They ask me, what do you think of the Pope?

Not much, it's a mystery, an improbable mystery.


It's a great tragedy for the Church, because ultimately, who's with the Pope is with the Church, is with the unity of the Church... But there is also a question mark. When we say "How is it possible that the Pope, if he's truly Pope, successor of St. Peter, he must in consequence have the inspiration of the Holy Ghost, he must be protected by the Holy Spirit in what he does, because he's the Pope we have the promise of our Lord that he will be protected in upholding the faith... Therefore someone who does these kinds of things is not Pope...This Pope is doing things that are so contrary to the faith, against the Church, so destructive to the faith of the Church, and the Church itself... But it's not the Pope, it's his entourage... Well, here's one solution. The Pope is a prisoner, the Pope is a martyr, the Pope is locked in, the Pope isn't free to do what he wants, the Pope is drugged, the Pope is half-crazy, the Pope is I don't know what, he's a human wreck who is led around and manipulated...That's one solution. It's a solution that I'd say is astonishingly supported by many visionaries, people who think they have visions, I'd say they are diabolical in origin, these visions.

These visions of those who say that the Holy Father is a prisoner, that the Holy Father is somehow incapable, that he's drugged, for the thirteen years that he's been there he has no responsibility for anything. They've locked this man up and then eventually we get to the point where there's another Pope who is imprisoned under the Vatican, then they've given him a double and other things like this that are just ridiculous,  ridiculous, ridiculous, no? Idiotic, completely idiotic, aren't they, and all of this is very smart on the part of the devil because this sways a certain amount of people, right, who are always saying: The Pope! The Pope! The Pope! No, no, no, don't speak to me about the Pope! Be obedient! Be obedient! I beg you, I beg you, it's his entourage, it's not him.

But I will say you can also look at the problem from another angle and say: good, ultimately I agree with you, it's not possible that the Pope who is protected by the Holy Ghost, by the words of Our Lord Jesus Christ, could do things like this. There we agree, it's not possible, it doesn't fit, this destruction of the Church, this destruction of the Social Reign of Christ the King, this destruction of the Catholic faith in every aspect, every catechism, every university, every religious order, the seminaries, everywhere you look it is the systematic destruction of the Church, which was aimed at by all of these reforms that the Vatican implemented, because Vatican II wasn't, I'd say, what allowed these reforms to be put into effect, what had to be done was to implement the reforms of Vatican II in an equivocal way, this allowed them to start putting the reforms into practice and this was the goal, it [ Vatican II I believe ] was the springboard that permitted all this, so it can be said that the Holy Father, in effect, that it's not possible that a Pope could do all this, therefore he's not Pope.

This reasoning is worth, this reasoning, I don't know, I don't say that's what's going on and there are several scenarios, maybe this one has some merit, we'll know the truth later maybe, I don't know, I don't know. The way I see it, it's not clear yet, you understand, but one day if it came to light that it was true, and this is something that is far from impossible, here also, there are apparitions that say the same thing and these apparitions have been recognized by the See of Peter, Fatima, La Salette, that say that the devil will climb to the highest places in the Church, I don't know if by the "highest place in the Church" that means Secretary of State, and then stops there, or if it goes even farther, if it goes all the way to the Pope. I don't know maybe even to someone who says he's the Pope, I don't know, but you know this is something that isn't impossible and theologians have studied this problem, the theologians have studied this problem to see if it's something that can happen, if a Pope can perhaps be a heretic and as a result excommunicated from the Church and therefore all his acts become illegitimate and invalid. And if, just as a hypothesis, once again I just don't know, don't put words in my mouth, I don't know, but if at last it comes out that quietly that there are certain connections to Masonry, imagine that the Pope was registered in a Masonic lodge before his election, he would be excommunicated. Excommunicated... His election is invalid, he can't be Pope and we would have had for all this time... A Pope who wasn't Pope. This is possible. Once again I don't say this is what is really happening but what do you want in a situation like this, we're looking for a solution. We find ourselves with a problem that has almost no theological solution, theologically, I say theologically almost impossible to solve, so we search for a solution, fine! A solution that he is a prisoner, drugged, this is possible. I admit that when you see him move around and talk, personally I haven't seen him for two years, I haven't seen him in the flesh, I mean privately but with a public audience, I saw him put aside his paper and his script, speaking with a skill, a fluidity, getting to the point, with intelligence but in full possession of his faculties, in full possession of his faculties, not a man who had been drugged, or who has been given a shot or who... Not at all! The farthest thing from it!

