Saturday, July 20, 2019

Washington Post: Most Mexicans Oppose Francis's Illegal Immigration Mania

The Washington Post reported:

"More than 6 in 10 Mexicans say migrants are a burden on their country... A 55 percent majority supports deporting migrants who travel through Mexico to reach the United States."
(Washington Post, "Unauthorized immigration faces public backlash in Mexico," July 17, 2019)

It looks like Mexico might be the next country to follow Italy in rejecting Francis's mania for the chaos of open borders and illegal immigration.

Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of Mexico to its noble Catholic Cristero roots which raged war against the ignominious Masonic-Socialist overlords who were and are destroying the great country.

Friday, July 19, 2019

Francis's Communion for Adulterers "Development of Doctrine" Contradicts Vatican I & the Apostles

Father Joseph Fenton was one of the top American Catholic theologians of the last century.

His doctoral dissertation was directed by the great Father Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange and in the 1960's he was a collaborator of Cardinal Alfredo Ottaviani in the fight against the Modernist heresy.

In 1953, in an article for the American Ecclesiological Review he wrote:

"The statement that our Catholic dogma or doctrine is the growth or the development of the seed planted by the Apostles would seem to be seriously objectionable. According to the Vatican Council [Vatican I] the Holy Father [pope] has been empowered to teach infallibly, not the growth or the development of the primitive Christian teaching, but the 'revelation delivered through the Apostles, or deposit of Faith' itself. What the Church teaches to the faithful in this year of 1953 is not a mere development of the teaching delivered to the Church of the Apostles. It is that very message, which has been proposed and guarded infallibly by the ecclesia docens [teaching Church] since the beginning, and will be thus proposed and guarded until the end of time."

"It is true, of course, that there has been an increase of knowledge of the deposit of the faith on the part of the Church."
(American Ecclesiological Review, "The Question of Ecclesiastical Faith, April, 1953)

This is only way that Cardinal John Henry Newman's concept of development of doctrine can be accepted as I am sure he understood.

His sixth test of "development" which must be understood as "increase of knowledge" said the "increase of knowledge" had to conserve what had gone before it from the time of the Apostles or, in other words, it cannot contradict the teachings of the Apostles.

Is is obvious that Francis's teachings of:

Communion for adulterers and the death penalty is "inadmissible" contradict not just Vatican I, but the teachings of the Apostles.

Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church.

Pro-Gay Accomplice Faggioli Attacks all who aren't Complicit in Francis's Cover-up of Gay Predator McCarrick

Yesterday, the pro-gay Massimo Faggioli attacked three bishops who weakly or implicitly supported whistleblower Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò's revelations that Francis covered-up for serial gay sex abuser Theodore McCarrick.

The historian Faggioli by doing this showed he is a hardened accomplice to the Vatican sex abuse cover-ups.

The pro-gay Faggioli revealed that he is a unyielding supporter of the intrinsic evil of homosexual sins when he attacked African Cardinal Robert Sarah for critiquing the gay activist Fr. James Martin.

Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church.

Wednesday, July 17, 2019

Guardian: Cdl. Pell "Raised the Possibility that Francis might be the 38th False Pope [Antipope]"

The leftist British Guardian in 2014 reported that Cardinal George Pell "raised the possibility that Francis might turn out to be the 38th false pope."

The Guardian is a ultra pro-Francis publication and one of its former reporters has recently promoted the fake quote that claimed Benedict XVI said "The Pope is one; [he] is Francis" which LifeSiteNews apparently showed was not a quote.

The leftist publication wrote:

"Pell, published over the weekend a homily... Pope Francis, he said, was the 266th pope, "and history has 37th false or antipopes."

"Why mention them, except to raise the possibility that Francis might turn out to be the 38 false pope."
(The Guardian, "A Catholic Church schism under Pope Francis isn't out of the question," October 30, 2014)

As everyone knows, a few years later, Pell ended up in prison on what Catholic commentator Patrick Coffin said "even Pell's ideological foes feel the verdict is absurd."

Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church.

Tuesday, July 16, 2019

Vatican I Expert Fr. Rippinger: "Proximate to Heresy... saying that the Pope is Infallible Regardless of Conditions... not, therefore, Excused"

Vatican I Expert Fr. Chad Rippinger, PhD, in his book "Magisterial Authority" wrote:

"[T]reat[ing] ALL papal statements as if they are infallible... is proximate to heresy because it rejects the precise formulation of the conditions of infallibility as laid out in by Vatican I... by essentially saying that the pope is infallible regardless of conditions."

"... Worse still, those who were to follow a pope who was in error in a non-infallible teaching which is taught contrary to something that is infallible is not, therefore, excused."
(Magisterial Authority, Pages 5-14)

Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church.

Sunday, July 14, 2019

Is Francis a Antipope or a Heretical Pope who "Must" be Deposed by "the Church" according to Doctor of the Church St. Francis de Sales?

On April 30, 2019, 19 top Catholic scholars led by the world renowned theologian Fr. Aidan Nichols declared that "[a] heretical papacy may not be tolerated" in their Open Letter:

"[T]he world's bishops [must]... admonish the Pope and [he] must publicly reject heresy or face losing the papacy."
(EdwardPentin.co.uk, " Father Aidan Nichols Signs Open Letter Charging Pope Francis with Heresy," May 1, 2019)

Doctor of the Church St. Francis de Sales totally confirmed beyond any doubt the validity and the necessity of the Open Letter :

"[T]he Pope... WHEN he is EXPLICITLY a heretic, he falls ipso facto from his dignity and out of the Church, and the Church MUST either deprive him, or, as some say, declare him deprived, of his Apostolic See."
(The Catholic Controversy, by St. Francis de Sales, Pages 305-306)

But, all the Conservative and Traditionalist anti-Open Letter Catholic commentators and all the Sedevacantists are united in rejecting or ignoring the teaching of Doctor of the Church St. Francis de Sales.

The Sedevacantists reject the Doctor of the Church's teaching that the Church "must... declare him [the explicit heretic Pope] deprived, of his Apostolic See" because like Neo-Protestants they, the Sedes, get to "declare him deprived, of his Apostolic See" not the Successors of the Apostles who Jesus Christ put in authority.

The Sedes love quoting that the explicitly heretical Pope "falls ipso facto from his dignity and out of the Church," but then dishonestly ignore or deliberately leave out the second part of the sentence.

The anti-Open Letter Catholics, however, are in some ways more cowardly in that they ignore St. Francis de Sales' teaching altogether.

They over and over again talk about the "speculation" of St. Robert Bellarmine while they are either ignorant or choose to ignore for the sake of their strawman arguments not the "speculation" of this Doctor of the Church, but his straight forward explicit teaching about deposing a Pope.

The favorite strawman arguments of the anti-Open Letter Catholics are the mantras of schism and recently "counciliarism" to avoid the hard discussion of the teaching of a Doctor of the Church.

Why are these anti-Open Letter commentators afraid of engaging St. Francis de Sales?

Do they honestly think they can use their strawman mantras of schism and "councilarism" against him?

Are they calling a Doctor of the Church a schismatic and a "councilarist" heretic?

Remember that the "counciliarist" heresy came about before the time of St. Francis de Sales so he would be a explicit heretic if what he taught above had anything to do with it.

Do they honestly think that the Church makes schismatics and heretics into Doctors of the Church?

Next, the top intellectual of the anti-Open Letter Conservatives and Traditionalists who is philosopher Edward Feser showed how weak their fall back position arguments are when he wrote in his Semi-anti-Open Letter post:

"For example, Pope Francis has made many statements that at least seem to contradict traditional Catholic teaching on divorce and remarriage, conscience, grace, capital punishment, and a variety of other topics."
(Edwardfeser.blogspot, "Some comments on the Open letter, May 6, 2019)

It appears to me that Francis doesn't just "seem to contradict traditional Catholic teaching on divorce and remarriage," but EXPLICITEDLY "contradict[ed] traditional Catholic teaching on divorce and remarriage" when he in a "official act as the pope" placed the Argentine letter in the the Acts of the Apostolic See (AAS)  in which he said of the Buenos Aires region episcopal guidelines:

"There is no other interpretations."

