nowire2.jpg



news-digest2.jpg

     Published May 21, 2015

Sometimes words just fail...


Listen Free Online...

Sermon Series:
“Satan will Try to Deceive Even the Elect”
Part 1

bp-mark-pivarunas.jpg


Most Rev. Mark A. Pivarunas


As part of their ongoing broadcast series “From the Pulpit,” our friends at The Restoration Radio Network are making available a very informative multi-part sermon by His Excellency, Bishop Mark Pivarunas, CMRI, on the ways in which Satan is trying to deceive even the elect, as warned by our Blessed Lord Jesus Christ in Matthew 24:24: “For there shall arise false Christs and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders, insomuch as to deceive (if possible) even the elect.

The following description of Part 1 of Bp. Pivarunas’ sermon is adapted from Restoration Radio:


Bishop Pivarunas starts off this series by explaining the different types of truth with examples. His Excellency then delves into the different states of our minds. Using examples, Bishop Pivarunas teaches us how we can apply this knowledge in theology and in everyday life.

We live in confusing times with an abundance of religions. As we know, there is only one true religion, and the concept of indifference is condemned by the Church. Vatican II has slyly and diabolically placed heresy in its teachings, and even though we know Vatican II is a false religion that came from a false church, its teachings can slip into our minds as truth if we are not on our guard.

Listen in on this series as Bishop Pivarunas points out the objective falsities we are constantly presented with in today’s times, and why they are wrong, so that we will not be deceived.

 

CLICK HERE TO LISTEN to Part 1 of this sermon. On the page that opens, scroll down until you see the big red “FREE” button — right underneath it, you will find the podcast player. Simply click on the triangular PLAY symbol to stream the show online, or click on the little cloud symbol at the bottom right of the player to download the episode for offline listening.

A great companion piece to this sermon broadcast is our post on Cardinal Manning and his predictions, based on his research of the Church Fathers and approved theologians, of how the Great Apostasy will unfold and prepare the way for the Antichrist:


See the list of links below for more informative broadcasts by Restoration Radio and other items of interest.

Related Links:



The gospel according to Francis...

Francis and the Gospel of Man

francis-cross.jpg

Bergoglio’s cross has no Christ on it, because in his gospel the Redemption is essentially irrelevant


On May 12, 2015, the leader of the Vatican II Sect, Jorge Bergoglio (“Pope Francis”), used the opportunity of the 20th General Assembly of Caritas Internationalis to preach a sermon advancing his false humanist gospel that reduces the essence of Christianity to the service of the earthly needs of our neighbor, as though God became incarnate simply to encourage us to feed the hungry, shelter the homeless, and give alms to the poor. 

The full text of Francis’ sermon can be found here:


Co-opting the Scripture reading of Acts 16:22-34 for his humanist agenda, Francis claimed:

The story tells us that the man immediately took the necessary steps on the path towards faith and salvation: together with his household, he listened to the Word of the Lord; washed the wounds of Paul and Silas; received Baptism with his entire family; and finally, full of joy, he welcomed Paul and Silas into his home, setting the table and offering them something to eat.

    The Gospel, proclaimed and believed, urges us to wash the feet and the wounds of the suffering and to prepare the table for them. The simplicity of the gestures, where the acceptance of the Word and the sacrament of Baptism are accompanied by the welcome of the brother, as if these were indeed one single gesture: to welcome God and to welcome others; to welcome others with the grace of God; to welcome God and express this act in the service to our brothers and sisters. Word, Sacraments and service refer to and nourish each other, as can already be seen in these testimonies of the early Church.


This exposition is quite misleading. Giving a quick verbal nod to the jailer’s conversion to Christ, the Argentinian antipope turns the focus on the fact the man treated the wounds of St. Paul and Silas and prepared a meal for them. Yet, the whole tenor of the actual text is one of salvation, one of passing from the kingdom of darkness to the Kingdom of God, where the washing of the wounds of the two prisoners set free and the meal in which they all partook was just a minor, fairly insignificant detail. Read the passage for yourself:

And the people ran together against them; and the magistrates rending off their clothes, commanded them to be beaten with rods. And when they had laid many stripes upon them, they cast them into prison, charging the gaoler to keep them diligently. Who having received such a charge, thrust them into the inner prison, and made their feet fast in the stocks. And at midnight, Paul and Silas praying, praised God. And they that were in prison, heard them.

And suddenly there was a great earthquake, so that the foundations of the prison were shaken. And immediately all the doors were opened, and the bands of all were loosed. And the keeper of the prison, awaking out of his sleep, and seeing the doors of the prison open, drawing his sword, would have killed himself, supposing that the prisoners had been fled. But Paul cried with a loud voice, saying: Do thyself no harm, for we all are here. Then calling for a light, he went in, and trembling, fell down at the feet of Paul and Silas. And bringing them out, he said: Masters, what must I do, that I may be saved?

But they said: Believe in the Lord Jesus, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house. And they preached the word of the Lord to him and to all that were in his house. And he, taking them the same hour of the night, washed their stripes, and himself was baptized, and all his house immediately. And when he had brought them into his own house, he laid the table for them, and rejoiced with all his house, believing God.

(Acts 16:22-34; underlining added.)


Clearly, the focus of the passage is the jailer’s salvation, having turned from an enemy of Christ to a member of His Body, he and his entire household. True, his conversion immediately resulted in corporal works of charity, which indeed flow from a living Faith — but aiding our neighbor in his temporal needs is not the purpose of conversion, or of Faith, or of the Church. This is something Francis entirely fails to mention, and this failure is so serious that it completely distorts the Gospel. After all, one need certainly not be a Catholic or even believe in the Divinity of Christ to be kind to one’s neighbor.

Bergoglio habitually transposes the end and the means: Charity towards our fellow man is not an end in itself, to which our Faith is but the means; rather, the end is union with God, to which Faith working through charity is a means. The distinction is crucial, because if the former were true, then it would follow that any religion that produces such corporal works of mercy is acceptable, and it ultimately does not matter per se what one believes (which is exactly what Francis believes given how he acts). But in the latter case, works of charity are not the end but the means to arriving at a blessed eternity, and only if they are joined to Faith. For just as Faith without works is dead (see Jas 2:24), neither will works without Faith accomplish our salvation (see Gal 2:16; Heb 11:6).

When the jailer in Acts 16 asked the Apostle and his companion what he ought to do to be saved, the two men of God did not respond by saying, “Feed the homeless, help the poor, treat the sick.” Rather, they said, “Believe in the Lord Jesus.” Can you remember the last time you heard Francis exhort non-Christians to believe in the Lord Jesus, to forsake their idols, to abandon their false worship and convert their hearts and minds to the only true and living God (cf. 1 Thess 1:9; Jn 17:3; 1 Jn 5:20), who alone is the Way, the Truth, and the Life, and apart from Whom they will not have eternal life (see Jn 14:6)? No? Neither can we. What we do remember, however, is that Francis obediently hid his pectoral cross before the Jews in Jerusalem and told Muslims that they could draw abundant spiritual fruit from their observance of Ramadan.

francis-hidden-crucifix2.jpg

Jorge Bergoglio being a “witness of Christ”


Francis’ religion is not the true Catholic religion, as it was known for 1,900 years until the death of the last known Pope, Pius XII (1958); rather, it is a humanistic religion that focuses on man rather than God and has its origins and finds its ideals in the doctrines of the Freemasons, who preach a secular liberty, fraternity, and equality. God is used merely to provide an incentive to people to engage in service to their fellow man. In this distortion of true religion, everything is owed to man and nothing is owed to God except perhaps insofar as it is owed to man.