Well then, when he blessed the Pentecostals, was there a revolver pointed at his head? When he kissed the feet of the Orthodox was there a revolver pointed at his head? ... No, this is absurd, it's not possible. Besides Mgr. Benelli said to me three weeks ago, when I saw him, Mgr. Benelli said to me: 'It's the Pope who wrote you those letters, you don't want to believe it but it's the Pope who wrote them to you, he is fully up to date, he is up to date about everything, he knows very well what he's doing and he's the one who wants all this happen and he makes the decisions and when I leave, when this conversation we're having is over and I leave, I am going to see the Pope every day, and I am immediately going to tell him what was said in this conversation.

From the French

Here are some excerpts from the section on Chapter 12


v. 1: "And a great sign appeared in heaven: A woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars:

"Quote from: Fr. Kramer, pp. 276-7
The woman of chapter twelve is not the Blessed Virgin Mary.
…
According to the ancient Fathers, the human nature or character of the Church is here delineated, while in chapters four and five her divine nature and prerogatives were depicted.
…
The twelve stars represent the twelve apostles; or they may be God’s mystical number symbolizing the Christian nations, that as a contrast to the ten crowned horns of the beast, shall be the glory of the Church when the days of Antichrist approach.
…
The moon under her feet has ever been understood to symbolize the unchanging and unchangeable character of the Church.

v. 2: "And being with child, she cried travailing in birth, and was in pain to be delivered.

"Quote from: Fr. Kramer, p. 278In that travail, she gives birth to some definite “per­son” who is to RULE the Church with a rod of iron (verse 5). It then points to a conflict waged within the Church to elect one who was to “rule all nations” in the manner clearly stated. In accord with the text this is unmistakably a PAPAL ELECTION, for only Christ and His Vicar have the divine right to rule ALL NATIONS. Furthermore, the Church does not travail in anguish at EVERY papal election which can be held without trouble or danger. But at this time the great powers may take a menacing attitude to hinder the election of the logical and expected candidate by threats of a general apostasy, assassination or imprisonment of this candidate if elected. This would suppose an extremely hostile mind in the governments of Europe towards the Church and would cause intense anguish to the Church, because an extended interregnum in the papacy is always disastrous and more so in a time of universal persecution. If Satan would contrive to hinder a papal election, the Church would suffer great travail.

v. 3: "And there was seen another sign in heaven: and behold a great red dragon, having seven heads, and ten horns: and on his head seven diadems:

"Quote from: Fr. Kramer, pg. 279
This red dragon it is that brings the Church into great distress at that time.
…
No fiercer enemy of God and man has appeared in Christian times than Communism, and strange to say, RED is its emblematic color. Communism may by that time have gained control of the governments of Europe, It would then erect almost insurmountable difficulties for the holding of a conclave to elect a pope.
…
Satan knows how exten­sively an interregnum in the papacy would favor his success in recovering his ancient lordship over the world. (See 2 Thess II. 7 ["For the mystery of iniquity already worketh; only that he who now holdeth, do hold, until he be taken out of the way."]).

Card. Manning's 1862 argument for why the Antichrist will be within the Catholic Church is simple:

Quote from: Card. Manning
We have here [2 Thessalonians 2:3-11] a prophecy … of a [spiritual*] revolt, which shall precede the second coming of our Lord … The authority, then, from which the revolt is to take place is that of the kingdom of God on earth, prophesied by Daniel [cf. Daniel 2] as the kingdom which the God of heaven should set up … in other words, the one and universal Church, founded by our Divine Lord, and spread by His Apostles throughout the world. In this one only kingdom was deposited the true and supernatural pure theism, or knowledge of God, and the true and only faith of God incarnate, with the doctrines and laws of grace. This, then, is the authority from which the revolt is to be made, be that revolt what it may.
[*"St. Jerome, with some others, interprets this revolt to be the rebellion of the nations or provinces against the Roman Empire. … They have revolted, and no manifestation has appeared." Thus, the revolt is spiritual, not temporal.]{Lect. 1 of Temporal Power of the Vicar of Christ's 2nd part (4 lectures), "The Perpetual Conflict of the Vicar of Christ", pp. 81-173}

v. 4: "And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and cast them to the earth: and the dragon stood before the woman who was ready to be delivered; that, when she should be delivered, he might devour her son.