The guidelines explicitly allows according to LifeSiteNews "sexuality active adulterous couples facing 'complex circumstances' to 'access the sacraments of Reconciliation and the Eucharist.'"
(LifeSiteNews, "Confusion explodes as Pope Francis throws magisterial weight behind communion for adulterers, December 4, 2017)

In a article on OnePeterFive, specialist in Magisterial authority Dr. John Joy said "It means that it is an official act of the pope."
Moreover, the article said:

"Dr. Joy pointed out that adding the letter to the AAS could, in fact, damage the credibility of Amoris Laetitia by potentially removing the possibility that it could be intercepted in an orthodox way, via its publication in the official acts of the Apostolic See, that the unorthodox interpretation is the official one."
(OnePeterFive, "Pope's Letter on Argentinian Communion Guidelines for Remarriage Given Official Status," December 2, 2017)

The "official act of" Francis is a "unorthodox interpretation."

It doesn't just "seem to contradict traditional Catholic teaching." The "official act of the pope" is a "unorthodox interpretation" which means it contradicts traditional Catholic teaching which is just another way of saying by "official act the pope" is teaching heresy.

Now, let us quote Feser:

"(1) Adulterous sexual acts are in some special circumstances morally permissible... these propositions flatly contradict irreformable Catholic teaching. Proposition (1) contradicts not only the perennial moral teaching of the Church, but the teaching of scripture itself."
(Edwardfeser.blogspot, "Denial flows into the Tiber," December 18, 2016)

Finally, we get to the Conservatives and Traditionalists who say Francis absolutely cannot be a antipope. They ask the question:

Is it possible for someone to be a antipope even though the majority of cardinals claim he is pope?

The case of Antipope Anacletus II proves that it is possible for a majority of cardinals to claim a man is pope while he, in reality, is a antipope.

In 1130, a majority of cardinals voted for Cardinal Peter Pierleone to be pope. He called himself Anacletus II. He was proclaimed pope and ruled Rome for eight years by vote and consent of a absolute majority of the cardinals despite the fact he was a antipope.

In 1130, just prior to the election of antipope Anacletus, a small minority of cardinals elected the real pope: Pope Innocent II.

How is this possible?

St. Bernard said "the 'sanior pars' (the wiser portion)... declared in favor of Innocent II. By this he probably meant a majority of the cardinal-bishops."
(St. Bernard of Clairvaux by Leon Christiani, Page 72)

Again, how is this possible when the absolute majority of cardinals voted for Anacletus?

Historian Warren Carroll explains:

"[C]anon law does not bind a Pope arranging for his successor... [Papal Chancellor] Haimeric proposed that... a commission of eight cardinals should be selected to choose the next Pope... strong evidence [shows] that the Pope [Honorius] endorsed what Haimeric was doing, including the establishment of the electoral commission [of eight cardinals]."
(The Glory of Christendom, Pages 36-37)

The majority or "sanior pars," five cardinals out of eight of "the electoral commission," elected Pope Innocent II as St. Bernard said and as evidence shows was the will of the previous pope in what we can call a constitution for the election of his successor.

In the same way, is it possible that Francis was not elected pope even though he received a absolute majority of cardinals votes and is now as in the case of Anacletus proclaimed pope by the same absolute majority?

As with the case of Anacletus, it is possible Francis is a antipope if his election contradicted or violated the constitution promulgated by Pope John Paul II for electing his successor.

The award-winning Mexican journalist and President of Vida para Nacer Jose Munguia who studied theology at the Gregorian University in Rome brings forward evidence that there were "serious irregularities" against John Paul II's constitution that governed the 2013 conclave that could invalidate the conclave which elected Francis:

"Article 79 of the Constitution Universi Domenici Gregis, which establishes the details of how the conclave must be celebrated, says the following: 'Confirming the prescriptions of my predecessors, I likewise forbid anyone, even if he is a cardinal, during the Pope’s lifetime and without having consulted him, to make plans concerning the election of his successor, or to promise votes, or to make decisions in this regard in private gatherings'."

"And in article 81 it is established that these agreements are punished with excommunication latae sententiae (i.e. automatic, without the need of a declaration by anybody, ipso facto and eo ipsa)."

"The information revealed by Cardinal Daneels days before the Synod, coincides with that published by Austin Ivereigh, in his book “The Great Reformer” in which he reveals how, during the 2013 conclave, four cardinals from the Mafioso Saint Galen group (Kasper, Lehman, Danneels and Murphy O’Connor) came together to illicitly orchestrate a campaign in favour of the election of Bergoglio, after the latter had agreed to be the beneficiary of this scheming."

"... After the election came the two books which revealed the serious irregularities committed within the conclave that elected Bergoglio. The first is the [Spanish language] book by Elisabbeta Piqué (Bergoglio’s authorised biographer from Argentina) entitled 'Francisco, Vida y Revolución' (Francisco, Life and Revolution). Piqué knew, through Francis himself, what happened inside the conclave. The other book is by the famous vaticanologist Antonio Socci 'Non é Francesco' (Francis is not the Pope)."

"The revelations of [Spanish speaking] Piqué [which are almost unknown to the English speaking world] are so well believed as coming from Francis that the Osservatore Romano, the official Vatican newspaper, published the chapter that deals with how the conclave developed. Vatican Radio and Television did likewise. What happened is that Bergoglio, on being elected Pope, felt that the threat of excommunication – which falls on any cardinal for revealing what happened in the conclave – no longer affected him and related to the journalist the things that happened within the Sistine Chapel."

"The narration: In the conclave, in the evening of the 13th of March, in the fourth vote count of the day, there were 116 votes when there were only 115 cardinals in the hall. One cardinal put in one paper too many. This fourth vote was won by Cardinal Angelo Scola of Milan (The Italian Episcopal Conference itself released a bulletin congratulating Scola for having been elected Pope). This vote count was improperly annulled. Angelo Scola’s website published that the recently elected Pope had taken the name of John XXIV. Wikipedia also published it. A few minutes later both sites took down this result. What happened is that when the recently elected Pope was on his way to the balcony of Saint Peter’s, a group of cardinals, mostly Germans and Americans, approached him to tell him that he had to return to the Sistine Chapel because the vote count had to be annulled."

"Now, the Apostolic Constitution Universi Domenici Gregis (Art 69) establishes that if two folded papers came from the same cardinal with the same name or if one was blank, they must be counted as a single vote. If, on the other hand, there were two different names, both papers are annulled and none of the two votes is valid. But it clearly establishes: “In none of the two cases must the election be annulled”. In this case there was an extra white paper. The established procedure was not followed but rather the election was annulled, which was expressly prohibited."

"Contravening the dispositions of the Constitution, the fourth vote count was declared null, they forced Cardinal Angelo Scola, recently elected and having taken the name of John XXIV, to resign and return to the Sistine Chapel, and they proceeded with a fifth vote in which Jorge Mario Bergoglio was elected."

"This was the second irregularity of the conclave, because the Constitution establishes (Art 63) that there must only be four voting sessions per day, two in the morning and two in the evening."

"The case for saying that the designation of Bergoglio is effectively invalid is clear, according to canon lawyers, who refer us to article 76 which states: 'Should the election take place in a way other than that prescribed in the present Constitution, or should the conditions laid down here not be observed, the election is for this very reason null and void, without any need for a declaration on the matter; consequently, it confers no right on the one elected'."

"This pile of evidence led Cardinal George Pell to declare that Francis could well be the 38th antipope in the history of the church, and not the 266th Pope as the vast majority believe."

"Finally, it is worth pointing out here, that even if all the aforementioned be cast in doubt or discredited, all opposing arguments collapse with Cardinal Danneels’s admission in his biography, that he and a group of cardinals, the “Mafia Club”, plotted to force Benedict XVI to resign. When you have a confession, proof is not necessary."
[https://www.ultimostiempos.org/en/blog-en/item/81-antipopes-conclave.html]

Bishop Rene Gracida, also, brings forward evidence that the conclave that elected Francis was invalid because there were "serious irregularities" against John Paul II's constitution that governed the 2013 conclave.