But let us return to Bergoglio’s sermon once more. Notice how in the following quote, the papal pretender does mention Christ, but only in order to promote his soup-kitchen gospel of serving man’s earthly needs. Our Lord is reduced to a prop for encouraging people to help others — Faith in Him is being mentioned only in relation to how it manifests itself in charitable deeds done to other humans:

Whoever lives the mission of Caritas is not a simple charitable worker, but is a true witness of Christ. He is a person who seeks Christ and allows Christ to seek him; people who love with the spirit of Christ, a spirit of gratuitousness and gift. All of our strategies and plans remain empty unless we carry this love in us. Not our love, but His. Or better yet: our love, purified and strengthened by His love. 

In this way, we can serve everyone and set the table for all. This is also a beautiful image that the Word of God offers us today: setting the table. Even now, God sets the table of the Eucharist. Caritas sets many tables for the hungry. In recent months you launched the great campaign “One human family, food for all”. There are still so many people today who do not have enough to eat. The planet has enough food for all, but it seems that there is a lack of willingness to share it with everyone. We ought to set the table for all, and ask that there be a table for all. We must do what we can so that everyone has something to eat, but we must also remind the powerful of the Earth that God will call them to judgement one day and there it will be revealed if they really tried to provide food for Him in every person (cf. Matt. 25:35) and if they did what they could to preserve the environment so that it could produce this food.


Although it is true that if we truly love Christ, we will also love our neighbor and serve him through works of charity, it is likewise true that the state of sanctifying grace — impossible without
Faith — is necessary for our charitable deeds to have any supernatural merit, in order for them to help us attain to a blessed eternity. What Bergoglio should have said and done is used the opportunity to remind all at Caritas that while serving man’s temporal needs is essential, this must be merely the stepping stone to bring all to Christ so that their earthly existence will not have been lived in vain: “Labour not for the meat which perisheth, but for that which endureth unto life everlasting, which the Son of man will give you” (Jn 6:27). Let your bodily feeding of the hungry be but the first step to caring for their souls — feed the hungry with bread now but then with the true doctrine and the Supersubstantial Bread, the very flesh of our Blessed Lord Himself:

Your fathers did eat manna in the desert, and are dead. This is the bread which cometh down from heaven; that if any man eat of it, he may not die. I am the living bread which came down from heaven. If any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever; and the bread that I will give, is my flesh, for the life of the world. The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying: How can this man give us his flesh to eat? Then Jesus said to them: Amen, amen I say unto you: Except you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you. He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath everlasting life: and I will raise him up in the last day.

(Jn 6:49-55)


Our Lord, too, fed the hungry, but as soon as they were filled, He preached the true, saving doctrine to them, pointing out that ultimately the soul matters more than the body, for the body must necessarily go into the grave either way: “Jesus answered them, and said: Amen, amen I say to you, you seek me, not because you have seen miracles, but because you did eat of the loaves, and were filled
” (Jn 6:26).

This is the Catholic way to look at the corporal works of mercy. Francis’ excessive focus on the needs of the body, however, distort this beautiful truth, and ultimately make what would be works of great charity into deeds that harm the Gospel. Francis blathers on about how the charitable worker is a “witness of Christ” who “loves with the spirit of Christ”, thus making it appear as though he is preaching Christ, yet never does he clearly exhort people to work for the salvation of souls from eternal damnation, to convert them from a false religion to the true religion, allowing souls to be transferred from the darkness of sin to the Kingdom of God. Rather, as his cover he seeks refuge behind banalities and generalities about “witnessing” with the “love of Christ”, which are so vague that one cannot see why this love should be peculiar to our Lord Jesus Christ or His holy Catholic Church and why it couldn’t be found in or through other religions which also help meet the bodily needs of our neighbor.

Watch the following brief video, which features “Pope” Francis endorsing the humanitarian work of Caritas, leaving the focus, as always, on the needs of this world, with no thought whatsoever given to man’s spiritual needs, the eternal salvation of his soul, and the true worship that God has a strict right to demand from His rational creatures:

Masonic doctrine under the guise of the corporal works of mercy: the importance of man’s temporal needs is exaggerated to the point of neglecting and denying his spiritual needs


The logical corollary of all this is, of course, that no one needs the office of the papacy at all. No one needs a Catholic Church even. If it’s ultimately just a welfare club, a glorified version of the boy scouts or the local soup kitchen — an NGO, in other words — , then no one needs such an expensive establishment as the Vatican II Sect to run all this. No one needs a “Pope” to tell us to feed the hungry, clothe the naked, or help the infirm. Some verbal assurances that it is “bringing Christ” to the world won’t change that. For a Buddhist it might be ensuring good future karma. For an atheist it might just be about “making a difference” because “it’s the right thing to do”. But the logical conclusion then is that all religions are substantially the same, differing only in accidental things, having different banners, names, labels, and “flavors”. But ultimately, it’s all the same. 

That is what logically follows from the false humanitarian gospel of Jorge Bergoglio. It is the Modernist apostasy to a tee. It is the religion of man: by man, of man, for man; God is invoked only to give an impetus to one’s service to man, to set in motion, accelerate, or explain one’s efforts. The dimension of the whole business remains entirely horizontal; its only focus is the temporal needs of man, this world and this world alone. Heaven and hell, if they are brought up at all, are only used to promise man a great reward for his service or to threaten him with punishment if he should neglect this man-centered religion.

And indeed, Francis does exactly this — threaten people with hell if they don’t feed the poor enough — by referencing Matthew 25 and saying: “God will call them [the leaders of the world] to judgement one day and there it will be revealed if they really tried to provide food for Him in every person (cf. Matt. 25:35) and if they did what they could to preserve the environment so that it could produce this food.” It is ironic that Francis again makes a reference to judgment and, in a veiled way, to hell, because this is the same Francis who said that the Last Judgment will be a party and that hell is really just the annihilation of souls rather than their eternal punishment.

Will we be judged by whether we clothed the naked, fed the hungry, gave drink to the thirsty, and so forth? Yes, we will indeed, as our Lord warned in Matthew 25. However, what’s more important — and what Francis continually fails to point out — is that all the good deeds in the world will ultimately have been of no value if we did them for a merely natural motive and if we did them without sanctifying grace, for which the virtue of Faith is absolutely necessary: “But without faith it is impossible to please God” (Heb 11:6).

