The Novus Ordo Files:
NEWS ARCHIVE for October, 2011
NOTE: This month's
archive is in the process of being expanded, as there were
significant recurring computer problems during the past several weeks. If you
have benefited from the website,
please help us finally resolve this
ongoing problem (click on the button at the right to make
a donation).
If you benefit from this web site, please...
Novus Ordo Watch is not responsible for, nor necessarily endorsing, the
content of linked web pages.
Links are mainly posted for educational purposes.
A NOVUS ORDO WATCH ANALYSIS
Michael Voris's Black Hole of Forgetfulness
Occupy Wall Street, Benedict XVI and
'The Vortex'
Michael
Voris' web TV commentary "The Vortex"
usually begins more or less the same way. First, you see a
still photo of him looking preppy in his sports coat and
Justin Bieberish haircut,
while an audio track percolates with a funky slap bass guitar riff reminiscent of
the
Seinfeld theme song (of all things!), soon to be joined
by some spacey sound effects.
The program begins as he
twirls his pencil around in spirals, while greeting his
viewers with the show's tagline:
"Hello everyone and welcome to "The Vortex", where lies and falsehoods are trapped and exposed".
And to be honest, he often does a pretty good job at
exposing them…up to a point.
And what precisely
is
that point?
It's the point where he quits talking about radical
"priests" and dissident "nuns", troublesome USCCB agencies
and just about anyone or anything in the Vatican not named
Benedict XVI. No, "Pope" Ratzinger's Modernist lies and
falsehoods never get "trapped and exposed" on "The Vortex",
because they never even get discussed there; it's like they
all get pulled into a whirling vortex of a different sort―call
it
Michael Voris's Black Hole of Forgetfulness.
(Oh, occasionally Benedict gets mentioned, but only
selectively for things like issuing a decree to crack
down on
the seminaries or
Summorum Pontificum or being ignored
or misinterpreted
by Novus Ordo liberals; things that to the gullible
prove that the "Holy Father" is
really on the side of the angels.)
And then there are a few shows when Mr. Voris manages to
botch up nearly everything, as in the above commentary,
which he's entitled "Church Liberals Strike Again" (we
seriously considered calling this analysis "Michael Voris
Strikes Again", because the one-sided approach he displays
here is so typical of his program).
This time he starts out with a Benedict quote or what
appears
to be a Benedict quote..…
full report>>>
The SSPX's
dilemma
Bishop Williamson: Jews as Christ Killers
"Bishop Richard Williamson of the Society of St Pius X
(SSPX) is up to his old tricks and has angered the European
Council of Rabbis with his remarks about the Jews’ role in
the crucifixion of Jesus. The bishop believes Jews are
Christ-killers — and his latest words on the subject come as
Pope Benedict XVI begins an inter-faith summit in Assisi.
Among his many attributes, I must say Bishop Williamson has
great tim
NOW Comments:
What on earth is Bp. Williamson thinking? And what are the
SSPX and Modernist Rome plotting? On September 23rd, his
Superior in the Society, Bp. Bernard Fellay, wrote him
a stern letter
in which, among other things, he was ordered "to remain
silent" or face "the starting of the canonical procedure
leading to (your) exclusion from the SSPX."
So what does Williamson do? Three weeks later he bulls
forward, oblivious to the warning message he's acknowledged
receiving, and publishes his online Eleison Comments,
despite the threat of expulsion. To make matters worse, the
choice of subject matter was highly provocative,
like when he reviewed movies or mused about the unbelief of
composer Johannes Brahms. `continues In
addition, Fr. Michael Mary Sim, Superior of the Transalpine
Redemptorists, an order that had been associated with the
SSPX until it defected to the Novus Ordo sect in 2008,
accused Bp. Williamson of seeking "to sow trouble between
the SSPX and the Church, and between the Church and the
Jewish people" and suggests that the solution is for Bp.
Fellay to
"ask the Holy Father to defrock the
illegitimate bishop".'
A NOVUS
ORDO WATCH SPECIAL REPORT
Assisi 2011: APOSTASY REVISITED On
October 27th
Benedict XVI traveled to the Umbrian town of Assisi,
made glorious as the birthplace of both the thirteenth
century church luminary St. Francis, and the religious
order he founded, the Friars Minor (or Franciscans).