However, the anti-Open Letter traditional Catholic commentator Steve Skojec on May 7, 2018 apparently rejected Bishop Gracida's call for the cardinals to judge if Francis's election to the papacy was valid calling the validity question itself, using a phrase of Francis's close collaborator Cardinal Blasé Cupich, a "potentially dangerous rabbit hole."
(Onepeterfive, "Cardinal Eijk References End Times Prophecy in Intercommunion," May 7, 2018)

At the time, Skojec referred back to his September 26, 2017 post where he said:

"JPII has removed the election-nullifying consequences of simony... nowhere else in the following paragraphs is nullity of the election even implied."
(Onepeterfive, "A Brief note on the Question of a Legally Valid Election," September 26, 2017)

Bishop Gracida shows that Skojec is wrong in his Open Letter quoting Pope John Paul II's Universi Dominici Gregis' introductory perambulary and paragraph 76:

- "I further confirm, by my Apostlic authority, the duty of maintaining the strictest secrecy with regard to everything that directly or indirectly concerns the election process" [the above which Gracida clearly shows in his Open Letter was not maintained thus making the conclave and Francis's papacy invalid according to the Bishop].
(Introductory perambulary)

- "Should the election take place in a way other than laid down here not to be observed, the election is for this very reason null and void."
(Paragraph 76)

Gracida's Open Letter, moreover, shows that Skojec is wrong above:

"The clear exception from nullity and invalidity for simony proves the general rule that other violations of the sacred process certainly do and did result in the nullity and invalidity of the entire conclave."

On top of all that, Skojec ignores paragraph 5 and contrary to what conservative canon lawyer Edward Peters has said about Universi Dominici Gregis when he suggests canon lawyers have a role in interpreting the John Paul II Constitution, the document says:

"Should doubts arise concerning the prescriptions contained in this Constitution, or concerning the manner of putting them into effect. I [Pope John Paul II] Decree that all power of issuing a judgment of this in this regard to the College of Cardinals, to which I grant the faculty of interpreting doubtful or controverted points."
(Universi Dominici Gregis, paragraph 5)

Later in the paragraph it says "except the act of the election," which can be interpreted in a number of ways.

The point is, as Bishop Gracida says and Universi Dominici Gregis said, only the cardinals can interpret its meaning, not Skojec, not canon lawyers or anyone else.

The Bishop is saying what the document says: only the cardinals can interpret it.

He, also, says put pressure on the cardinals to act and interpret it which both Skojec and Peters appear to prefer to ignore.

Moreover, Bishop Gracida's Open Letter and Pope John Paul II's document make a number of points which neither Skojec, Peters or anyone else to my knowledge have even brought up or offered any counter argument against.

I used to have respect for both Skojec and Peters, but unless Gracida's Open Letter is squarely responded to my respect for them will completely be gone for they will be neglecting their responsibility to God and His Church.

They are both wrong if they ignore this important Open Letter of Bishop Gracida.

If Peters and Skojec as well as the conservative and traditional Catholic media are ignoring Bishop Gracida because he isn't a cardinal and retired, remember that St. Athanasius wasn't a cardinal (that is involved in the selection or election process of the pope of the time) and was retired.

During the Arian heresy crisis, Pope Liberius excommunicated Athanasius. You don't get any more retired than being excommunicated.

Skojec gave blogger Ann Barnhardt's analysis of the papal validity a long article and podcast. The only bishop in the world contesting Francis in a meaningful way deserves as much. Why is he apparently so afraid of Bishop Gracida?

Skojec and Peters need to answer Gracida's theologically clear and precise arguments and either clearly and precisely counter them or put pressure on the cardinals to put into action the needed canonical procedures to remove Francis if he was "never validly elected" the pope or else remove him from the Petrine office for heterodoxy.

Francis is not orthodox so there are only two things he could be:

1. A validly elected pope who is a material heretic until cardinals correct him and then canonically proclaim he is a formal heretic if he doesn't recant thus deposing him (See: "Unambiguously Pope Francis Materially Professes Death Penalty Heresy: Cd. Burke: 'If a Pope would Formally Profess Heresy he would Cease, by that Act, to be the Pope'": http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2018/08/unambiguously-pope-francis-materially.html?m=1) or

2. a invalidly elected antipope who is a heretic.

The point is whether you think using all the information available 1. is the objective truth or 2. is the objective truth you must act.

You must as the Bishop says put: "pressure on the cardinals to act" whichever you think. 

There are many ways to put pressure such as pray and offer Masses for this intention, send the Gracida link to priests, bishops and cardinals, make signs and pray the rosary in front of their offices as we do in front of abortion clinics. Use your imagination to come up with other ideas.

Gracida is calling the cardinals to "[a]ddress... [the] probable invalidity" before they attempt to depose him from the Petrine office for heterodoxy. But, just as importantly he is calling all faithful Catholics to act and not just bemoan Francis's heresy. 


Bishop Gracida in a email to me and through the Catholic Monitor to all faithful Catholics said:

"ONE CAN SAY THAT FRANCIS THE MERCIFUL IS A HERETIC UNTIL ONE DIES BUT IT CHANGES NOTHING. WHAT IS NEEDED IS ACTION... WE MUST PRESSURE THE CARDINALS TO ACT. SEND THAT LINK TO EVERY PRIEST AND BISHOP YOU KNOW":


https://wp.me/px5Zw-95e.


Remember that many who are calling those like Bishop Gracida, journalist Munguia  and others "schismatics" for calling for a cardinal investigation are following in the footsteps of the real schismatics who promoted and followed Antipope Anacletus II.

Renown Catholic historian Carroll explicitly says that what matters in a valid papal election is not how many cardinals claim a person is the pope. What is essential for determining if someone is pope or antipope is the "election procedures... [as] governed by the prescription of the last Pope":

"Papal election procedures are governed by the prescription of the last Pope who provided for them (that is, any Pope can change them, but they remain in effect until they are changed by a duly elected Pope)." 

"During the first thousand years of the history of the Papacy the electors were the clergy of Rome (priests and deacons); during the second thousand years we have had the College of Cardinals."

"But each Pope, having unlimited sovereign power as head of the Church, can prescribe any method for the election of his successor(s) that he chooses. These methods must then be followed in the next election after the death of the Pope who prescribed it, and thereafter until they are changed. A Papal claimant not following these methods is also an Antipope."

"Since Antipopes by definition base their claims on defiance of proper Church authority, all have been harmful to the Church, though a few have later reformed after giving up their claims."
[http://www.ewtn.com/library/homelibr/antipope.txt]

The schismatic followers of  Antipope Anacletus II didn't want St. Bernard to investigate who was the real pope. It was the followers of the real pontiff Pope Innocent II who asked Bernard to investigate.

Why are so many Traditional and Conservative Catholics afraid of a cardinal investigation of the apparent "serious irregularities" against John Paul II's constitution that governed the 2013 conclave that could invalidate the conclave which elected Francis?

I have gotten some push back from Skojec and others who attacked Bishop Gracida apparently using Siscoe's claim that it is a infallible dogma that a man is infallibly a pope if there is "peaceful and universal acceptance" by the Church.

Was there peaceful and universal  acceptance?

In Siscoe's own book "True or False Pope,"  he mentions the following scholars who questioned the validity of Francis's election: Vatican expert Antonio Socci and "Stefano Violin, esteemed Professor of Canon Law" (Page 390). And there is a bishop and many other scholars who question the validity not mentioned by him.

Apparently, Siscoe didn't get his "peaceful and universal" dogma from a dogmatic statement from a pope or council, but from a good, but a not necessarily infallible theologian John of St. Thomas.  Here is his quote from John of St. Thomas:

"[T]his man in particular, lawfully elected and accepted by the Church, is the supreme pontiff."
(Trueorfalsepope.com, "Peaceful and Universal Acceptance of a Pope," 2-28-19 and 3-13-19)

This bring us back to the renown historian Carroll statement: "A Papal claimant not following these methods [which is the conclave constitution of a previous pope] is also an Antipope."

Even John of St. Thomas agrees with Carroll when he said as quoted by Siscoe:

Besides "acceptance" a valid pope needs to be "lawfully elected."

Again, Bishop Gracida is asking for a cardinal investigation. He is saying what John Paul II's conclave constitution says about the question of if Francis was "lawfully elected" or not: only the cardinals can investigate it and interpret it, not Siscoe, Skojec, canon lawyers or John of St. Thomas.