As our Lord taught in the Gospel, if we did clothe the naked, feed the hungry, and so forth, but we did so without the “wedding garment” of sanctifying grace, we will likewise be condemned to hell: “And he saith to him: Friend, how camest thou in hither not having a wedding garment? But he was silent. Then the king said to the waiters: Bind his hands and feet, and cast him into the exterior darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth” (Mt 22:12-13). 

francis-hugs-needle-face.jpg

This man could get a job as a pincushion at Gammarelli’s...
© LaPresse / Source: lastampa.it


H
ere are some more Scripture passages that put Francis’ eco-soup-kitchen gospel into a completely different light, passages he could have quoted but didn’t:

  • …[I]f you believe not that I am he [the Redeemer of the world], you shall die in your sin. (Jn 8:24)
  • Behold, he that is unbelieving, his soul shall not be right in himself: but the just shall live in his faith. (Hab 2:4)
  • Whosoever revolteth, and continueth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that continueth in the doctrine, the same hath both the Father and the Son. (2 Jn 1:9)
  • He that believeth and is baptized, shall be saved: but he that believeth not shall be condemned. (Mk 16:16)
  • He that believeth in the Son, hath life everlasting; but he that believeth not the Son, shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him. (Jn 3:36)
  • But without faith it is impossible to please God. (Heb 11:6)
  • But knowing that man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ; we also believe in Christ Jesus, that we may be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: because by the works of the law no flesh shall be justified. (Gal 2:16)


Obviously, no one has to believe that Christ is the Son of God in order to agree that we should help starving children. So, the purpose of our Faith is not so we would practice the corporal works of mercy. Their practice is necessary of course, because charity is an indispensable requirement for salvation (see 1 Cor 13:2), but fulfilling our neighbors’ temporal needs is ultimately not the reason why Christ came to earth and established His Church. Bergoglio’s religion neutralizes our Lord and His Gospel in a most diabolical way. Francis denies Christ not by denying Him outright, but by falsifying Him, by twisting His message.

Doing this, Francis acts in a manner characteristic of all Modernists, whom Pope St. Pius X denounced as “the most pernicious of all the adversaries of the Church” (Encyclical Pascendi, n. 3): Francis preaches error by mixing truth with falsehood; specifically, by exaggerating a truth (the necessity of engaging in corporal works of mercy) and then omitting other truths (e.g., the necessity of Faith and of practicing the spiritual works of mercy) that contradict his distortion of truth. 

In the false humanitarian gospel of Jorge Bergoglio, the conversion and salvation of souls is entirely eclipsed. Francis’ religion is a cruel mutilation of Christ and His saving Truth. Our Blessed Lord, the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity, is being reduced to the status of merely being a “good teacher” (cf. Lk 18:19), a nice fellow whose job it was to encourage all of us to help one another, be kind to one another, and live an earthly existence with as little conflict, grief, or suffering as possible.

This, ladies and gentlemen, is not the Gospel. This is the Anti-Gospel. God didn’t need to become man just so that we would give food to the hungry. God didn’t suffer the Passion and die on the Cross so that we would save the trees or have a recycling program. God didn’t defeat death and the powers of hell so that we would seek our happiness in created things. The sobering words of St. John the Apostle come to mind: “And every spirit that dissolveth Jesus, is not of God: and this is Antichrist, of whom you have heard that he cometh, and he is now already in the world” (1 Jn 4:3); “For many seducers are gone out into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh: this is a seducer and an antichrist” (2 Jn 1:7).

Francis’ gospel is evil, wicked, blasphemous. When in an interview he was asked for advice on how to find true happiness, he gave ten tips that were entirely naturalist and worldly — and downright laughable and embarrassing. God was not even so much as mentioned:


Francis loves to dwell on the corporal works of mercy, because they are those that focus mostly on the here and now and are acceptable to most, regardless of what religion they follow — thus he is guaranteed to win the applause of the world. It is the spiritual works of mercy that the Argentinian apostate usually ignores, minimizes, misapplies, or distorts, paying them lipservice while neutralizing their very essence. 

As a reminder, the spiritual works of mercy are the following:

  • To instruct the ignorant;
  • To counsel the doubtful;
  • To admonish sinners;
  • To bear wrongs patiently;
  • To forgive offences willingly;
  • To comfort the afflicted;
  • To pray for the living and the dead.


(Source)


The first three are the biggest thorns in Francis’ side, who is on record stating that as long as a needy child gets an education, he does not care whether the child is raised Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, or whatever; he is on record admonishing people
not to evangelize; he has publicly stated that Jews do not need Jesus Christ and that Muslims should study the Koran instead of the Bible; and he has repeatedly told Protestants they need not or ought not to become Catholic. Indeed, he holds to and spreads the heresy that non-Catholics can be martyrs for Christ. Francis is extremely dangerous and extremely two-faced (see examples here). If his mouth had six sides, he would speak out of all six of them.

dalai-lama-francis-logo.jpg

Granted, we replaced Francis with the Dalai Lama in this logo,
but would anyone know the difference in terms of the message?


Some will say that Francis is being misrepresented by the media. This may be true
to an extent; however, it would be entirely wrong-headed to blame the media for their coverage of a man who continually issues ambiguous and vague statements about matters that he knows the press will cover in a certain way. There is a man who cannot stop talking, who loves to speak in figurative terms, who is never clear in what he says, who has a history of liberalism, who constantly engages in ambiguous or downright heretical, scandalous, and impious actions (see the Laundry List here), and who has made “climate change” the focus of his own first encyclical letter in a world which is drowning in apostasy, heresy, moral filth, and impiety.

Folks, don’t blame this on the media. Francis is merely allowing the media to be used as a scapegoat by those with their heads in the sand. If he really had a problem with what the media are reporting, he could act very unambiguously at any point: He could stop the daily stream-of-consciousness sermons, the stupid interviews, the endless addresses and off-the-cuff remarks at audiences, the worshipping of migrants, and so forth. He could issue an encyclical or other text denouncing all the evils of the modern world. He could call a press conference and issue a thundering condemnation of everything that is wrong with the world and with the press in particular. He could do all these things — but he will not. He will not because, overall, the media’s representation of him is quite accurate.

The fact that Francis may express himself ambiguously and then “clarify” things later, or say one thing and then say the opposite at another time, is simply an indication that he has mastered the Modernist art of doublespeak, a most pernicious technique of injecting the poison of heresy into gullible and innocent souls while retaining plausible deniability. This method was already exposed and condemned in no uncertain terms in 1794 by Pope Pius VI, who noted that:

...seemingly shocking affirmations in one place are further developed along orthodox lines in other places, and even in yet other places corrected; as if allowing for the possibility of either affirming or denying the statement, or of leaving it up to the personal inclinations of the individual – such has always been the fraudulent and daring method used by innovators to establish error. It allows for both the possibility of promoting error and of excusing it.

(Pope Pius VI, Bull Auctorem Fidei, introd.)


Make sure you read the introduction of Auctorem Fidei in its entirety at the link above — it contains more papal gems condemning Liberalism and its deceptive tactics.

Our analysis of Francis’ words is not unjust or mistaken. In fact, it is confirmed not only by his own words but also by his endless actions that prove again and again that he cares about bodies to the detriment of souls (and certainly about man over God). The “mission” Francis always talks about is ultimately directed at meeting man’s temporal needs, which he calls the “fruit” of the “Gospel”. But while the corporal works of mercy are part of the fruit of the Gospel, part of a living Faith, they are only a temporal fruit and must be done for the love of God, who is our ultimate end, and before whom we can only be justified by grace through Faith.