The trip was made to celebrate the 25th
Anniversary of John Paul II's World Day of Prayer for
Peace at Assisi, in which his predecessor invited "160
religious leaders spending the day together with fasting
and praying to their God or Gods. They represented 32
Christian religious organizations and 11 other
non-Christian world religions…"
In response to the first Assisi interreligious meeting,
Society of St. Pius X founder Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre
declared: "He who now sits upon the Throne of Peter
mocks publicly the first article of the Creed and the
first Commandment of the Decalogue. The scandal given to
Catholic souls cannot be measured. The Church is shaken
to its very foundations." And two years later in 1988,
when raising four men to the episcopacy, Abp. Lefebvre
would in part defend his act by saying it was in
defiance of the authorities in Modernist Rome
(significantly, "Cardinal" Ratzinger was mentioned by name),
who sought to "reduce Tradition to naught" and against
"the
spirit of Vatican II and the spirit of Assisi."
Fast-forward a quarter of a century, and one of those
four men echoes the words of Abp. Lefebvre. "Yes, we are
deeply indignant, we vehemently protest against this
repetition of the days at Assisi," declared SSPX
Superior Bishop Bernard Fellay back in January.
"Everything that we have said, everything that
Archbishop Lefebvre had said at the time of the World
Day of Prayer for Peace in Assisi in 1986, we repeat in
our own name. It is evident, my dear brothers, that such
a thing demands reparation. What a mystery!”
Well,
only a mystery if by that Bp. Fellay refers to is a
mystery of iniquity
as was sadly witnessed in 1986, in what was undoubtedly
the defining moment of the entire Assisi event,
when the Church of St. Peter was the scene of pagans
placing a statue of Buddha atop the tabernacle (right).
Over a millennium ago, Catholic churches were once built
upon the ruins of pagan temples, but now the tables had
been turned, so to speak, and an idol now stood in the
midst of a church nearly nine hundred years old.…
Lawsuit looms as school attempts to ditch co-ed dorms
Sex, booze survive at Catholic (in name only) University of
America
“'Life is Co-Ed' has become the unofficial
rallying call of the Catholic University students unhappy
and unconvinced by their president’s unprecedented decision
to revert all dormitories to single-sex living quarters."
Maybe it was all
just a big mistake…yeah, sure it was!
USCCB agency gave $1.3M in to 'gay', pro-abortion. Marxist
and other subversive groups "In 2009, American Life
League joined with several other concerned organizations to
form the Reform CCHD Now Coalition. In March of 2010, the
coalition sent a report on CCHD to each bishop, showing
that, in 2009–2010, 51 out of 237 groups receiving CCHD
funding either directly or through coalition membership
promoted abortion, birth control, homosexuality, and/or
Marxism. Thus, 21% of the groups funded by CCHD were
involved in such work."
They decide her
errors aren't compatible with theirs
USCCB committee repeats caution on
'Sister' Elizabeth Johnson book
"The doctrinal committee of the US bishops’ conference
issued a new statement about
Quest for the Living God
after the author had submitted a lengthy response to their
original criticism. In a 21-page critique issued in March,
the bishops’ committee had found that the Johnson book
'contains misrepresentations, ambiguities, and errors that
bear upon the faith of the Catholic Church as found in
Sacred Scripture, and as it is authentically taught by the
Church’s universal magisterium.'”
NOW Comments:
Let's see. It's said to contain "misrepresentations,
ambiguities, and errors that bear upon the faith of the
Catholic Church
as found in Sacred Scripture, and as it is authentically
taught by the Church’s universal magisterium (emphasis
added)." In other words, it's faithfully following the
teaching much of what's been taught since Vatican
II. So what are the Novus Ordo "bishops" getting bent out of
shape about? Rather than criticizing her, the USCCB should
be giving her an award, unless perhaps her
misrepresentations, ambiguities and errors are different
from those promoted by them…and therefore, unauthorized,
to boot!
VIDEO
Holy defiance to the blasphemy of antichrists!
French Catholic resistance to
Jesus-mocking 'theatre' doubling each day "It
started with a dozen or so Catholics from Renouveau Francais.
Then more came along to replace those who had been arrested.
By Tuesday night there were more than 150. Last night there
were more than 300. The riot police treat the French
Catholics with brutality, and arrest everyone in sight
including priests, but every night the number of protesters
has doubled. Doubtless there will be an even larger number
tonight.