Finally, I ask Siscoe and Skojec to answer the following Dubia questions or stop the insulting name calling such as labeling everyone who finds holes in their arguments: "Sedevacantists or Benevacantists" and stop pretending their arguments have any validity:

1. Doctor of the Church St. Francis de Sales said "The Pope... when he is explicitly a heretic... the Church must either deprive him or as some say declare him deprived of his Apostolic See." Was St. Francis de Sales a Sedevacantist or a Benevacantist? Answer: yes or no.

2. "Universal Acceptance" theologian John of St. Thomas said "This man in particular lawfully elected and accepted by the Church is the supreme pontiff." Was John of St. Thomas for saying "the supreme pontiff" must be BOTH "lawfully elected and accepted by the Church" a Sedevacantist or a Benevacantist? Answer: yes or no.

3. Do you think that a "supreme pontiff" if "universally accepted" is still Pope if, to quote papal validity expert Arnaldo Xavier de Silveira on "dubious election[s]", that he is "a woman... a child... a demented person... a heretic... a apostate... [which] would [thus] be invalid[ed] by divine law"? Answer: yes or no.

4. Renowned Catholic historian Warren Carroll agreed with Bishop René Gracida on the determining factor for discerning a valid conclave for a valid papal election besides divine law. Carroll pronounced:

"But each Pope, having unlimited sovereign power as head of the Church, can prescribe any method for the election of his successor(s) that he chooses... A papal claimant not following these methods is also an Antipope."

Are renowned historian Carroll and Bishop Gracida for saying this Sedevacantists or Benevacantists? Answer: yes or no.

5. Is Bishop Gracida really only a pawn of the legendary and notorious "Sedevacantist and Benevacantist" mastermind Ann Barnhardt for convincingly demonstrating that there is valid evidence that Pope John Paul II's conclave constitution "Universi Dominici Gregis" which "prescribe[d].. [the] method for the election of his successor(s)" was violated and must be investigated by Cardinals? Answer: yes or no.

Lastly, why are Siscoe and Skojec apparently so afraid of a investigation by cardinals?

I ask both to please give a specific answer to why they are apparently so afraid of a investigation.

Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church and for Catholics to not just bemoan heresy, but put pressure on the cardinals to act as well as for the grace for a cardinal to stand up and investigate and to be the St. Bernard of our time.

In fact, please offer Masses, fast and pray the rosary for these intentions


Saturday, July 13, 2019

Socci: Benedict XVI told Cd. Brandmuller he didn't want to be "seen [as] the Ex-Pope"

Antonio Socci in his new book uses quotes to show that Benedict XVI, in his two letters responded to Cardinal Walter Brandmuller's criticism of the title "pope emeritus," saying he didn't want to be a cardinal because he would be "seen [as] the ex-pope."

Brandmuller wrote Benedict that the title "pope emeritus" happened to be "extraneous to the entire canonical-theological traditional."

Benedict according to Socci "expresses concern [to Brandmuller in the letters] had he returned to being a cardinal, 'in that cardinal would have been seen the ex-pope,' thus creating confusion."

Simply put Socci presents the case that if Benedict doesn't want to be seen as the "ex-pope" then he wants to be seen as the pope which brings us back to the "question of the validity of a dubious or partial resignation."
(The Secret of Benedict XVI, Pages 99-105)

Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church

"Satan is the Prince [of]... This World now has a Friend within the Church in the person of Pope Francis"

"Space, therefore, for Pope Francis, is simply a euphemism for what we are in possession of now – in other words, what we traditional Catholics believe to be the fullness of God’s Immutable Revelation, Rules, Dogma, the Infallible Magisterium, and the reality that we each possess a substantial human nature and soul, requiring the same fundamental choice now as was true of the first man."
 
"Time is proposed by Pope Francis as being greater than Space because “becoming” is more real than God’s Supreme Being, and takes precedence over the Revealed Truths which are the fullness of that Being. It is therefore quite easy to see why, in the mind of Pope Francis, an apparent universal mercy trumps immutable dogma – why the divorced and remarried may receive Holy Communion, why we must be 'inclusive' towards practicing homosexuals (who must certainly also be admitted to Sacramental Communion if such a “mercy” holds true), and why, in fact, we must be inclusive towards everyone (except, apparently, rich capitalists, the Mafia, and possibly Traditionalists). It is the Journey into the future which is everything. There can be no Now which demands conversion to any Absolutes, and such conversion cannot be a requisite for being included within the sacramental and supernatural life of Christ’s Mystical Body."

"If Time triumphs over the 'space' of God’s Immutable Truth, then we float, untethered, until the life of God’s Revelation is left behind. The world, of which Satan is the Prince, has for some time rejected all Absolutes, and prostrated itself before the goddesses of evolutionary progress. This world now has a friend within the Church in the person of Pope Francis. And all of this is being done in the name of a universal mercy which is the ultimate mockery of Christ and the Truth for which He suffered and died"
- James Larson

http://rosarytotheinterior.com/the-teilhardian-theology-of-pope-francis-program-for-the-amazonian-synod/

Pope Francis and Teilhardian Evolution: Program for the Amazonian Synod

By James Larson

In our article The Amazonian Synod and Teilhardian Evolution: A Journey into the Heart of Antichrist, we analyzed the Teilhardian evolutionary theology (including Teilhard de Chardin’s nightmare embrace of eugenics as integral to this theology) which is the agenda for the upcoming Amazonian Synod. We have been asked to provide more evidence that such Teilhardian evolutionary theology is really the agenda behind Pope Francis program of Integral Ecology for this Synod. Pope Francis’ environmental encyclical Laudato Si was certainly written in preparation, and as the alleged “theological” foundation, for this event. The following analysis, largely employing what is contained within this encyclical, is offered as additional irrefutable testimony that this is the case.