Francis’ overemphasis on easing the plight of the suffering has reached ridiculous proportions now — he recently told his followers they should kneel before the poor. Not surprisingly, we see people like Barack Obama take advantage of the new “papal” tone:


Don’t say that Francis couldn’t foresee this. He could and did, and besides, why doesn’t he come out now and denounce Obama in no uncertain terms? Whenever we cause scandal (whether by mistake or deliberately), we have an obligation to redress it, and we must do so in the same way in which the scandal was caused (i.e. in this case, publicly).

Here is a good rule of thumb: A supposedly legitimate shepherd of souls who constantly focuses on the temporal needs of man while at the same time neglecting or even directly attacking his spiritual needs, is not a shepherd but a hireling, a wolf, an antichrist. He is like a paramedic who does all in his power to ease the headache of a man who is running towards the edge of a cliff. As good as it may be, in itself, to ease the pain of a headache, it is ultimately not an act of charity at all if the man isn’t being kept from running off the cliff.

In all his endless blathering about the sufferings of humanity, Francis omits an all-important fact: We were not created for this world. We were created for eternity. Before long, all of us will have passed out of this world and entered eternity, and there we will remain for ever and ever, and it will be either eternal bliss or eternal suffering. This is for certain — all of us will enter either Heaven or hell, for ever. There is no in-between (except, of course, the Limbo of Infants, but this does not apply to anyone reading this post).

Francis’ false humanitarian gospel is not new, by the way. It is as old as original sin itself. The great spiritual writer Fr. Edward Leen in his masterful work, Why the Cross?, put it very well when he denounced “those dreams that the enemies of God [!] are ever vainly hoping to realise, dreams of an earthly paradise to be achieved by vast plans for the reorganisation of the world. Man, in his perversity, never abandons the hope of scaling the heavens by force of arm and might of intellect” (Leen, Why the Cross? [Sheed & Ward, 1938], p. 163).

Those dreams are vain indeed, as they are doomed to failure. As Pope St. Pius X explained:

...the City cannot be built otherwise than as God has built it; society cannot be setup unless the Church lays the foundations and supervises the work; no, civilization is not something yet to be found, nor is the New City to be built on hazy notions; it has been in existence and still is: it is Christian civilization, it is the Catholic City. It has only to be set up and restored continually against the unremitting attacks of insane dreamers, rebels and miscreants. OMNIA INSTAURARE IN CHRISTO [TO RESTORE ALL THINGS IN CHRIST].


(Pope St. Pius X, Apostolic Letter Notre Charge Apostolique [“Our Apostolic Mandate”], 1910)


The Apostolic Letter against Sillonism quoted here,
Notre Charge Apostolique, is a real treasure trove of genuine Catholic teaching refuting the secularist, liberal, quasi-socialist claptrap of the Vatican II Church.

One of the foundational errors of humanists like Francis is the denial of the necessity of the love of God before the love of man; we must love God first and our neighbor for the sake of God:

Master, which is the greatest commandment in the law? Jesus said to him: Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with thy whole heart, and with thy whole soul, and with thy whole mind. This is the greatest and the first commandment. And the second is like to this: Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. On these two commandments dependeth the whole law and the prophets.

(Mt 22:36-40; underlining added)


This clear distinction between the greatest and the second greatest commandments — and especially the essential subordination of the latter to the former — is obliterated outright by Vatic
an II and by Jorge Bergoglio in particular:


For this reason, love for God and neighbor is the first and greatest commandment.

(Vatican II, “Pastoral Constitution” Gaudium et Spes, n. 24; underlining added.)


It would not be right to see this call to growth exclusively or primarily in terms of doctrinal formation. It has to do with “observing” all that the Lord has shown us as the way of responding to his love. Along with the virtues, this means above all the new commandment, the first and the greatest of the commandments, and the one that best identifies us as Christ’s disciples: “This is my commandment, that you love one another as I have loved you” (Jn 15:12).

(Antipope Francis, “Apostolic Exhortation” Evangelii Gaudium, n. 161; underlining added.)


As the title of our blog post says, Francis preaches another gospel, the “Gospel of Man.” Just as Satan told Adam and Eve in the beginning, “you shall be as Gods” (Gen 3:5), so Francis and the Novus Ordo Church are once again putting man in the place of God, no doubt a foreboding of the coming of the Antichrist (cf. 2 Thess 2:3-4).

Let us come to a close by quoting some additional passages of St. Pius X’s Apostolic Letter against the Sillonists, because they sound like they were written precisely to refute Francis and the Modernist Sect that emerged after the death of Pope Pius XII. Notice how the words of Pope Pius X put into proper context the love of neighbor and how the corporal works of mercy, as being the fruit of a genuine love of God, lead to seeking the conversion of the other to the holy Catholic Faith, apart from which there can be no salvation:

The same applies to the notion of Fraternity which [the Sillonists] found on the love of common interest or, beyond all philosophies and religions, on the mere notion of humanity, thus embracing with an equal love and tolerance all human beings and their miseries, whether these are intellectual, moral, or physical and temporal. But Catholic doctrine tells us that the primary duty of charity does not lie in the toleration of false ideas, however sincere they may be, nor in the theoretical or practical indifference towards the errors and vices in which we see our brethren plunged, but in the zeal for their intellectual and moral improvement as well as for their material well-being. Catholic doctrine further tells us that love for our neighbor flows from our love for God, Who is Father to all, and goal of the whole human family; and in Jesus Christ whose members we are, to the point that in doing good to others we are doing good to Jesus Christ Himself. Any other kind of love is sheer illusion, sterile and fleeting. 

Indeed, we have the human experience of pagan and secular societies of ages past to show that concern for common interests or affinities of nature weigh very little against the passions and wild desires of the heart. No, Venerable Brethren, there is no genuine fraternity outside Christian charity. Through the love of God and His Son Jesus Christ Our Saviour, Christian charity embraces all men, comforts all, and leads all to the same faith and same heavenly happiness.

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

… 

We wish to draw your attention, Venerable Brethren, to this distortion of the Gospel and to the sacred character of Our Lord Jesus Christ, God and man, prevailing within the Sillon and elsewhere. As soon as the social question is being approached, it is the fashion in some quarters to first put aside the divinity of Jesus Christ, and then to mention only His unlimited clemency, His compassion for all human miseries, and His pressing exhortations to the love of our neighbor and to the brotherhood of men. True, Jesus has loved us with an immense, infinite love, and He came on earth to suffer and die so that, gathered around Him in justice and love, motivated by the same sentiments of mutual charity, all men might live in peace and happiness. 

But for the realization of this temporal and eternal happiness, He has laid down with supreme authority the condition that we must belong to His Flock, that we must accept His doctrine, that we must practice virtue, and that we must accept the teaching and guidance of Peter and his successors. 