"Each is liable, under Article 431-1 of the French Criminal
Code, for penalties ranging from one to three years in
prison for defending the image of Jesus from feces. Had they
been defending the Talmud or the gas chambers they would be
lauded as heroes. What is now most sacred in the West,
Christ or Antichrist?" [Left: The defaced portrait of
Christ as it appears at the end of the play, Sul
concetto di volto nel figlio di Dio (On the Concept
of the Son of God’s Face)]
NOW Comments:
We at Novus Ordo Watch salute these protestors who braved
jail time to boldly speak out against this Christ-hating
work for stage. In the wake of the protests, Italian
playwright Romeo Castellucci, in a joint statement with the
Théâtre de la ville,
denied that there was excrement on face of Christ,
merely black ink. “That’s untrue and I find the idea
horrible,” said Castellucci on 22 October and the statement
repeats the denial, saying that it represents a shroud.
Castellucci shows himself here to be a true son of the
devil, lying about the play and feigning shock and disgust
at the very idea of such a thing.
For he's the same man who just six months prior to this, far
from denying that feces was what supposed to have defaced
the portrait, had a good chuckle over this disgusting plot
device with a reporter for London's newspaper,
The Guardian:
Every evening before the curtain goes up, various
vials of steaming brown liquid must be churned in order
to get the texture, consistency – and, inevitably, the
odour – exactly right. The only consolation is that this
is synthetic prop s***: "You didn't think it was real?"
jokes Castellucci. "I don't actually produce it myself."
A play about excrement may seem like the extreme of
theatrical endeavour. But in the wider context of
Castellucci's often deeply disturbing work, s*** is just
another day in the office.… ("Romeo
Castellucci: Christ…what is that smell?")
No story of this sort would be complete, however, unless the
French Conciliar hierarchy express their support. Support
for the protestors?
No,
for the immoral play, of course. On the other hand, those
demonstrating against this wickedness hiding under the mask
of art were roundly condemned: The following passage shows
them being mislabeled as dupes and told to stop, while the
play, during one point of which "a strong smell of feces
invades the theater," is blasphemously compared in a
favorable sense to Christ's crucifixion:
Especially discouraging for
the protesters has been the fact that several bishops,
including the archbishop of Paris, Cardinal André
Vingt-Trois, and the bishop of Rennes, Mgr Pierre
d’Ornellas, were publicly interpreted Castellucci’s
dung-carting “work of art” as a legitimate portrayal of
human decadence and a thought-provoking show.
The cardinal, referencing a term coined by Lenin, named
the protesters “useful idiots” and called for the public
demonstrations to stop. Mgr d’Ornellas asked Catholics
to “take time to understand” the play: while the
stage-play is “provoking”, he wrote, no
“christianophobia is involved” and should only help
remind everyone about “the most ordinary of trivial
sufferings: man’s comedown in old age” answered by the
“profound manifestation of love” on the part of the son.
The old man “emptying himself of his dignity” should
remind us of Christ “emptying Himself ‘unto death, and
the death of the Cross’”, he added. ("
Paris 'Cardinal', several
other 'bishops' defend anti-Christian play")
Will Benedict XVI
discipline these mitered degenerates? We all know the
answer to that one. And when he does absolutely
nothing against them in defense of Our Savior, we
can be sure that the neo-traditional defenders who
foolish think he's really on the side of Catholic
Tradition (the real "useful idiots" in this
scenario) will no doubt make ridiculous new excuses
for him―the usual excuses for
the inexcusable―as
they always do (the more things change, the more they
stay the same). They are useful idiots because they
think that by upholding everything this modernist in
shepherd's clothing does (save that they can't explain
away, which conveniently gets ignored), they are working
towards the restoration of the Church, but all the while
being deceived into following the call of a false Papa.
But it's wrong to dwell on the negatives, because there
is so much to be thankful and encouraged about what's
taken place in France. Let these noble demonstrators be
inspirations and models to all Catholics, for there are
many such battles to wage in the days ahead, and we most
surely will need the same courage and fortitude to stand
up for Our Blessed Lord against the forces of darkness
who are enjoying their momentary time of triumph. In
these days, every victory for God should be celebrated
with a
Te Deum, even
our partial victories!