In prophetic anticipation of the crisis which we now have with us, Teilhard de Chardin wrote just one month before he died in 1955:
On the other hand, I cannot fail to feel around me – if only from the way in which ‘my ideas’ are becoming more widely accepted – the pulsation of countless people who are all – ranging from the border-line of belief to the depths of the cloister – thinking and feeling, or at least beginning vaguely to feel, just as I do. It is indeed heartening to know that I am not a lone discoverer, but that I am, quite simply, responding to the vibration that (given a particular condition of Christianity of the world) is necessarily active in all the souls around me…..Everywhere on Earth, at this moment, in the new spiritual atmosphere created by the appearance of the idea of evolution, there float, in a state of extreme mutual sensitivity, love of God and faith in the world: the two essential components of the Ultra-human. These two components are everywhere ‘in the air’; generally, however, they are not strong enough, both at the same time, to combine with one another in one and the same subject. In me, it happens by pure chance (temperament, upbringing, background) that the proportion of the one to the other is correct, and the fusion of the two has been effected spontaneously – not as yet with sufficient force to spread explosively — but strong enough nevertheless to make it clear that the process is possible — and that sooner or later there will be a chain-reaction“. (The Christic, p. 101-102).
The chain-reaction” of which Teilhard de Chardin spoke in the above passage has taken sixty years to materialize.  His work was censured by various Church officials for decades, culminating in the 1962 Monitum of the Holy Office exhorting “all Ordinaries as well as the superiors of Religious institutes, rectors of seminaries and presidents of universities, effectively to protect the minds, particularly of the youth, against the dangers presented by the works of Fr. Teilhard de Chardin and of his followers”. As late as 1981, the Holy See issued a communiqué reaffirming this warning.
Teilhard’s Evolutionary Gnosticism has now been blessed with both the voice and the vehicles empowering it to be mainstreamed. The voice is that of Pope Francis, and the vehicles which he has employed are his encyclical Laudato Si, and his Apostolic Exhortation Amoris Laetitia.
Just as uniting the concept of evolution to Christology provided the theological key to Teilhard de Chardin’s concept of all matter evolving towards the Omega Point of the “Christic” (this constituting his concept of a “Cosmic Liturgy”), so the ecological movement is now providing the necessary chemistry for the “explosion” of this poisoned theology and spirituality within the minds and hearts of millions of Catholics. Laudato Si is rightly seen as the manifesto of this revolution. Following are passages from this encyclical which speak of the universal transfiguration of all created things upon the evolutionary “altar of the world”.
83. The ultimate destiny of the universe is in the fullness of God, which has already been attained by the risen Christ, the measure of the maturity of all things.[53] Here we can add yet another argument for rejecting every tyrannical and irresponsible domination of human beings over other creatures. The ultimate purpose of other creatures is not to be found in us. Rather, all creatures are moving forward with us and through us towards a common point of arrival, which is God, in that transcendent fullness where the risen Christ embraces and illumines all things. Human beings, endowed with intelligence and love, and drawn by the fullness of Christ, are called to lead all creatures back to their Creator.
236. It is in the Eucharist that all that has been created finds its greatest exaltation…. The Lord, in the culmination of the mystery of the Incarnation, chose to reach our intimate depths through a fragment of matter. He comes not from above, but from within, he comes that we might find him in this world of ours….Indeed the Eucharist is in itself an act of cosmic love: ‘Yes, cosmic! Because even when it is celebrated on the humble altar of a country church, the Eucharist is always in some way celebrated on the altar of the world’.[166]” (the quote at the end of this passage is from Pope John Paul II’s encyclical Ecclesia de Eucharistia).
If we are tempted to deny the Teilhardian theology and cosmology in these passages, we need only to look at footnote #53 in the above quote. It contains the following comment: “Against this horizon we can set the contribution of Fr. Teilhard de Chardin”.
Three more examples:
237. On Sunday, our participation in the Eucharist has special importance. Sunday, like the Jewish Sabbath, is meant to be a day which heals our relationships with God, with ourselves, with others and with the world. Sunday is the day of the Resurrection, the “first day” of the new creation, whose first fruits are the Lord’s risen humanity, the pledge of the final transfiguration of all created reality.
243. Jesus says: ‘I make all things new’ (Rev 21:5). Eternal life will be a shared experience of awe, in which each creature, resplendently transfigured, will take its rightful place and have something to give those poor men and women who will have been liberated once and for all.
244. In the meantime, we come together to take charge of this home which has been entrusted to us, knowing that all the good which exists here will be taken up into the heavenly feast.
In order to see the grievous error represented in these passages from Laudato Si, we need only consult Holy Scripture, and the many passages from both Old and New Testaments which clearly reveal that the earth will totally perish and cease to be, that the world is not our lasting home, and that Christ’s assurance that He will “make all things new” in no way signifies a final transfiguration of any created thing, living or dead, which does not have a spiritual soul:
With desolation shall the earth be laid waste, and it shall be utterly spoiled: for the Lord hath spoken this word. (Isaiah 24:3)
For behold, I create new heaven, and a new earth: and the former things shall not be in remembrance, and they shall not come upon the heart. (Isaiah 65:1.)
Heaven and earth shall pass, but my words shall not pass. (Matthew 24:35).
But the heavens and the earth which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire, against the day of judgment and perdition of the ungodly men. (2 Peter 3:7)
But the day of the Lord shall come as a thief, in which the heavens shall pass away with great violence, and the elements shall be melted with heat, and the earth and the works which are in it, shall be burnt up. Seeing then that all these things are to be dissolved, what manner of people ought you to be in holy conversation and godliness? Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of the Lord, by which the heavens, being on fire, shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with the burning heat? But we look for new heavens and a new earth according to his promises, in which justice dwelleth. (2 Peter 3:10-13).
And I saw a new heaven and a new earth. For the first heaven and the first earth was gone, and the sea is now no more. (Apoc. 21: 1).
The Teilhardian spiritualism implicit in Pope Francis’ concept of the altar of the world, and his concept of the final transfiguration of all created things, demands that the above scriptures be considered false. If “matter is the prehistory of spirit” (Joseph Ratzinger’s phrase), and if, as Pope Francis teaches, all creatures are to be “resplendently transfigured” and be present at the “heavenly feast”, then all creatures possess a dignity and sacredness that demands an imperishability which parallels that of human beings. We need add that the Pope Francis’ concept of the “altar of the world'” comes straight from the pen of Teilhard, who in his work The Mass on the World wrote:
““Since once again, Lord – though this time not in the forests of the Aisne but in the stepes of Asia – I have neither bread, nor wine, nor altar, I will raise myself beyond these symbols, up to the pure majesty of the real itself [Note: there is no way that Teilhard could use these words, and make this juxtaposition if he believed in the substantial, Real Presence of Christ after the Consecration]; I, your priest, will make the whole earth my altar and on it will offer you all the labours and sufferings of the world.” (The Heart of Matter, p. 119).
And, a little further on, he elaborates:
This restless multitude, confused or orderly, the immensity of which terrifies us; this ocean of humanity whose slow, monotonous wave-flows trouble the hearts even of those whose faith is most firm: it is to this deep that I thus desire all the fibres of my being should respond. All the things in the world to which this day will bring increase; all those that will diminish; all those too that will die: all of them, Lord, I try to gather into my arms, so as to hold them out to you in offering. This is the material of my sacrifice; the only material you desire.
Once upon a time men took into your temple the first fruits of their harvests, the flower of their flocks. But the offering you really want, the offering you mysteriously need every day to appease your hunger, to slake your thirst is nothing less than the growth of the world borne ever onwards in the stream of universal becoming.
“Receive, O Lord, this all-embracing host which your whole creation, moved by your magnetism, offers you at this dawn of a new day. (p. 121)
The “ecological spiritualism” proposed throughout Pope Francis’ Laudato Si therefore represents not just a lengthy and inappropriate descent of the Church into the science of this world, but is preeminently constituted as a manifesto for a totally radical change in Catholic theology and spirituality.
In the City of God, St. Augustine spoke of two Cities in combat for the souls of men: “These two Cities are made by two loves: the earthly City by love of oneself even to the contempt of God; the heavenly City by love of God even to the contempt of self.” (City of God, 14:2). Seventeen hundred years later, these two loves are now represented by two altars: the traditional Catholic altar which receives the Gift of Christ from above, and the Teilhardian altar of the world upon which man worships his own becoming, and the evolutionary ascent of all of creation.
There is, of course, a legitimate use of the expression “altar of the world”. Fatima has long been called the ‘Altar of the World” because pilgrims come from all over the world to worship at this place of Our Lady’s visitation. It is also true that the Mass itself might be considered the Altar of the World – wherever it is offered on this earth, God becomes present. But this is a far cry from the Teilhardian-inspired use of such terms as “altar of the world”, “Mass on the World”, or “altar of the earth” to connote a process of universal becoming by which the earth itself is to be seen as a “living host” being transfigured by an evolutionary processes which will culminate with all its creatures “resplendently transfigured” and “taken up into the heavenly feast”. Rightly we may view such a liturgy as being offered on the pantheistic altar of Satan.
The encyclical Laudato Si was promulgated on May 24, 2015. One year later, on March 19, 2016, the Pope’s Apostolic Exhortation Amoris Laetitia was published. What might be called the “theological agenda” of Amoris Laetitia is succinctly formulated very early in this document. In paragraph 3, we encounter the following:
Since ‘time is greater than space,’ [bold emphasis mine, quotation marks are Francis’], I would make it clear that not all discussions of doctrinal, moral, or pastoral issues need to be settled by interventions of the magisterium. Unity of teaching and practice is certainly necessary in the Church, but this does not preclude various ways of interpreting some aspects of that teaching or drawing certain consequences from it. This will always be the case as the Spirit guides us towards the entire truth (cf. Jn 16:13), until he leads us fully into the mystery of Christ and enables us to see all things as he does. Each country or region, moreover, can seek solutions better suited to its culture and sensitive to its traditions and local needs. For “cultures are in fact quite diverse and every general principle…needs to be inculterated, if it is to be respected and applied.”
Now, any honest assessment of this paragraph should produce profound bewilderment. The subjects we are dealing with in Amoris Laetitia– marriage, family, the impossibility of divorce and remarriage, the intrinsic evil of homosexuality, and the prescription against those living in adultery receiving the Eucharist – all these subjects are doctrinal “places” which are not subject to evolution, change, growth, or inculteration. The notion that doctrinal truths can be “inculturated” with different “solutions” in various cultures is simply a prescription for relativism. Further, there can be no unity of teaching and practice where these doctrines are violated. And finally, if questions regarding such doctrines need not now to be “settled by intervention of the magisterium”, it is only because they have been settled by the magisterium and by the Gospel from its inception. In other words, every sentence in paragraph 3 is redolent with error and deception.
We do indeed have not only the right, but also the obligation, to reject this concept that “time is greater than space” in regard to anything to do with Catholic truth. And we should be left with a very disturbing question as to exactly what Francis is trying to do with this strange notion that “time is greater than space”.
Amoris Laetitia is not the first time that Francis has used this phrase or concept. Those who read Pope Francis’ Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium may have been puzzled that in fact an entire subsection of this document was titled “Time is Greater than Space”. There we read:
A constant tension exists between fullness and limitation. Fullness evokes the desire for complete possession, while limitation is a wall set before us. Broadly speaking, “time” has to do with fullness as an expression of the horizon which constantly opens before us, while each individual moment has to do with limitation as an expression of enclosure. People live poised between each individual moment and the greater, brighter horizon of the utopian future as the final cause which draws us to itself. Here we see a first principle for progress in building a people: time is greater than space.”
On the contrary, the Catholic Faith is not established upon a “horizon which constantly opens before us”, but upon what is within us now:
Neither shall they say: Behold here, or behold there. For lo, the kingdom of God is within you.” (Luke 17:21)
It has nothing to do with a utopian future, but with the “now” of our response to God’s grace and truth:
And we helping do exhort you, that you receive not the grace of God in vain….Behold, now is the acceptable time; behold, now is the day of salvation.” (2 Cor. 6:1-2).
It is this now which has been the crucial and saving moment for each individual soul from the creation of Adam down to the last man. It is this now which has been the source of all that is good in human history; for it is here that God’s Rule is either accepted or rejected, this in turn determining whether true love, peace, justice, compassion, and mercy are either accepted or rejected in societies and nations.
Pope Francis indeed seems to make “time” the very source of revelation and salvation. In his interview with Anthony Spadaro, he said the following:
God manifests himself in historical revelation, in history. Time initiates processes, and space crystallizes them. God is in history, in the processes. We must initiate processes, rather than occupy spaces.”
This, of course, is all very reminiscent of Joseph Ratzinger’s statement concerning the temporality of the universe, “which knows being only in the form of becoming”. This is absolutely contrary to Catholic doctrine and Thomistic metaphysics which rightly sees each created thing as possessing a substantial form determining a specific substantial being in itself. Such “beings” or “kinds” of being do certainly experience accidental change, but they cannot cease to be “what they are” without total corruption (in the case of living things this entails their death) of their substantial form. This of course eliminates all possibility of one thing evolving into another. The notion, therefore, that created things “know being only in the form of becoming” is the great philosophical lie of our age. It is the lie which gives credence to all forms of evolutionary theory. Nor is it a lie which affects only temporal realities. The human soul can only find God in the” now” of God’s immutable Life and Truth, which is the source of his own being, and which is constant in the midst of all the changing vicissitudes of his or her life.
Space, therefore, for Pope Francis, is simply a euphemism for what we are in possession of now – in other words, what we traditional Catholics believe to be the fullness of God’s Immutable Revelation, Rules, Dogma, the Infallible Magisterium, and the reality that we each possess a substantial human nature and soul, requiring the same fundamental choice now as was true of the first man.
Time is proposed by Pope Francis as being greater than Space because “becoming” is more real than God’s Supreme Being, and takes precedence over the Revealed Truths which are the fullness of that Being. It is therefore quite easy to see why, in the mind of Pope Francis, an apparent universal mercy trumps immutable dogma – why the divorced and remarried may receive Holy Communion, why we must be “inclusive” towards practicing homosexuals (who must certainly also be admitted to Sacramental Communion if such a “mercy” holds true), and why, in fact, we must be inclusive towards everyone (except, apparently, rich capitalists, the Mafia, and possibly Traditionalists). It is the Journey into the future which is everything. There can be no Now which demands conversion to any Absolutes, and such conversion cannot be a requisite for being included within the sacramental and supernatural life of Christ’s Mystical Body.
If Time triumphs over the “space” of God’s Immutable Truth, then we float, untethered, until the life of God’s Revelation is left behind. The world, of which Satan is the Prince, has for some time rejected all Absolutes, and prostrated itself before the goddesses of evolutionary progress. This world now has a friend within the Church in the person of Pope Francis. And all of this is being done in the name of a universal mercy which is the ultimate mockery of Christ and the Truth for which He suffered and died.
Please spread the word about the Rosary!

