall and bitterness the Church, the spouse of the Immaculate Lamb, and have laid impious hands on Her most sacred possessions. In the Holy Place itself, where has been set up the See of the most holy Peter and the Chair of Truth for the light of the world, they have raised the throne of their abominable impiety with the iniquitous design that when the Pastor has been struck the sheep may be scattered.  Arise then, O invincible Prince, bring help against the attacks of the lost spirits to the people of God, and give them the victory.  They venerate thee as their protector and patron; in thee holy Church glories as her defense against the malicious powers of hell; to thee has God entrusted the souls of men to be established in heavenly beatitude.  Oh, pray to the God of peace that He may put Satan under our feet, so far conquered that he may no longer be able to hold men in captivity and harm the Church.  Offer our prayers in the sight of the Most High, so that they may quickly conciliate the mercies of the Lord; and beating down the dragon, the ancient serpent, who is the devil and Satan, do thou again make him captive in the abyss, that he may no longer seduce the nations.  Amen.

Verse: Behold the Cross of the Lord; be scattered ye hostile powers.

Response: The Lion of the Tribe of Juda has conquered the root of David.

Verse: Let Thy mercies be upon us, O Lord.

Response: As we have hoped in Thee.

Verse: O Lord hear my prayer.

Response: And let my cry come unto Thee.

Verse: Let us pray.  O God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, we call upon Thy holy Name, and as suppliants, we implore Thy clemency, that by the intercession of Mary, ever Virgin, immaculate and our Mother, and of the glorious Archangel Saint Michael, Thou wouldst deign to help us against Satan and all other unclean spirits, who wander about the world for the injury of the human race and the ruin of our souls. 

Response:  Amen.