PLEASE WATCH FOR OUR UPCOMING INTERVIEW WITH ONE OF
THE COURAGEOUS PARTICIPANTS. EXCLUSIVE AT NOVUS ORDO
WATCH!
A fitting development
Church leaders welcome announcement on Royal Succession
"Catholic Church leaders in the
UK and Scotland have welcomed today's announcement on the
Royal Succession by the Prime Minister, David Cameron, at
the Commonwealth Heads of Government Summit in Perth,
Australia.
"The Most Reverend Vincent Nichols, Archbishop of
Westminster and President of the Catholic Bishops'
Conference of England and Wales said: 'I welcome the
decision of Her Majesty's Government to give heirs to the
throne the freedom to marry a Catholic without being removed
from the line of succession. This will eliminate a point of
unjust discrimination against Catholics and will be welcomed
not only by Catholics but far more widely. At the same time
I fully recognize the importance of the position of the
Established Church in protecting and fostering the role of
faith in our society today.…'"
NOW Comments:
This reminds us a little of the famous quote from the late
Franciscan Fr. Carl Pulvermacher that goes:
"Once there are no more valid priests they'll
permit the Latin Mass." Today, if any royal fiancée were to
be a "Catholic", it's highly likely that it would
be the kind who'd have no
problem with the Anglican/neo-Druid "Archbishop of
Canterbury", Rowan Williams, co-officiating the wedding
ceremony! Certainly the differences between the Novus Ordo
and Anglican sects are growing fewer and fewer, so the expression "disparity of cult"
doesn't have as much the
in this regard. And for that matter, it's probably not out
of the question for L'Osservatore Romano to one day
issue an apology for the trouble the Church inflicted on the
Tutors several centuries ago,
"One in four Americans call themselves
Catholic, but a survey released Monday finds this is more a
cultural brand label for many than a religious identity."
Abuse scandal goes on unabated
Cloistered 'priest' gets prison on sex charge
"A Melkite cloistered priest, who pleaded no
contest in September to the indecent assault of a
14-year-old boy, offered no apology to the victim at his
sentencing Thursday in Susquehanna County Court.
"The Rev. Philip Ferrara, 49, was sentenced to six to 24
months in state prison by President Judge Kenneth Seamans.
He also must undergo a sexual offender evaluation and
receive treatment."
Really?
Don't believe it!
Obama is alienating 'Catholic' voters "Catholics
make up about a quarter of the American electorate and have
backed the popular-vote winner in every presidential
election since 1972. That track record continued through
2008: While weekly churchgoing Catholics slightly favored
Sen. John McCain, Catholics as a whole backed President
Barack Obama by a margin of 54 to 45 percent.
"Given the role Catholics played in Obama's 2008 victory and
their habit of picking presidential winners, you might think
that an embattled president with a 40-percent approval
rating would be working overtime to solidify his support
among this crucial voting bloc. Instead, Obama seems intent
on convincing Catholics that their faith in him was
unwarranted."
St. Louis Post Dispatch
columnist Colleen Carroll Campbell
argues that because Obama has reneged on the pledge he made
at Notre Dame to work with pro-lifers to find "common
ground" (sic)
on the abortion issue, while pushing "for a mandate that
would require Catholic institutions to violate the teachings
of their church by covering contraceptives in their health
care plans – including sterilization and drugs that induce
abortions," he runs the risk of losing the bloc of
"Catholic" voters who in 2008 helped propel him to the White
House.
We at Novus Ordo Watch beg to differ with Campbell's
appraisal. Mightn't some who voted for him then, withhold
their support in 2012? Sure, but we submit those will be few
and far between. Why is this?
Simple. No true Catholics or other intelligent, well-informed pro-lifers voted for
Obama…none.
They were the ones who were rightly alienated by him from
the start (as should all people of good will), for they knew that not only was he an avid defender
of (among other things)
abortion "rights", but while a State Senator in Illinois
infamously
opposed a measure that would protect
abortion survivors from infanticide.
So notorious an enemy of the unborn, then, was Obama at the
time of his Presidential candidacy in '08 that there
seemingly was no way that anyone in the Novus Ordo "Church"
could reasonably vote for him, given that sect's supposed
pro-life policies.
Of course, the operative word there is "supposed", because
behind all of the hypocritical doubletalk mimicking Catholic
social teachings, is a pronounced contempt for the unborn
(yes, there are some in that sect who truly are pro-life,
yet lamentably are all too ready to accept the words of their
false shepherds without paying sufficient attention to the
lack of positive action consistent with those words).