"Quote from: Fr. Kramer, p. 284

Some eminent cardinal may be particularly outstanding in his efforts to stem the tide of demoralization of bishops and priests. Satan will know, and the world-powers will know, that he is the likely choice for the papacy, and that if elected, he will convoke a general council and exercise his supreme jurisdiction to inaugurate measures of reform. Satan knows that his own hopes of a rich harvest of souls will then be dashed to the ground.  Hence he must avert the election or have the pope assassinated when elected. The judgment is about to begin “at the house of God” (1 Peter IV. 17). The influence of the dragon will every­ where aim to subject the Church to the state. This persecution is thus a political subjugation, and one third of the bishops and priests will be ripe for apostasy. Satan’s intention is to subject the newly-elected pope also to the purposes of the World-powers or to plot his death. He may contrive an assurance of safety and immunity from harm for the cardinals to convene for the election the more easily to take the pope-elect prisoner. The dragon will want to intimidate the new pope into non-interference—to let affairs run and develop as heretofore. In that way would he “devour the son”, absorb the papacy and alone direct and rule the world.

v. 5: "And she brought forth a man child, who was to rule all nations with an iron rod: and her son was taken up to God, and to his throne."

Quote from: Fr. Kramer, p. 285-6
A general council may decree the reforms, but the pope must enforce them. These decrees will be the “seven thunders” mentioned in chapter ten.
…
The clause, “that he might devour her son”, does not necessarily mean assassination. The dragon is a symbolic form of the evil world-powers, who will resent the existence of a spiritual empire among them and through them and independent of them in its essential functions and will attempt to subject this empire to their will and service. They will try to make the Church a “state church” everywhere. This is possible only if they can subject the pope to their wills and compel him to teach and rule as they direct. That would be literally devouring the papacy.  Since they are defeated in this, they have the pope assassinated and “he is taken up to God and to His throne”, just as Christ by His death “was taken away from distress” (Is. LIII. 8).
…
this “son” will hardly have time to purify the Church, before he is persecuted, imprisoned and martyred. He is therefore surely not Christ.
…
This pope will be given the power to rule over the destiny of the Church immediately from Heaven. He carries out the will of God and loses his life in consequence; and immediately as part of his reward, he receives in Heaven patronage over the Church on earth.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Lúcia herself is reported to have explicitly stated that the Third Secret contains apocalyptic content. According to one source, when Lúcia was asked about the Third Secret, she said it was "in the Gospels and in the Apocalypse", and at one point she had even specified Apocalypse chapters 8 to 13, a range that includes Apocalypse 12:4, the chapter and verse cited by Pope John Paul II in his homily in Fátima on 13 May 2000.
Frere Michel de la Sainte Trinite (1990). The Whole Truth About Fatima, Volume III. Buffalo, New York CityA. p. 533.

Talks based on the Baltimore Catechism, designed for teachers, for home-schooling, to show with graphics either on chalk board or white board Our Faith. We shall include a download of each picture to print out.
                                                                                HOLY

The Catholic Church can truly be said to be the holiest of all churches. When we say that it is Holy, we mean: (1) that its founder, Jesus Christ, is holy (Draw Church -with name of founder);

(2) that it teaches a holy doctrine and invites all to a holy life (Draw preacher in pulpit);

(3) that so many thousands of its members have become saints (Draw line of saints).

No Protestant church could ever  claim all these things for itself.  For  example, which one of the Protestant-church founders can be compared to Christ?    Were any of  them  really holy men?   What Protestant church teaches a really holy doctrine?   And finally, who ever heard of a Protestant saint?

SECOND the Church of Christ must be

                                                                                APOSTOLIC

No church except the Catholic Church is Apostolic. When we say that it is Apostolic, we mean that it goes all the way back to Christ and the Apostles. Christ gave Peter charge of His Church, and from that day to this there has been an unbroken line of Popes, who have ruled the Catholic Church as the visible successors of Peter and who represent Christ.   (Draw a line of Popes.)