Further, whilst Jesus was kind to sinners and to those who went astray, He did not respect their false ideas, however sincere they might have appeared. He loved them all, but He instructed them in order to convert them and save them. Whilst He called to Himself in order to comfort them, those who toiled and suffered, it was not to preach to them the jealousy of a chimerical equality. Whilst He lifted up the lowly, it was not to instill in them the sentiment of a dignity independent from, and rebellious against, the duty of obedience. Whilst His heart overflowed with gentleness for the souls of good-will, He could also arm Himself with holy indignation against the profaners of the House of God, against the wretched men who scandalized the little ones, against the authorities who crush the people with the weight of heavy burdens without putting out a hand to lift them. 

He was as strong as He was gentle. He reproved, threatened, chastised, knowing, and teaching us that fear is the beginning of wisdom, and that it is sometimes proper for a man to cut off an offending limb to save his body. 

Finally, He did not announce for future society the reign of an ideal happiness from which suffering would be banished; but, by His lessons and by His example, He traced the path of the happiness which is possible on earth and of the perfect happiness in heaven: the royal way of the Cross. These are teachings that it would be wrong to apply only to one's personal life in order to win eternal salvation; these are eminently social teachings, and they show in Our Lord Jesus Christ something quite different from an inconsistent and impotent humanitarianism


(Pope St. Pius X, Apostolic Letter Notre Charge Apostolique [“Our Apostolic Mandate”], 1910; underlining and pargraph breaks added.)


Enough said. 
Pope St. Pius X was a Catholic; what religion Jorge Bergoglio is, is anyone’s guess, but one thing is for certain: It’s definitely not Roman Catholicism.

See Also:


But he didn’t have time for Asia Bibi...

Too Much Hot Air:
Francis Signs “Catholic” Climate Petition

francis-climate-petition.jpg

Image Source: http://catholicclimatemovement.global
Credit: Fotografia Felici


Weeks before the expected release of his encyclical letter on the environment, which we have nicknamed
Summa Ecologica, “Pope” Francis has endorsed a petition of the so-called “Global Catholic Climate Movement” (GCCM) that attempts to keep the earth’s temperature from rising by more than 1.5ºC.

The short petition is addressed to “World Leaders” and reads:


Climate change affects everyone, but especially the poor and most vulnerable people. Impelled by our Catholic faith, we call on you to drastically cut carbon emissions to keep the global temperature rise below the dangerous threshold of 1.5°C, and to aid the world’s poorest in coping with climate change impacts.

(“Pope Francis endorsed our Catholic Climate Petition!”, Global Catholic Climate Movement; accessed May 15, 2015)


Not only did Francis endorse the petition, he also signed it, though he had to do so in an indirect way for reasons of protocol. He designated his master of ceremonies, “Mgr.” Guillermo Karcher, to sign on his behalf. An article on the GCCM’s web site jubilantly recounts:

“Pope Francis was very supportive of the work we are doing to engage Catholics around the world in a coordinated response to climate change,” said Tomás Insua, a co-founder of the GCCM from Argentina. “Francis even joked that we were competing against his encyclical. His endorsement of our work is very important to raise awareness within Catholic circles globally, and to collect more signatures.”

Pope Francis asked the Pontifical Ceremonieri, Monsignor Guillermo Karcher, to sign the petition on his behalf as a way to show his endorsement (given that popes don’t sign petitions because of protocol).

The Pope also gave the GCCM the book “The Sun’s Energy in the Vatican” as a gift, to emphasize the Holy See’s commitment to renewable energy as a means to address the climate change crisis.

(“Pope Francis endorsed our Catholic Climate Petition!”, Global Catholic Climate Movement; accessed May 15, 2015)


Photos of the climate petition circus
can be viewed here.

By the way, recently several family members of Asia Bibi, the Christian woman who is on death row in Pakistan for allegedly “blaspheming” Islam, tried to get a private audience with Francis to ask for his help — and were refused. When they showed up at the Vatican to speak to Francis after his Wednesday audience on April 15, Francis gave them his attention for an entire 15 seconds before hurrying on to greet more of his fans. Here is a video of the sad spectacle:


We wish Francis good luck in getting the earth’s temperature contained. For starters, we suggest fewer trips by airplane, to save on carbon emissions, no more printing of endless encyclical letters, to save the trees — and an end to the daily homilies, to save on hot air.

See Also:



Wouldn’t want to let Christ get in the way...

Vatican’s Luv Logo for Francis Trip to United States Lacks Minor Detail: the Cross

francis-us-2015-trip-logo.jpg

The Beatles couldn’t have said it better...


Days after the ugly and ambiguous logo for the “Year of Mercy” 2015-16 was revealed, the Vatican has now unveiled the emblem for the next item on the Francis Show: Jorge Bergoglio’s visit to the United States of America in September 2015. You can see the logo as released by the so-called “United States Conference of Catholic Bishops” above.

Overall, the logo appears rather sterile, with no clear identity other than the figure that has its back turned toward you. But really, replace the illustration of Francis with one of the Dalai Lama, and it would fit just as much. As well it should, for it might as well be the Dalai Lama that comes to visit — the message preached will substantially be the same.

It’s funny, however, that this emblem has Francis’ back towards the viewer. Haven’t we been told since the 1960s that having your back to the people is just soo insensitive and offensive? Or is that only true when you can turn your back on the Tabernacle at the same time?

While this design is a lot less bad than what one could have expected, given prior history (remember the Philippines?), we notice the striking absence of a crucifix, or at least a cross — you know, that minor detail that says that it’s not about Francis but about Christ (“But we preach Christ crucified...” [1 Cor 1:23]). Ah well, but then that would be false advertising, so it’s actually a good thing there is nothing even remotely resembling a cross, lest anyone mistakenly associate Francis’ Masonic-Modernist Naturalism for Christianity.

The official slogan to go with this logo is “Love is our Mission” — wish that it were so! The absence of a crucifix or cross is your first indicator that the “love” which Francis is on a mission for is not the love of genuine Christian charity (we recall also his “mission” to the rabbis here). No, Francis’ mission is not true love, the love of charity as commanded by God towards Him and our fellow-man for His sake (see Mt 22:36-40); no, Bergoglio preaches a corrupted version of charity, not “love” but “luv”. We have written on this before: His “luv” consists of a shallow, insincere, and worldly compassion-for-show that focuses only on the needs of the body while craftily starving the soul. Of course the needs of the body are important, but they are subordinate to the needs of the soul, which are of much greater importance. All feeding of the homeless will do them no good if they are not also helped spiritually so they can reach eternal salvation. For the body will necessarily face the corruption of the grave before long, but the soul will live unto eternity (with the body then resurrected, either to glory or to shame — cf. Jn 5:29): “And fear ye not them that kill the body, and are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him that can destroy both soul and body in hell” (Mt 10:28).

Remember the sweet little girl in the Philippines that cried in front of Francis because she saw the great evil of suffering among the children there, especially through child prostitution, and she was struggling to understand how a good God could allow this? Instead of nourishing her tender soul with the sweet milk of the saving Gospel, which alone gives the true sense of all suffering and the great merit to be derived especially from the suffering of the innocent, if born patiently and with resignation to God’s will, he simply gave her a hug (that’s the shallow and phony part of his “mercy” and “luv”). Certainly, this hug gave her some consolation for a brief moment, but what he did then was inject a venomous lie into the sweet soul of that dear child. He said to her, “There is no answer.” Now that was cruel. That is what will stay with the girl long after the comfort of the hug is gone. That is what will make her doubt God, or hate God, and perhaps even despair.