And this isn't anything new. In 1973, when the post-Vatican
II subversion of the Church had been moving virtually
unobstructed for nearly a decade, Supreme Court Associate
Justice William Brennan, a Catholic in name only, was
allowed to remain in the "Church" despite being one of the
most significant facilitators of legal abortion, when he
voted with the majority to impose neo-pagan legalized
slaughter of the unborn in the
Roe vs. Wade
decision. Not only was Brennan
not
excommunicated, at his
death 24 years later, he was
given a 'Catholic' burial
out of St. Matthew's Cathedral in Washington, DC.
More recently, Senator Ted Kennedy, one of the greatest
enemies of the unborn, was
similarly honored in Boston
two years ago, where he was eulogized as "a wonderful
Catholic" at a service presided over by the phony
conservative pro-lifer "Cardinal" Sean O'Malley, who
defended his presiding over the funeral against pro-life
critics, whom he sternly accused of doing "irreparable
damage to the communion of the Church (sic)."
(When O'Malley gives Kennedy a "requiem" with all the pomp
and circumstance that his pseudo-Catholic "Church" can
muster, then he can be safely added to the list of
"prelates" who are PLINOs, that is Pro-Life In Name Only.)
And
then there's the ongoing respect shown to leaders who uphold
the "rights" of the baby killers at even the highest levels
of the Vatican II "Church", including Benedict XVI (shown at
right shaking hands with Obama, as he warmly welcomes him to
the Vatican―remember
to wipe the blood off, Your Phoniness).
The argument by some that Benedict "had" to meet with him
because a Pope is unconditionally required to meet foreign
leaders and dignitaries is false (Fr. Ratzinger's bogus
claims to the Chair of Peter notwithstanding), as has been
shown on numerous occasions down through history.
In recent times, Pope St. Pius X famously
refused
an audience with Theodore Rooseveltin 1910, because former
President had announced his intention to address a Methodist
group while in Rome. Can anyone imagine St. Pius X would
have graced with a meeting the likes of a notorious,
unrepentant proponent of abortion and infanticide (not to
mention "gay rights")?!
Just think how much of a public relations coup with Novus
Ordo "Catholics" it was for Obama, to be welcomed at St.
Peters and photographed exchanging smiles and gifts with the
man that so many confusedly look to as Pope. Don't think
that the Obama reelection team isn't going to exploit this
to the hilt with the Vatican II crowd, along with his being
honored for his contributions to jurisprudence (sic―what
a sick joke, honoring a man whose entire public career has
shown him as someone who has contempt for both Divine Law
and Natural Law, not to mention Constitutional Law) at the
law schools of prestigious ex-Catholic universities.
This carries over into the "sacramental" life of the
counterfeit "Church", as well, with the reception of
what passes for communion by abortion enablers like Vice President Joe Biden,
and Senators John Kerry and Nancy Pelosi, to name a few
(oh sure, there are a some Conciliar "bishops" and "priests" who
at least in theory―and a few in fact―refuse it to such public figures, but
such clerics are in a pronounced minority and viewed as
irrelevant oddballs, since the politicians find can easily
enough find many, many others who readily
will
give it to them―in the Novus Ordo "Church at the very least
there obviously is no enforced, across-the-board policy to
which all clerics must adhere).
But getting back to the Campbell column we can see by the
foregoing examples that Conciliar staunch pro-lifers in the
United States cannot count on the support of the their
leaders to stand up for the unborn. In fact, the in 2008 the
USCCB made sure that Obama would get the support of lukewarm
defenders of life, by providing them with a readymade excuse
that we paraphrase as: "I'm voting for a relentlessly
pro-abortion candidate, but I'm
not
voting for him for that reason", thus reducing this from a
non-negotiable issue (battling the ongoing legal approval of
mortally sinful
acts) down to the rank of those that are morally neutral,
such as whether or not, say, to raise taxes for road
maintenance. (Hey,
it just one issue out of many, no big deal!).