No Protestant church claims to go back to the time of Christ. Most of these churches started directly or indirectly from Martin Luther in 1517 —but Christ's Church was existing long before that time. So if we are looking for the Church of Christ, we had better not waste time with present-day Protestant churches, which do not go back to Christ.

THIRD the Church   of Christ must be

                                                                                ONE

No church but the Catholic Church is ONE. When we say that it is One, we mean: (1) that it has one faith (i. e, one doctrine)—the entire doctrine or teaching of Christ (Draw cross with words); (2) that all its members all over the world are bound together as ONE BODY (Draw people and their words) ; (3 ) that all these Catholics are governed in spiritual matters by one visible head—the Pope (Draw Pope).

The Protestant churches even among themselves never agree on the same teaching. What one says, the other denies. This leads them into many divisions; and because one part will not do as another part does, they have no one to rule them. Surely if these were right, Christ could hardly allow them to go to pieces like that.

FOURTH the Church of Christ must be

                                                                                UNIVERSAL

No church but the Catholic Church is Universal. When we say that it is Universal, we mean that as one united Church it has always existed, is to be found teaching all nations of the world, and contains all truth.

No Protestant church will ever be spread over the whole world as the Catholic Church is, because all these Protestant churches have too many divisions among their own people; they are not united like the Catholics, and they do not contain all the truths that Christ taught.

You see then that the Church which Christ wishes all to join in order to save their souls is the HOLY Church which he founded; the APOSTOLIC Church which goes back to the time of Christ; the UNITED Church which teaches all His doctrine; the UNIVERSAL Church which is spread over the entire earth.

AND THAT CHURCH IS THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH.

Currently out of print, check Amazon for old copies

WHAT? NO RESISTANCE?
    
A healthy body reacts with a vigorous immune system by resisting viruses, harmful bacteria and diseases that attack it. So, by way of comparison, when the leadership of the Society of St. Pius X officially embraced Liberal ideas most harmful to the Faith and publicized them, rather than react by crying "Resistance to what?", it should rather be, "WHAT? NO RESISTANCE?" Truthfully, there should have been a healthy, unanimous wave of resistance from the very beginning, to that which threatens the very foundations of the Traditional Roman Catholic Faith!

Faced with the manifest ignoring of the wisdom, warnings, and prudence of Abp. Lefebvre never to pursue a purely practical agreement without Rome's conversion to Tradition FIRST, expressed by the shift of principles in July 14, 2012's General Chapter Statement, "WHAT? NO RESISTANCE?"

Faced with the 6 Conditions, which the SSPX "bound itself to," the first one asking for, what amounts to, the freedom to set up one of our own altars in the Pantheon of All Beliefs so aggressively promoted by the Conciliar Church, when Abp. Lefebvre always refused such a false communion, demanding the Pope's and Rome's conversion to the Faith of Tradition,"WHAT? NO RESISTANCE?"

Faced with the willingness to be put under the local Modernist bishops in the second desirable Condition, "WHAT? NO RESISTANCE?"

Faced with the leaders of the SSPX's Liberal statements on the Council, the errors of Vatican II, on Religious Liberty, on the New Mass being legitimately promulgated, on accepting the New Code and the New Profession of Faith, on accepting Vatican II as "enlightening" and "deepening" Catholic Tradition (1), "WHAT? NO RESISTANCE?"

Faced with none of these statements, declarations and affirmations having been publicly rejected, corrected or refuted in a clear, precise manner by the culprits themselves, to all the priests and faithful of the world, scandalized by these compromises threatening the only Revealed Truth, "WHAT? NO RESISTANCE?"
Faced with the Society's leaders unjustly silencing, expelling, threatening bishops, priests, Carmelite nuns and faithful, even to the point of refusing Holy Communion and expelling children from their schools and threatening the same in the future for any who openly oppose the new direction of compromise and false agreements, "WHAT? NO RESISTANCE?"

     Faced with the leadership's ever growing silence about Modernist Rome's ongoing destruction of the Faith, Spirit of Assisi, Pope Francis' scandals against the Faith as well as the Modernist bishops throughout the world, "WHAT? NO RESISTANCE?"