Friday, July 12, 2019

Is the Francis Vatican a Soros & Obama NSA Deep State Operation?

Ganesh Sahathevan is a Fellow at the (American Center for Democracy) ACD’s Economic Warfare Institute.

The ACD/EWI team specializes in economic warfare, purposeful interference in civilian infrastructure, including the financial markets, transnational criminal and terrorist organizations. ACD fellow Sahathevan said Pope Francis's closest collaborator has "an illegal slush fund financed by George Soros":

"Cardinal Oscar Rodríguez Maradiaga, the so-called "Vice Pope" given his close association with Pope Francis, has refused to answer questions concerning his work with a number of NGOs funded by billionaire George Soros.Cardinal Oscar has also refused to answer queries concerning any funding he, or entities associated with him, may have received from Soros..."

"... It does appear as if the "Vice Pope" is on some campaign to change the Vatican from within, and that he is doing so with what amounts to an illegal slush fund financed by George Soros." (realpolitikasia.blogspot.com, "'Vice Pope' Cardinal Oscar Rodríguez Maradiaga does not deny being funded by George Soros,and working with the 'Catholic Spring' movement ,"February 9, 2017),[https://acdemocracy.org/ourteam/], [http://realpolitikasia.blogspot.com.au/2017/02/vice-pope-cardinal-oscar-rodriguez.html?m=1]

Financial expert Sahathevan, also, reported that the most powerful official in Francis's Vatican, Secretary of State Cardinal Pietro Parolin, apparently knew that funds not appearing on "official balance sheets" could be illegal and he may be covering up illegal slush funds and asked Francis & Parolin to "come clean":

"As reported yesterday"

""Vice Pope" Cardinal Oscar Rodríguez Maradiaga does not deny being funded by George Soros,and working with the "Catholic Spring " movement"

"In the above story it was concluded that Oscar appears to be in charge of a slush fund financed by George Soros, which is intended to be used for purposes Oscar sees fit, which may include financing of a 'Catholic Spring.'"

"While that story was the result of an independent investigation by this writer it does seem that the Vatican's Prefect of the Secretariat for the Economy, Cardinal George Pell, may have uncovered the existence of similar financial structures, even if he did not quite understand what it is he had uncovered."

"In late 2014 Pell announced that he had 'discovered that ... some hundreds of millions of euros were tucked away in particular sectional accounts (of departments within the Vatican ) and did not appear on the Vatican's balance sheet.'

"What was even more interesting than that revelation was the reaction of the Vatican's Director of the Holy See Press Office, Fr. Federico Lombardi, S.J, presumably acting under instructions from the  Vatican;s Secretary Of State  Cardinal Pietro Parolin:"

'It should be observed that Cardinal Pell has not referred to illegal, illicit or poorly administered funds, but rather funds that do not appear on the official balance sheets of the Holy See or of Vatican City State, and which have become known to the Secretariat for the Economy during the current process of examination and revision of Vatican administration...'"


"This statement was curious for Pell did not actually say that the accounts were 'illegal.' If anything Pell seemed not to understand that financial entities of any sort often have secret reserves, In fact, Pell concluded with some satisfaction that his discovery meant that the Vatican was well able to finance its activities..."

"..It does seem as if there is some concern within the Vatican that slush funds such as that which appear to be controlled by Cardinal Oscar, that ought to have been reported and accounted for as required by Canon Law, remain secret. Wikileaks and in time other publications are going to make that task  near impossible, and hence it is best that all concerned come clean."
(realpolitikasia.blogspot.com, "Vice Pope" Cardinal Oscar's Soros funding-Has the Vatican Bank acted as conduit , is it in breach of international AML,CTF and KYC regulations?,"February 14, 2017), [http://realpolitikasia.blogspot.com/2017/02/vice-pope-cardinal-oscars-soros-funding_14.html?m=1]

Sahathevan could have predicted that Francis's chief adviser later in 2017, again, would be accused of financial corruption as reported by Edward Pentin:

"One of Pope Francis’ chief advisers on Church reform has rejected allegations of financial corruption made in an Italian publication this week, but questions remain over diocesan accounting procedures...Honduran Cardinal Oscar Andrés Rodriguez Maradiaga... The documents, which the Register has obtained, show general figures denoting gross income for the archdiocese and spending running into millions of dollars, but with no particulars."