The world, of course, loves what Francis did, because it’s a great photo combined with a great soundbite, displaying his supposed “humility” by claiming we do not know the answer to this all-important question. In reality, what Francis did was neither merciful, nor compassionate, nor charitable. In the true sense of the word, he scandalized the little girl and all who listened to him, by putting a strumbling block into their spiritual path.

We have documented and written about this at length — you can review the analysis and the arguments here:


Unfortunately, most minds in this nation — the United States of America — have been so dumbed down or been fed such an inadequate or erroneous education that they would never know the difference between genuine love and a fake “luv”. Ours is a society in which just about anything is called “love” that really isn’t, and true love is labeled “hate”. Everything is backwards now: Lust is taken for love; niceness is taken for love; offending God rather than man is taken for love. By contrast, true love often has to correct, rebuke, and “offend” — man for the sake of God, that is; and this is now labeled “hate.” Black has become white; light has become darkness; right has become wrong.

Contrast Francis’ false, worldly luv with what the great anti-Modernist Pope St. Pius X had to say about genuine charity in his Apostolic Letter against the errors of Le Sillon, a Modernist movement in France that sought to secularize and neutralize Catholicism by reconciling it with the ideals of the French Republic (i.e. a prototype of Vatican II):

The same applies to the notion of Fraternity which [the Sillonists] found on the love of common interest or, beyond all philosophies and religions, on the mere notion of humanity, thus embracing with an equal love and tolerance all human beings and their miseries, whether these are intellectual, moral, or physical and temporal. But Catholic doctrine tells us that the primary duty of charity does not lie in the toleration of false ideas, however sincere they may be, nor in the theoretical or practical indifference towards the errors and vices in which we see our brethren plunged, but in the zeal for their intellectual and moral improvement as well as for their material well-being. Catholic doctrine further tells us that love for our neighbor flows from our love for God, Who is Father to all, and goal of the whole human family; and in Jesus Christ whose members we are, to the point that in doing good to others we are doing good to Jesus Christ Himself. Any other kind of love is sheer illusion, sterile and fleeting. 

Indeed, we have the human experience of pagan and secular societies of ages past to show that concern for common interests or affinities of nature weigh very little against the passions and wild desires of the heart. No, Venerable Brethren, there is no genuine fraternity outside Christian charity. Through the love of God and His Son Jesus Christ Our Saviour, Christian charity embraces all men, comforts all, and leads all to the same faith and same heavenly happiness.

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

… 

We wish to draw your attention, Venerable Brethren, to this distortion of the Gospel and to the sacred character of Our Lord Jesus Christ, God and man, prevailing within the Sillon and elsewhere. As soon as the social question is being approached, it is the fashion in some quarters to first put aside the divinity of Jesus Christ, and then to mention only His unlimited clemency, His compassion for all human miseries, and His pressing exhortations to the love of our neighbor and to the brotherhood of men. True, Jesus has loved us with an immense, infinite love, and He came on earth to suffer and die so that, gathered around Him in justice and love, motivated by the same sentiments of mutual charity, all men might live in peace and happiness. 

But for the realization of this temporal and eternal happiness, He has laid down with supreme authority the condition that we must belong to His Flock, that we must accept His doctrine, that we must practice virtue, and that we must accept the teaching and guidance of Peter and his successors. 

Further, whilst Jesus was kind to sinners and to those who went astray, He did not respect their false ideas, however sincere they might have appeared. He loved them all, but He instructed them in order to convert them and save them. Whilst He called to Himself in order to comfort them, those who toiled and suffered, it was not to preach to them the jealousy of a chimerical equality. Whilst He lifted up the lowly, it was not to instill in them the sentiment of a dignity independent from, and rebellious against, the duty of obedience. Whilst His heart overflowed with gentleness for the souls of good-will, He could also arm Himself with holy indignation against the profaners of the House of God, against the wretched men who scandalized the little ones, against the authorities who crush the people with the weight of heavy burdens without putting out a hand to lift them. 

He was as strong as He was gentle. He reproved, threatened, chastised, knowing, and teaching us that fear is the beginning of wisdom, and that it is sometimes proper for a man to cut off an offending limb to save his body. 

Finally, He did not announce for future society the reign of an ideal happiness from which suffering would be banished; but, by His lessons and by His example, He traced the path of the happiness which is possible on earth and of the perfect happiness in heaven: the royal way of the Cross. These are teachings that it would be wrong to apply only to one's personal life in order to win eternal salvation; these are eminently social teachings, and they show in Our Lord Jesus Christ something quite different from an inconsistent and impotent humanitarianism


(Pope St. Pius X, Apostolic Letter Notre Charge Apostolique [“Our Apostolic Mandate”], 1910; underlining and pargraph breaks added.)


BAM! Saint Pius X blows Francis and his false gospel away. You would be well-advised to read the Pope’s Apostolic Letter Notre Charge Apostolique in its entirety, at the link given above. It is a sound refutation of the secular, humanist, and naturalist “gospel” of Jorge Bergoglio. Read it and see how much what Pius X thunders against is exactly what Francis believes, preaches, and practices.

What are your thoughts on the official logo of Francis’ visit to the United States? Leave a comment and join the discussion in our combox below this post. 

Let’s hope that this will be the last logo to be issued for a while.

See Also:



news-digest2.jpg

     Published May 10, 2015

I can’t believe it’s not Catholic: The “SoulCore” Rosary Exercise Program!
Find out what the Blessed Virgin forgot to give St. Dominic!
CAUTION! IMMODEST POSTURES



“See what things the enemy hath done wickedly in the sanctuary” (Ps 73:3)...

Belgian “Bishop” Approves of Dog Funeral, Defends “Priest”

dog-funeral-checkmark.jpg


You may want to put on your surprise face if you still have one left at this point. On April 25, 2015, we reported on a scandalous prayer event in a Catholic Church in Belgium: A Novus Ordo presbyter had given a funeral-like service to a dog, a chihuahua, to “accompany” the people in their “grief” and extend “compassion” to them. He specifically pointed out that he was doing this as part of a response to “Pope” Francis’ call for reaching out to the “peripheries” of society. You can read our full report, with photos and video, here:


At the time, a number of naive conservative Novus Ordos must have thought to themselves, “Just wait until the bishop steps in and straightens out this wayward prelate!” Ah well, the diocesan “bishop”, Mr. Remy Vancottem, has now “stepped in” and … (drumroll) … defended the dog ceremony! The so-called Catholic Herald reports as follows:


A Belgian bishop has defended a priest who held a prayer service for the grieving owners of a pet dog.

Bishop Rémy Vancottem of Namur insisted the ceremony was not a Catholic funeral, but apologised to those who were troubled by the event.

Bishop Vancottem said the priest had simply wanted “to be close to people who were sad to have lost a pet to which they were emotionally attached”.

Fr Francis Lallemand presided at the ceremony in the church of St-Victor d’Auvelais in Sambreville, a Walloon area south of Brussels.