Faced with the rising "friendly fire" towards the priests, monks and nuns of the Resistance (who merely repeat the Founder's warnings) as the "greatest evil" and ignoring the real danger and enemy to Christ the King and His Holy Religion, namely, Modernist /Conciliar Rome of 2013, "WHAT? NO RESISTANCE?"
Faced with the 6 Conditions, not one of which demands a doctrinal agreement, proving that Menzingen is ever determined to seeking a "practical agreement" (as if real unity can ever be possible without unity in the Catholic Truth), "WHAT? NO RESISTANCE?"

Faced with the affirmations that the Declarations of Vatican II "On Religious Liberty" and "On Relations of the Church With Non-Catholic Religions"(already condemned by previous Popes), are RECONCILABLE, albeit "with difficulty," with the prior Magisterium (Doctrinal Declaration, III, 5), by Society leaders, "WHAT? NO RESISTANCE?"

Faced with over 500 priests trained to combat Modernism and identify its tactics (such as ambiguous language) and confronted with this in the very documents sent from Menzingen, officially swallowing the Modernist poison, even before a written “canonical normalization” or “agreement” has been signed; faced with the overwhelming silence, “WHAT? NO RESISTANCE?”

When the Faith is compromised or EVEN IN DANGER (cf. Doctrinal -- not "Prudential"-- Declaration, April 15, 2012), St. Thomas Aquinas affirms (2) that inferiors have the duty to publicly correct their superiors, respectfully, but clearly, Bp. de Castro Meyer made it the point of his short sermon at the Episcopal Consecrations, 25 years ago. Abp. Lefebvre did not fear to continually correct the Vatican II Popes, numerous Cardinals and clergy. Was he not labeled  "schismatic", "rebellious", "dissident", "sedevacantist", "liberal" (for confronting superiors), "disobedient", "imprudent", etc., etc.? Did he not form a Resistance to the Conciliar Church and its Reforms?Truly admirable was his organization of the Priestly Society of St. Pius X to continue the True Doctrine, Mass, Catechism, and Sacraments. This was, to draw from the example of Sacred Scripture, building with the trowel in one hand.

But he also combatted the modern errors, the scandals of the then, reigning popes, and the destruction of countless souls through the errors and spirit promoted by the Conciliar Church. This was wielding the sword. Yes, the trowel in one hand, to build, the sword in the other, to fight! Fight he did indeed, till his last breath!
The new direction of the SSPX (admitted by Bp. Fellay's "new attitude towards Rome," the new non-critical approach of the newly branded websites, "Rome is changing" (3) and put into practice by the General Chapter Statement, 6 Conditions and the Doctrinal Declaration of April 15, 2012) has laid down the sword of combat ("... We must abandon the bulldozer approach") and focus on the "positive side" of solely building with the trowel.

But while the onslaughts of the enemies of the Faith are ever advancing and the Conciliar Reign of Terror heightens, there is nothing the Freemasons would agree with more, than to quit publicly exposing the real enemies to the Faith in today's Modernist Rome, and grow more agreeably silent on their errors, scandals and betrayals to Our Lord Jesus Christ. "Polemics" rains on the Conciliar parade.

This brings us to "Why the Resistance?"..."Resistance to what?" It is because OUR LORD JESUS CHRIST IS GOD, KING, AND THE ETERNAL HIGH PRIEST! He is the One betrayed, denied, mocked, and uncrowned by Vatican II and its adherents. To make the slightest compromise, even in the name of "practical prudence" with Vatican II, its illegitimate ("bâtarde") Mass and Reforms is to humiliate and betray Our Lord Jesus Christ! "...By their fruits you will know them" (St. Mt. VII 20).

So, "Resistance to what?" needs to be re-examined in the Light of the Faith and then, when one honestly reads the General Chapter Statement and 6 Conditions, the April 15th Doctrinal Declaration, the May 11, 2012 Interviews on CNS, the DICI Interviews of June 7, 2012, along with the continual double-speak and contradictions which still continue, then what honestCatholic cannot but ask, "WHAT? NO RESISTANCE TO ALL THIS?  What must we do?"

     Referring back to the example of a healthy body, only an emergency surgery can, short of a miracle, revive the SSPX from the mortal wound of the compromise committed last Summer. The steps taken depart from the mission and purpose of the Society's Founder in an official capacity. Miracles? That is Our Lady's "forte" and She knows how to invoke them! She has the mission to revive the Church and can save the SSPX we love and hold dear. But while praying and sacrificing, what else can we do?"...I am not a pessimist. The Holy Virgin will have the victory. She will triumph over the great Apostasy, the fruit of Liberalism. One more reason not to twiddle our thumbs! We have to fight more than ever for the Social Reign of Our Lord Jesus Christ! In this battle, we are not alone: we have with us all the Popes up through Pius XII inclusively. All of them combatted Liberalism in order to deliver the Church from it. God did not grant that they succeed, but this is no reason to lay down our weapons!