"One source with a detailed knowledge of the issue told the Register the documentation omits $1.3 million that the Honduran government gave the archdiocese to be spent on Church projects."[http://m.ncregister.com/blog/edward-pentin/cardinal-maradiaga-denies-financial-allegations-but-questions-remain-unansw#.WnVUC3OIYwh]

What financial expert Sahathevan apparently didn't know was that Parolin and Pell were in a power struggle when he reported the above. Cardinal Pell was suppose to reform the Vatican corruption including the Secretary of State's finances.

Parolin according to the Catholic Herald in a "series of power struggles" ended the outside audit and Vatican financial reform "even before" Pell was forced to return to Australia on old sex-abuse allegations. ("How Cardinal Parolin won the Vatican civil war," November 9, 2017)

As everyone knows, Pell ended up in prison on what Patrick Coffin said "even Pell's ideological foes feel this the guilty verdict is absurd." Before Pell was defeated, in his attempt to clean up the financial corruption of the Vatican old guard, by the old guard leader Parolin, Crux reported:

"[Auditor General Libero] Milone said... he and Australian Cardinal Pell... were trying to access information on APSA, traditionally among the most obscure of the Vatican's various financial players."
(Crux, "Vatican's ex-auditor ready to return, says it's 'not too late' for reform," July 28, 2018)

In the Pell power struggle shady and suspicious actions were taken by a employee of Parolin (Archbishop Angelo Becciu) on Pell collaborator former Auditor General Milone. The Auditor suspecting that he was being spied on brought in a external contractor who "determined" his computer was "infected with file copying spyware" according to LifeSiteNews.com in its September 28, 2017 article "Former Vatican auditor accused of spying says 'shady games' going on in Rome."

The website The Eye Witness reported on shady and suspicious spying done on Benedict XVI and Francis before and after the last conclave:

"It is now revealed that the NSA was tapping the phones and communications of the entire Vatican establishment, including Pope Benedict XVI and Pope Francis before, during and after the Conclave.  Is such a thing possible?  Here is one of many reports:"
 
"http://voiceofrussia.com/news/2013_10_30/Nothing-is-sacred-to-US-NSA-snoops-on-Pope-7540/..."

"In another report, from Al-Jazeera we read:
 
"Bergoglio ' had been a person of interest to the American secret services since 2005, according to Wikileaks' it said."

"The bugged conversations were divided into four categories: 'leadership intentions', 'threats to financial systems', 'foreign policy objectives' and 'human rights', it claimed."

"Why the American Secret Service considered Cardinal Bergoglio a person of interest for the past eight years is an interesting question although the Secret Service like all other US agencies is widely believed to have been corrupted, so it remains unclear as to how one should assess this piece of information or what it was about the activities of the Cardinal that prompted their extreme interest.  Still it is curious to say the very least..."

"...But if the Conclave was compromised in some way (and even if it wasn't we do know that the NSA has been listening to electronic communications of high Churchmen in Rome and probably everywhere else) then this opens up a whole new avenue of inquiry."
[http://theeye-witness.blogspot.com/2013/10/a-compromised-conclave.html?m=1]

One reason why the NSA could reasonably have been spying on Benedict and Francis at that conclave could be that the spy agency was corrupted by the Obama administration.

It is not unreasonable to assume that the administration wanted Bergoglio to replace Benedict.

Benedict's agenda put anti-abortion and moral pro-family issues as top priorities while Francis gives lip services to those issues, but sees them as secondary to his agenda which is almost identical to the Obama administration and Soros agendas such unrestricted mass immigration (See: http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2017/12/the-dark-lord-soros-his-servant-white_27.html?m=1).

Zero Hedge shows that NSA became a servant of the Democrat's agenda and it's FISA abuses:

"Donald Trump must veto reauthorized NSA spying powers which passed both the House and the Senate yesterday without a single reform, in light of an explosive four-page memo said to detail sweeping FISA Abuses by the FBI, DOJ and the Obama Administration during and after the 2016 presidential election, says former NSA contractor and whistleblower Edward Snowden." [https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-01-19/snowden-trump-must-veto-reauthorized-nsa-spying-powers-light-fisa-memo]

Another reason is related to the first reason for the spying is that the Democrats and some liberal Republicans are funded by Soros who is pushing unrestricted mass immigration:

"There does indeed seem to be a “hidden Soros Slush Fund” in the Democratic Party’s official platform, as commentator Michelle Malkin recently pointed out... Malkin suggests that Obama’s rival for the White House, John McCain, hasn’t criticized the slush fund proposal because his Reform Institute received $150,000 from the Open Society Institute." [https://capitalresearch.org/article/the-hidden-soros-slush-fund/]

The final reason for the spying, and the word could needs to be stressed, could be Democrat slush funds and financial improprieties in the Vatican Bank if the following report is true which can't be verified which brings us back to Sahathevan's call to Parolin and Francis to "come clean" as was attempted by Benedict:

"The following was reported by Bob Chapman in the International Forecaster blog. Chapman has been around forever and is well respected in many circles. He does not mention his source for the information..."

"On Wednesday 5th January 2011, it emerged that US establishment-related slush fund accounts had been located in, and seized from, the Vatican Bank in Rome. The source of funds for these accounts in almost every instance was found to be the US Treasury."

"Beneficiaries of the covert Vatican accounts include Barack Obama, Michelle Obama and each of the Obama children, Michelle Obama's mother, all the Bushes and the Clintons, including Chelsea Clinton, Joe Biden, Timothy Geithner, Janet Napolitano, several US Senators, including Mitch McConnell, several US Congressmen including John Boehner, several US Military Chiefs of Staff, the US Provost Marshal, the US Judge Advocate General, the US Supreme Court Chief Justice, John Roberts, several US Judges, the Pope, and several cardinals."

"Big money was found in each of the accounts. The longer the beneficiaries have been in office, the greater the account balances were found to be. They range from a few million USD to more than a billion USD in the case of John Roberts. The total number of slush fund accounts so far identified at the Vatican Bank is said to be between 600 and 700." [https://m.facebook.com/notes/jonas-clark/slush-fund-accounts-of-major-us-politicians-identified-and-seized-at-vatican-ban/491500200958/]

Akacatholic.com reported that evidence points to financial blackmail possibly being involved in the Pope Benedict XVI abdication who appeared to be attempting, like Pell and Milone, to uncover "financial improprieties":

"An article by Italian journalist Maurizio Blondet is making the rounds alleging that Pope Benedict XVI was blackmailed into abdication by forces allied with SWIFT (the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication), which had a hand in the shutdown of ATM and bank card services at the Vatican in January of 2012."

"According to Blondet:

There was a blackmail of Benedict XVI, coming from who knows where, through SWIFT. The underlying reasons for this have not been clarified, but it is clear that SWIFT has intervened directly in the management of affairs of the Church..."

"...It strikes me as interesting that more attention isn’t being paid to the role played by Ronaldo Hermann Schmitz, the acting President of the IOR [Vatican Bank] Board at the time, given his ties to Deutsche Bank."

"I mean, one would think that the former Deutsche Bank Executive Director, even if unable to leverage his contacts within the German banking giant to forestall such a drastic move, would have at the very least been well aware of what was coming and could have perhaps taken steps to secure the services of another financial institution, as happened in short order soon afterwards."

"This leads me to wonder where Ronaldo Hermann Schmitz’s own interests may have lied as this was taking place."

"Let me be clear; I have no information implicating Schmitz in any nefarious activity; I am simply making common sense observations and asking questions that, curiously enough, have apparently never been addresses by those in the media; in spite of the extensive coverage these events received."

"In any case, one is still left to wonder what motivated Gotti Tedeschi’s removal."

"Given that the reform of the IOR [Vatican Bank], for all intents and purposes, was all but halted while interim President Schmitz acted as caretaker until a new President could be found, one might assume that this interruption alone was the primary motive."

"It seems rather clear for reasons addressed below, however, that the motive went well beyond simply protecting the interests of those whose financial improprieties Gotti Tedeschi was laboring to uncover, making it seem far more likely Gotti Tedeshi’s demise was undertaken in order to set in motion the events that would secure the abdication of the man who appointed him."