The body of Miss Chiwa, an 11-year-old chihuahua, rested on a bier before the altar of the church.

A video of the event showed Fr Lallemand speaking to a packed congregation, many of whom carried their own pet dogs.

“We are not here to celebrate a funeral but to show our support during the loss of a loved one,” Fr Lallemand said, according to La Vie. “We want to share our sympathy and compassion with [owners] Sylvana and Josse.”

Miss Chiwa and her owners made numerous television appearances in Belgium and helped to raise funds for the animal charity Gamelles du Coeur.

(“Belgian bishop defends priest over ‘dog funeral’”, Catholic Herald, May 7, 2015; italics added.)


Don’t blame this on Francis, by the way: Vancottem was first made a “bishop” under John Paul II (1982) and appointed to his current post by Benedict XVI (2010), as the Catholic Hierarchy web site notes.

The actual statement of “Bp.” Vancottem, in the original French, can be read here. In typical ambiguous Vatican II language, the mock bishop “clarifies” that the Rev. Lallemand, who presided over the canine farce, “wanted to be close to the people”, who were “sad to have lost a pet, to which they were emotionally attached”, adding that it is “always possible to pray with and for those who are grieving”, yet also warning that “ambiguity” must be “avoided” that could cause such an event to be “confused” with a real “Christian funeral”. He furthermore assures his flock that in the future he will “clarify” what sort of things are permitted in this regard and what things aren’t. Of course, he also apologizes in his statement to “those who were troubled by this celebration”, whose concern he “understands”. Translation: “What happened here is a good thing, because it serves man, but I’m sorry if some people were offended. We’ll talk more about it later.”

bishop-remy-vancottem.jpg

Mr. Remy Vancottem, currently playing “Catholic Bishop of Namur”, Belgium


Once again we see that in the Novus Ordo Sect, everything centers on man, on humanity, never on God, who is simply relegated to the sidelines as a nice chap whose job is to serve man by hearing our prayers and solving our problems. In the real Catholic Church, if a real Catholic priest were confronted with a situation in which people come to him because they are in terrible grief over the loss of a dog, he would have used that opportunity to instruct the people on the necessity of detaching ourselves from earthly things, on the foolishness of clinging to anything that must of necessity pass away, and on the wonderful and noble purpose of our human existence, which infinitely surpasses that of the animals, as we — unlike brutes — were created for the Beatific Vision, to behold and be with and enjoy the Most Holy Trinity forever and ever. A real Catholic priest would have clarified that animals do not have rational souls and were not created for eternity (sorry, you can’t take Baxter with you!). He would then have admonished the people to make an examination of conscience and a good confession.

What happens in the Novus Ordo religion instead? There is a prayer service to comfort the people who have “lost something to which they were emotionally attached”. Well then, expect funeral-like prayer services soon for broken laptops, wrecked cars, and malfunctioning xboxes, since it is “always possible to pray with and for those who are grieving”. This will never happen, you say? Oh really — didn’t you say the same thing 10 years ago about “dog funerals”?

If such an abominable event, in which a “Liturgy of the Word” is celebrated for a dog that has died, with the dead animal displayed before the sanctuary and people coming up to “pay their respects”, had happened in a Catholic Church before Vatican II, the local bishop would have immediately stepped in and placed the church under interdict, excommunicated or at least suspended the priest and ordered him to spend the rest of his life in penance at a monastery, away from the world. The parish church would then have needed to be rededicated after having suffered such terrible defilement.

Not, of course, in the new man-centered religion of “mercy” and “luv,” where condemnation is only reserved for those who seek to practice the authentic Catholic religion. 

The day of the service, the dog-funeral “priest” Rev. Lallemand had already stated he was not afraid of the reaction of his “bishop.” He obviously knew him well.

See Also:


New Radio Show — Listen Free

ESCAPE FROM THE NOVUS ORDO:
IV: Intentional Irreverence – The New Mass (2)

exit-sign.jpg

Isn’t it time you too headed for the exit?

michael-oswalt.jpg


Restoration Radio’s new show “Escape from the Novus Ordo” returns with Fr. Michael Oswalt, a former Novus Ordo “priest” of the diocese of Rockford, Illinois, who converted to traditional Catholicism (sedevacantism) and was ordained a true priest in 2011. He has penned an open letter to his former diocese of Rockford, Illinois, in which he explains why he left the Novus Ordo religion. The letter is available in English and Spanish:


Born in 1972, no one is a better fit than Fr. Oswalt to help you see the errors of the Vatican II Church (aka Novus Ordo Sect) and advise you on how to exit this false establishment and become a real Catholic, that is, someone who is Catholic in the same way everyone was Catholic until the death of Pope Pius XII in 1958 (just before the Second Vatican Council). Fr. Oswalt currently serves as the pastor of St. Benedict Catholic Church in Huntsville, Alabama. 

Novus Ordo Watch is pleased to be the sponsor for Escape from the Novus Ordo throughout this year, which means you will be able to listen to all episodes of this program in 2015 free of charge, without having to have a subscription to Restoration Radio.

Listen on Demand at any time, FREE:

CLICK HERE TO LISTEN
In page that appears, scroll down to where it says “Podcast Player”
and click to play or download to your computer.


Episode Description:

Have you been concerned about "liturgical abuse" in the Novus Ordo "Mass”? Were you dismayed at the recent French “Bumper Car Mass”? Are you attempting to apply Catholic standards to the Novus Ordo religion and practice? Are you trying to “fight from within” on the Pastoral Council or the Liturgy Committee? Have you played "Where's the tabernacle?" in a Novus Ordo parish? Can we just "offer it up" when attending a Novus Ordo "Mass”?

Alternatively, have you finally awakened to the reality that the Novus Ordo Sect is not the Catholic Church? How do you now, armed with the knowledge of Roman Catholicism, escape the impostor religion?

This episode of Escape from the Novus Ordo continues the examination of the intentional irreverence of the New "Mass” from the last episode.

Father Michael Oswalt discusses the Novus Ordo doctrine of change and the primacy of obedience over human respect, along with more stories of his time in the Novus Ordo. Find out the Novus Ordo definitions of the essential terms: "Pastoral" and "Charity."

Join Fr. Oswalt and host Jason Guardiano as they discuss the Traditional Latin Mass versus the Modern “Mass” offered at your local Novus Ordo parish.

pool-mass.jpg

What? You’ve never been to a Pool “Mass”?


As Novus Ordo Watch is sponsoring the entire first season of
Escape from the Novus Ordo, we are no longer sponsoring the ongoing and very informative Francis Watch broadcasts, which you can subscribe to at Restoration Radio.


Other select Radio Broadcasts and Related Links:


A twisted image for a twisted “mercy”...

The Vatican’s “Year of Mercy” 
Logo Fails to Surprise

year-of-mercy-logo.jpg


The Vatican has unveiled its logo for the upcoming supposed “Year of Mercy” that begins on December 8, 2015 and runs through November 20, 2016. Click on the image to see a larger version. Out of all the things they could have done, this is what they came up with: Christ looks like He is skateboarding or ice-skating, He carries a man sideways on His shoulders, and there are three eyes visible, the center one clearly being shared between Christ and the man. One could also say that the image is ambiguous and appears to depict a Christ with two heads and three eyes.