"We have to build, while the others are demolishing. The crumbled citadels have to be rebuilt, the bastions of the Faith to be reconstructed: firstly the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass of All Times, which forms saints; then our chapels, which are our true parishes; our monasteries; our large families; our enterprises faithful to the social doctrine of the Church; our politicians determined to make the politics of Jesus Christ--this is a whole tissue of Christian social life, Christian customs, Christian reflexes, which we have to restore, on the scale that God wants, at the time God wills. All that I know, the Faith teaches us; it is that Our Lord Jesus Christ must reign here below, now, and not only at the end of the world, as the Liberals would have it!" (4).
     
      "Let us, therefore, fight on, with the trowel in one hand  and  the sword in the other!" 
"Of them that built on the wall and that carried burdens, and that laded: with one of his hands he did the work, and with the other he held a sword!" (II Esdras IV 17)
 
 
REFERENCES
 
(1) See: DICI Interview with Bp. Fellay On Relations With Rome, June 7, 2012, CNS Interview  May 11, 2012 in Menzingen and Doctrinal Declaration of April 15, 2012.
(2) St. Thomas Aquinas [IIa IIae Q. 33 a. 4 ad 2um]: "It must be observed, however, that if the faith were endangered, a subject ought to rebuke his prelate even publicly. Hence Paul, who was Peter's subject, rebuked him in public, on account of the imminent danger of scandal concerning faith, and, as the gloss of Augustine says on Galatians 2:11, Peter gave an example to superiors, that if at any time they should happen to stray from the straight path, they should not disdain to be reproved by their subjects."
(3) Letter of Bp. Fellay and Assistants to three Bishops, April 14, 2012, "We have observed a change of attitude in the Church...Vatican II...is no longer in people's heads. Fewer and fewer believe it." Interviews of June 7, 2012, DICI:  "The attitude of the official Church has changed, not me."
(4) They Have Uncrowned Him, by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, Chapter 34.
 

A conference given by the Seminary Rector, Father Peter R. Scott at St. Michael the Archangel Church in Adelaide, South Australia on Sunday March 3, 2003

I. THE PROBLEM

It is now nearly 40 years since traditional Catholics, overwhelmed by the continual degradation of the state of the Church, have been troubled in conscience as to what they ought to do. Ought I to conform exteriorly, while of course refusing to accept the heresies? This is the position of those who elect to stay in their Novus Ordo parishes or attend the Indult Mass. Then there is the other excess, the position of the sedevacantists, who maintain that they are the only Catholics left and send everybody else, laymen, priests, bishops, Pope into hell. Another position is that of those who give up out of discouragement, on account of the apparent hopelessness of the situation. They will stay at home, recite their Rosary, attend Mass if and when they can easily do so. They want to keep their Faith, and save their souls, but in a private way. They refuse to get involved in the conflicts brought about by this terrible crisis. They will not, as they call it, take sides. They consider that they are not responsible for this terrible crisis in the Church, and that consequently there is nothing that they can do to fix it.

There is, however, a fourth possible attitude to embrace, a more profound approach to the crisis, one based upon the Catechism. It can, however, only be understood inasmuch as one grasps the real and essential nature of the crisis. We must consequently identify, amongst the myriad of different manifestations of modernism in the post-conciliar church, the fundamental, driving, doctrinal error, most opposed to the catechism. It is not Communion in the hand, the refusal of the propitiatory sacrifice in the New Mass or the abuses that we are so familiar with. It is not even dialogue with Protestants, the refusal to stand up for Catholic truth or to take a firm position for marriage and against contraception and abortion. It is not New Age, feminism or the replacement of Christ’s teaching with the social justice gospel of a better world – liberation theology as it is called. There is a more profound error that constitutes the underlying theology that penetrates all of these deviations and many more, a modernist perversion of Catholicism which has inspired the entire post-conciliar revolution. It is a new theology of the Church, or the new Ecclesiology, according to the word that has been coined to identify it.