"Circumstantial evidence strongly attesting to this being the case can be found in the fact that the Vatican reached an agreement with a Swiss firm to resume ATM and other bank card transactions effective February 12, 2013, just one day after Benedict XVI announced his intention to abdicate.

Indeed, as far as I can tell, nothing of note had changed between the cessation of bank card operations on January 1st and their resumption on February 12th relative to the Vatican Bank’s compliance with international banking standards. Rather, the only noteworthy thing to change was the status of Benedict’s pontificate."

"Further evidence suggesting that the motives for Gotti Tedeschi’s removal extended beyond mere financial concerns." [https://akacatholic.com/money-sex-and-modernism/]

All Catholics need to know the answer to the following question asked to President Donald Trump in a Open Letter by important American Catholic leaders:

Was international political financial corruption possibly involving Soros and other globalist financial subversives such as SWIFT allied with the Obama administration Deep State involved possibly in blackmailing Pope Benedict XVI before his abdication and possibly in engineering the Francis conclave?

OPEN LETTER TO PRESIDENT TRUMP:

"With all of this in mind, and wishing the best for our country as well as for Catholics worldwide, we believe it to be the responsibility of loyal and informed United States Catholics to petition you to authorize an investigation into the following questions:
To what end was the National Security Agency monitoring the conclave that elected Pope Francis? [6]

-  What other covert operations were carried out by US government operatives concerning the resignation of Pope Benedict or the conclave that elected Pope Francis?

-  Did US government operatives have contact with the “Cardinal Danneels Mafia”?  [7]

-  International monetary transactions with the Vatican were suspended during the last few days prior to the resignation of Pope Benedict.  Were any U.S. Government agencies involved in this? [8]

-  Why were international monetary transactions resumed on February 12, 2013, the day after Benedict XVI announced his resignation? Was this pure coincidence? [9]

-  What actions, if any, were actually taken by John Podesta, Hillary Clinton, and others tied to the Obama administration who were involved in the discussion proposing the fomenting of a “Catholic Spring”?

- What was the purpose and nature of the secret meeting between Vice President Joseph Biden and Pope Benedict XVI at the Vatican on or about June 3, 2011?

-   What roles were played by George Soros and other international financiers who may be currently residing in United States territory? [10]

We believe that the very existence of these unanswered questions provides sufficient evidence to warrant this request for an investigation.

Should such an investigation reveal that the U.S. government interfered inappropriately into the affairs of the Catholic Church, we further request the release of the results so that Catholics may request appropriate action from those elements of our hierarchy who remain loyal to the teachings of the Catholic Church.

Please understand that we are not requesting an investigation into the Catholic Church; we are simply asking for an investigation into recent activities of the U.S. Government, of which you are now the chief executive.
Thank you again, and be assured of our most sincere prayers.

Respectfully,

David L. Sonnier, LTC US ARMY (Retired)
Michael J. Matt, Editor of The Remnant
Christopher A. Ferrara (President of The American Catholic Lawyers Association, Inc.)
Chris Jackson, Catholics4Trump.com
Elizabeth Yore, Esq., Founder of YoreChildren"

 1. https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/6293
2.http://www.wsj.com/articles/how-pope-francis-became-the-leader-of-the-global-left-1482431940
3.http://remnantnewspaper.com/web/index.php/articles/item/2198-the-year-of-mercy-begins
4.http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/18/politics/pope-francis-trump-christian-wall/
5. https://www.donaldjtrump.com/press-releases/donald-j.-trump-response-to-the-pope
6. http://theeye-witness.blogspot.com/2013/10/a-compromised-conclave.html
7. http://www.ncregister.com/blog/edward-pentin/cardinal-danneels-part-of-mafia-club-opposed-to-benedict-xvi
8. http://www.maurizioblondet.it/ratzinger-non-pote-ne-vendere-ne-comprare/
9. https://akacatholic.com/money-sex-and-modernism/
10. http://sorosfiles.com/soros/2013/03/soros-funded-catholic-groups-behind-african-socialist-as-next-pope.html [https://www.remnantnewspaper.com/web/index.php/articles/item/3001-did-vatican-attempt-to-influence-u-s-election-catholics-ask-trump-administration-to-investigate]
 
Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church.

Thursday, July 11, 2019

Were Vatican II & America Magazine Deep State CIA Operations?

The CIA online library reports that:

"Agency files reveal the true origins of the Berlin conference... helped to solidify CIA's emerging strategy of promoting the non-Communist left... the Agency's political operations against Communism over the next two decades."

"...The [CIA] congress in Berlin rolled ahead... World-renowned philosophers John Dewey Bertrand Russell... and [non-Communist leftist] Jacques Maritain agreed to lend gravitas to the event."
(www.cia.gov./library, "Origins of Congress for Cultural Freedom, 1949-50") [https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intelligence/csi-publications/csi-studies/studies/95unclass/Warner.html]

Pope Paul VI who was obviously the top architect of Vatican II said of the possible CIA "non-Communist leftist" operative Maritain:

"I am a disciple of Maritain. I call him my teacher.
(The Remnant, "Saul Alinsky and 'Saint' Pope Paul VI: Genesis of the Conciliar Surrender to the World, by Christopher A. Ferrara, August 16, 2018) [https://remnantnewspaper.com/web/index.php/articles/item/4029-rules-for-radicals-when-paul-vi-met-saul-alinsky]

The "teacher" of the pope Maritain who collaborated with the CIA non-Communist leftist "congress in Berlin," also, collaborated with his "friend" the non-Communist leftist Saul Alinsky who he introduced to Paul VI before he became pope according to the above Remnant article.

Paul VI born Giovanni Montini "served in the Holy See's Secretariat of State from 1922 to 1954. While in the Secretariat of State, Montini and Domenico Tardini were considered as the closest and most influential advisors of Pius XII." The CIA in 2006 declassified the following OSS 1945 document that apparently connects the Secretariat of State or State Secretariat office where Montini worked at the time with Maritain:

"Sub-source stated that the appointment of Jacques Maritain as French ambassador to the Holy See one of the greatest problems to the Holy See, because Maritain... is a well-known leftist, who advocated a close collaboration with progressive-minded Catholics and radical elements, even Communists... The Maritain presence in the Vatican will be the focus of all such movement throughout the world. The State Secretariat expects Maritain to be the focus of all such movements"
(Office of Strategic Services, Date of Information: 10 February 1945, ZSOLT ARADI VOL. 1_0107, PTF doc. 11316 and [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wik i/Pope_Paul_VI])

Another possible CIA operative besides Maritain who was a top architect of Vatican II on the "Declaration on Religious Liberty" was Fr. John Courtney Murray. Church Militant reported:

""Murray and his crowd of CIA operatives and TIME Magazine won the day, helping American Catholics buy into the proposition of the separation of Church and State and calling it 'religious liberty.'"
(Church Militant, "The Vortex - The CIA's Priest," November 11, 2015) [https://www.churchmilitant.com/video/episode/vort-2015-11-11]

The Remnant, also, revealed America Magazine might be another Deep State propaganda operative:

" [The] globalist establishment... Murray, SJ, push[ed] liberalism at the Second Vatican Council with documents such as Dignitatis Humanae as well as a slew of publications... One of the major outlets through which... Murray pushed his Americanism [heresy] was... America [now edited by Francis appointed consultor to the Vatican's Secretariat for Communications Fr. James Martin]."
(The Remnant, John Podesta's Catholic Spring Part IV: America Magazine LeftCat Kitty Litter or Deep State Propaganda?". February 29, 2019) [https://remnantnewspaper.com/web/index.php/articles/item/4029-rules-for-radicals-when-paul-vi-met-saul-alinsky]

And to end on a coincidence, if Pope Pius XII hadn't died of two stokes on October 8, 1958 it is possible that Paul IV's Vatican II might never have happened since two of its main architects would have been condemned.

In 2008, the liberal Catholic World admitted that Pope Pius XII was "preparing" to condemn probably the main architect of Vatican II Jacques Maritain and another architect of the Council John Courtney Murray "who "played a role in... Declaration on Religious Liberty":

"[T]he Holy Office was preparing an official condemnation of Murray, Jacques Maritain... only the death of Pope Pius XII on October 8, 1958... prevented this from happening."
(Catholic World, "Censuring of John Courtney Murray Part Two," March/April 2008)

Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church.