Overall, the logo gives the appearance of weirdness, twistedness, and ugliness — no surprise there. In fact, this reminds one of Francis’ Christmas card 2014, which had a donkey’s rear staring you in the face.

The Vatican has, of course, given an official explanation of the logo:


Along with the logo the Vatican also issued an official prayer for the year of “mercy”:


We note that although the prayer is full of talk about forgiveness, it is short on the essential requirements to be able to obtain such forgiveness from God: supernatural sorrow for sin and a firm purpose of amendment (among other things).

So, what do YOU think about this logo? Leave a comment in our combox below and discuss with others.

Oh, and one more thing — the Vatican’s “Archbishop” Salvatore Fisichella issued the following warning regarding unauthorized use of the logo: 

The logo has been registered in the international forum in order to safeguard its rights and to prevent any inappropriate use. It is obvious that permission must be granted by the Pontifical Council for any non-religious use of the logo and that any infringement will be duly prosecuted.

(source)


So much for mercy.


See Also:



“Hermeneutic of Continuity” Update...

Ecumenism:
Francis Contradicts Pope Pius XI Verbatim

pius11-francis.jpg


At this point, the Vatican II apostasy is so advanced that prior papal teaching is now being denied verbatim by the “Pope” of the Novus Ordo Church, without so much as batting an eye.

Consider what Francis said to the (female) Lutheran “Archbishop” of Sweden, Antje Jackelen, whom he received in audience today, May 4:

Pope Francis received the Lutheran archbishop of Sweden in audience on May 4 and said that the Christian division contradicts the will of Christ, scandalizes the world, and harms the cause of the preaching of the Gospel

“Much work” remains to be done in the ecumenical dialogue between Catholics and Lutherans, the Pope said, who said that we should accept one another as “brothers and sisters in the faith” rather than look upon one another as competitors. 

“The witness of our persecuted brothers and sisters spurs us to grow in fraternal communion,” the Pope added. “Of urgent relevance is also the question of the dignity of human life, always to be respected, as well as the themes related to the family, marriage and sexuality that cannot be silenced or ignored for fear of jeopardizing the ecumenical consensus already achieved.”

(“‘Much work’ remains in ecumenical dialogue, Pope tells Swedish Lutheran leader, Catholic Culture, May 4, 2015; underlining added.)


In 1928, Pope Pius XI, in his landmark encyclical against false religious unity by means of “ecumenism”, condemned exactly what “Pope” Francis just said. Listen closely:


Is it not right, it is often repeated, indeed, even consonant with duty, that all who invoke the name of Christ should abstain from mutual reproaches and at long last be united in mutual charity? Who would dare to say that he loved Christ, unless he worked with all his might to carry out the desires of Him, Who asked His Father that His disciples might be “one” [Jn 17:21]. And did not the same Christ will that His disciples should be marked out and distinguished from others by this characteristic, namely that they loved one another: “By this shall all men know that you are my disciples, if you have love one for another”? [Jn 13:35] All Christians, they add, should be as “one”: for then they would be much more powerful in driving out the pest of irreligion, which like a serpent daily creeps further and becomes more widely spread, and prepares to rob the Gospel of its strength. 

These things and others that class of men who are known as pan-Christians continually repeat and amplify; and these men, so far from being quite few and scattered, have increased to the dimensions of an entire class, and have grouped themselves into widely spread societies, most of which are directed by non-Catholics, although they are imbued with varying doctrines concerning the things of faith. This undertaking is so actively promoted as in many places to win for itself the adhesion of a number of citizens, and it even takes possession of the minds of very many Catholics and allures them with the hope of bringing about such a union as would be agreeable to the desires of Holy Mother Church, who has indeed nothing more at heart than to recall her erring sons and to lead them back to her bosom. But in reality beneath these enticing words and blandishments lies hid a most grave error, by which the foundations of the Catholic faith are completely destroyed.

(Pope Pius XI, Encyclical Mortalium Animos, n. 4; underlining added.)


So much for the much-touted “hermeneutic of continuity”. There is no continuity between pre-Vatican II Catholicism and the Novus Ordo corruption of Catholicism. The two are diametrically opposed; they are contradictory. If one is true, the other is false. We therefore know that the church of the Second Vatican Council is not and cannot be the Roman Catholic Church of our Lord Jesus Christ, whose last known legitimate shepherd was Pius XII (d. 1958). See the powerful video The Syllogism of Sedevacantism for an elaborate argument on this matter.

Make sure you read Pope Pius XI’s encyclical in its entirety if you have not already, using the link above. It is not very long and filled with powerful refutations of the various errors of ecumenism. Catholic truth is beautiful and clear: The true Church has always taught, and will always continue to teach, that the only genuine religious union that can come about between Catholics and non-Catholics is that of non-Catholics converting to the Catholic Church. Anything else is a betrayal of Christ; anything else would be an abandonment of the divine mission of the Church, which is impossible (cf. Mt 28:19-20; Mk 16:16; 1 Tim 3:15; Mt 16:18). The Church founded by God enjoys “perfect and perpetual immunity ... from error and heresy”, as the same Pius XI taught (Encyclical Quas Primas, n. 22), and hence any church which does not seek the conversion of those outside her fold, or which teaches error, cannot be the true Catholic Church.

The following links are other magisterial documents issued by the true Popes on the same question of ecumenism and religious unity — read them carefully, for they are refreshingly clear and beautiful and stand in such stark contrast to the Modernist-Masonic drivel that has come from the Novus Ordo Vatican since John XXIII and Vatican II:


The evidence that we are dealing with two essentially different religions is simply overwhelming and undeniable. He who has eyes to see, let him see!

See Also:



Looking for More? We only keep the 10 most recent blog posts on this page. For more, check the monthly Wire Archive...


...as well as the News Archive, which we maintained before our Wire Blog:

2013: 01/1302/13
2012: 01-03/1204/1205/1206/1207/1208/1209/1210/1211/1212/12
2011: 02/1105/1108/1110/11
2010: 01/1002/1005/1006/1007/1008/1010/1012/10
2009: 01/0902/0903/0904/0905/0907/0911/09   
2008: 01/0802/0803/0804/0805/0806/0809/0810/0812/08

2007: 01/0706/0707/0708/0709/0710/0711/0712/07
2006: 01/0602/0603/0604/0605/0606/0607/0608/0609/0610/0611/0612/06
2005: 01/0502/0503/0504/0505/0506/0507/0508/0509/0510/0511/0512/05
2004: 01/0402/0403/0404/0405/0406/0407/0408/0409/0410/0411/0412/04
2003: 01-03/0304-05/0306/0307/0308/0309/0310/0311/0312/03

2002: 10-12/02

Disclaimer:
We are not responsible for the content of externally-linked web pages. We do not necessarily endorse the content linked, unless this is explicitly stated. When linked content is endorsed by Novus Ordo Watch, this endorsement does not necessarily extend to everything expressed by the organization, entity, editor, or author of said content.

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 U.S. 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.