MORE................

'Is Britain’s cover-up of its 1845-1850 holocaust in Ireland the most successful Big Lie in all of history?

The cover-up is accomplished by the same British terrorism and bribery that perpetrated the genocide. Consider: why does Irish President Mary Robinson call it “Ireland’s greatest natural disaster” while she conceals the British army’s role? Potato blight, “phytophthora infestans”, did spread from America to Europe in 1844, to England and then Ireland in 1845 but it didn’t cause famine anywhere. Ireland did not starve for potatoes; it starved for food.

Ireland starved because its food, from 40 to 70 shiploads per day, was removed at gunpoint by 12,000 British constables reinforced by the British militia, battleships, excise vessels, Coast Guard and by 200,000 British soldiers.'

Read more: The Irish Holocaust

  by McHugh and Callan pre-Vatican II


Participation of Catholics in non-Catholic services may happen today in so many ways, and it is so difficult at times to draw the line between lawful and unlawful communication, that it is well before considering these cases to state the general rules that apply here.

1. General rules
   
   1. It is lawful to perform an act from which two effects follow, one good and the other bad, if the act in itself is good or indifferent if there is a sufficiently grave reason for performing it, if the evil effect is not intended and if the evil effect be not prior to the good effect (see 104).
      
      
   2. Circumstances vary in different localities and countries, and communication that would signify unity of belief in a place where Catholics and non-Catholics are very unequal numerically might be very harmless in a place where there is no great numerical difference. Offence to non-Catholics should not be given needlessly.
      
      
   3. In doubtful cases the decision whether or not a particular kind of communication is lawful or unlawful pertains to the Ordinary (Canon 1258).
      
      
2. Participation of Catholics in non-Catholic services is either active or passive. (a) Participation is active when one takes a part or fulfils some function in an act that is an official expression of the worship and belief of a sect, even though this takes place outside a church, or is not open to the general public. (b) Participation is passive, if one merely assists as a spectator, and not as a worshipper, at something pertaining to non-Catholic worship.
   
   
3. Sacred things in which communication is possible are of three classes:
   
   
   1. the chief acts of divine worship (i.e., Sacrifices, Sacra­ments, sacramentals) ;
      
      
   2. the secondary acts of divine worship (such, as prayers, processions, vows, oaths, the Divine Office, hymn singing, Scrip­ture reading, etc.,.). In the Protestant denominations some one or other of these is, as a rule, the central or distinctive service, al­though some have other proper features of their own, such as the silent meeting of the Quakers, the seance of the Spiritualists, the march of the Salvation Army, the charity kiss of the Dunkards;
      
      
   3. places (e.g., churches, lodge rooms, cemeteries), times (e.g., days of feast or fast), and objects (e.g., images, badges, aprons, banners, robes), pertaining to divine worship.
      
      
4. It is unlawful for Catholics in any way to assist actively at or take part in the worship of non-Catholics (Canon 1258). Such assistance is intrinsically and gravely evil; for (a) if the worship is non-Catholic in its form (e.g., Mohammedan ablutions, the Jewish paschal meal, revivalistic "hitting the trail," the right hand of fellowship, etc.), it expresses a belief in the false creed symbolised; (b) if the worship is Catholic in form, but is under the auspices of a non-Catholic body (e.g., Baptism as adminis­tered by a Protestant minister, or Mass as celebrated by a schis­matical priest), it expresses either faith in a false religious body or rebellion against the true Church.
   
   
5. it is unlawful for Catholics to simulate active assistance in the worship of non-Catholics, for, while the non-Catholic rite would be avoided, something which appeared to be that rite would be done, and thus profession of faith in it would be given.
   
   1. Hence, it is not lawful to do an indifferent act which bystanders from the circumstances will have to conclude is an act of false worship. Thus, Eleazar would not eat lawful meat which was put before him in order that he might pretend to eat the meat of sacrifice after the manner of the heathen (II Mach., vi).
      
      
   2. It is not lawful to accept a false certificate of participa­tion in false worship. Hence, the early Church condemned as apostates the Libellaties (i.e., those Christians, who, to protect themselves in time of persecution, obtained by bribery or other­wise a forged or genuine magistrate's certificate that they had sacrificed to the heathen gods).