Considering this sort of background, there is absolutely no
reason to expect some mass exodus away from Obama in the
next election. By and large, the U.S. "bishops" supported
him last time around (though feigning a nonpartisan
position) and that shouldn't change. Sure, like before
they'll whine about this or that provision of his socialist
healthcare plan, but it should be recalled that they've
always defended Obamacare in general. And that's going to
equate business as usual: Them falling back on their
sinister "okay to vote for pro-abortion politicians for other reasons"
dictum that in the end will permit the electoral
fence-sitters to vote again for Obama with clear, if misled
and gravely malformed, consciences. In the end, this is yet
another solid reason to reject these men as having the
slightest legitimate authority in the Catholic Church and to
vigorously oppose their claims to the contrary.
Open
Letter to John Vennari
"The operative clause in canon 18 is: '…as for those things that remain
unclear or in doubt…' Now, canon 188.4 is very clear textually – it means
that if certain conditions exist (like public defection from the faith), 'any office becomes vacant upon the fact and without declaration...' When
John Paul II declared before a Jewish audience in a synagogue in Mainz,
Germany in 1980 that the Old Covenant had not been revoked by God, a public
defection of faith occurred. There was nothing unclear. There was no doubt.
Every requirement of formal heresy was present: a public denial of Catholic
dogma and pertinacity.[31] Canon 2314 is included under the Third Part (On
penalties for individual delicts) of the Fifth Book (On Delicts and
Penalties), Title 11 (On delicts against the faith and unity of the Church)
of the 1917 Code of Canon Law. Canon 2314 states in para. 1, 'All apostates
from the Christian faith and each and every heretic or schismatic: 1. Incur
by that fact excommunication.'
"This is exactly what popes, fathers and
doctors of the Church, theologians and canonists of the Church have been
teaching for centuries: excommunication is ipso facto when the sins of
heresy, apostasy, or schism are committed. 2314.2 states, “Unless they [all
apostates, heretics, and schismatics] respect warnings, they are deprived of
benefice, dignity, pension, office, or other duty that they have in the
Church, they are declared infamous, and [if] clerics, with the warning being
repeated, [they are] are deposed [sic].' juridical process (trial) is
indicated here, and therefore, 2314.2 does not apply, because being the
supreme legislator, a pope cannot be judged by an ecclesiastical court. As
A. Vermeersch wrote, 'At least according to the more common teaching, the
Roman Pontiff as a private teacher can fall into manifest heresy. Then,
without any declaratory sentence (for the supreme See is judged by no one),
he would automatically (ipso facto) fall from power which he who is no
longer a member of the Church is unable to possess.'”
Two
of a kind
Liber Accusationis Quartus: From John Paul II to Benedict
XVI
"Here we find the explanation of the Pope’s refusal to
consecrate Russia, which the Most Blessed Virgin Mary explicitly
demanded at Fatima. In the eyes of the Pope, this demand is…
diabolical, yes indeed! Benedict XVI identifies it with the
third temptation by which the Devil offers Jesus domination
over the world.
"According to him, what is the 'true content' of
this third temptation? The Pope observes that, 'in
history, it continually takes a new form'. The
very first form was that of 'the Christian Empire…'after Constantine’s conversion!
"Practically speaking, it amounts to mistaking the motto of
St. Pius X, Omnia instaurare in Christo, with the third
temptation of Jesus in the desert. It amounts to saying that
the reign of the Capetians, in the kingdom of St. Louis was
the reign of the Devil and that Joan of Arc was a witch…
Here, in the writings of the Pope, one can discern the tip
of the Devil’s tail. For, according to him, "concrete
political and social structures have been sent from the
immediate sphere of the sacred, from the legislation of
divine law, to the liberty of man…'
"This means to democracy, which banishes all other
sacred authority from political, economical and social life.
According to Benedict XVI, this abdication of "divine
law" in favor of "the liberty of man"
goes back to evangelical times. Nevertheless, it has
remained misunderstood until the time of the
“Enlightenment”, which the Church condemned up until the
Second Vatican Council, which finally 'canonized' them."
more >>>
What is represented above?
A ghost? A skull? A space alien?
No, none of the above. The answer may
come as a shock. Click below to find out…
What it is and why it matters
Please consider
donating to this important cause if it is within your means. All for
the Greater Glory of God and the salvation of souls!
Fair Use Notice:
This web site may contain copyrighted material the use of which may
not always have been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are
making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of
political, human, religious, and social issues. We believe this constitutes
a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as
provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. For more information
go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use
copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond
'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
The SSPX's
dilemma
VIDEO
Two
of a kind
