“Pride sits in Modernism as in its own house”

“It cannot be difficult to find out which is the true religion, if only it be sought with an earnest and unbiased mind; for proofs are abundant and striking. We have, for example, the fulfilment of prophecies, miracles in great numbers, the rapid spread of the faith in the midst of enemies and in face of overwhelming obstacles, the witness of the martyrs, and the like. From all these it is evident that the only true religion is the one established by Jesus Christ Himself, and which He committed to His Church to protect and to propagate. For the only-begotten Son of God established on earth a society which is called the Church, and to it He handed over the exalted and divine office which He had received from His Father, to be continued through the ages to come. “As the Father hath sent Me, I also send you.”‘ “Behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world.”(6) Consequently, as Jesus Christ came into the world that men “might have life and have it more abundantly,”(7) so also has the Church for its aim and end the eternal salvation of souls, and hence it is so constituted as to open wide its arms to all mankind, unhampered by any limit of either time or place. “Preach ye the Gospel to every creature.”(8) Over this mighty multitude God has Himself set rulers with power to govern, and He has willed that one should be the head of all, and the chief and unerring teacher of truth, to whom He has given “the keys of the kingdom of heaven.”(9) “Feed My lambs, feed My sheep.”(10) “I have prayed for thee that thy faith fail not.”(11)”

 

6 Matt. 28:20, 7 John 10:10, 8 Mark 16:15, 9 Matt. 16:19, 10 John 21:16-17, 11 Luke 22:32.

Pope Leo XIII, IMMORTALE DEI, 1 November 1885

If Jesus is a liar, then He isn’t divine. If He isn’t divine, then Catholicism is a lie.

“But it is pride which exercises an incomparably greater sway over the soul to blind it and plunge it into error, and pride sits in Modernism as in its own house, finding sustenance everywhere in its doctrines and an occasion to flaunt itself in all its aspects. It is pride which fills Modernists with that confidence in themselves and leads them to hold themselves up as the rule for all, pride which puffs them up with that vainglory which allows them to regard themselves as the sole possessors of knowledge, and makes them say, inflated with presumption, We are not as the rest of men, and which, to make them really not as other men, leads them to embrace all kinds of the most absurd novelties; it is pride which rouses in them the spirit of disobedience and causes them to demand a compromise between authority and liberty; it is pride that makes of them the reformers of others, while they forget to reform themselves, and which begets their absolute want of respect for authority, not excepting the supreme authority. No, truly, there is no road which leads so directly and so quickly to Modernism as pride.”

Pope St. Pius X, PASCENDI DOMINICI GREGIS, 8 September 1907

And finally, back to Leo XIII:

“This wicked dragon pours out, as a most impure flood, the venom of his malice on men of depraved mind and corrupt heart, the spirit of lying, of impiety, of blasphemy, and the pestilent breath of impurity, and of every vice and iniquity. These most crafty enemies have filled and inebriated with gall and bitterness the Church, the spouse of the immaculate Lamb, and have laid impious hands on her most sacred possessions. In the Holy Place itself, where the See of Holy Peter and the Chair of Truth has been set up as the light of the world, they have raised the throne of their abominable impiety, with the iniquitous design that when the Pastor has been struck, the sheep may be.”

You can read more about that last quote HERE.

“All who adhere to errors of this kind are to be shunned and to be punished as detestable and abominable infidels”

I’ve been into the quotation headlines lately, and I predict it will continue. This one comes to us from Pope Leo X, by way of HERE.

“…since truth never contradicts truth, we declare every assertion contrary to the truth of illumined faith to be altogether false; and, that it may not be permitted to dogmatize otherwise, we strictly forbid it, and we decree that all who adhere to errors of this kind are to be shunned and to be punished as detestable and abominable infidels who disseminate most damnable heresies and who weaken the Catholic faith.”

Fifth Lateran Council, Bull Apostolici RegiminisDenz. 738

Although the topic being treated therein is wholly different, I shall shamelessly apply it to my own ends.

Yesterday’s post proved quite popular, thanks to Frank Walker over at Canon212. The ongoing theme is the direct link between Amoris Laetitia and intercommunion, and this will be further developed as we flesh out the link between Amoris, intercommunion, Humanae Vitae, and sodomy. Oh yes, dear friends, I’m afraid the endgame is sodomy. False unity, through false transcendence; the doctrine remains as an ideal, but we are called to go BEYOND mere doctrine by discerning the “spirit” in order to perfect our conscience. Only then can we be properly disposed to share the Body with our less fortunate brethren, knowing that in certain cases it is God himself who wills the sacrilege.

You best learn well this angle of attack and know how to refute it.

Take a look at this post from Tancred over at Eponymous Flower, titled “The Connection Between Amoris Laetitia and Intercommunion:”

“…it is clear that there is a red thread connecting inter-communion with Amoris laetitia. On the one hand, in dogmatic questions, a primacy of life over doctrine is asserted and, at the same time, in moral questions a primacy of life over the object of action. In fact, the true life of faith needs clear instruction and moral life clear guidance as to whether an action is good or bad in itself. Otherwise, “a false primacy of a false life will result,” says Don Morselli.

It follows automatically that life can never be a lie. The lack of agreement of one’s own life with the truth, which can be seen from the objective nature of things, leads to “life lies.” It is true that life is greater and more than the principles of the councils. But it is equally true that without these “explanations and interpretations” no real Christian life is possible.

Therefore, there is no possible “communion” (society) with Jesus and the Church possible if communion is lacking in faith because of the lack of the necessary approval for doctrine. Don Morselli in reference to the words of Pope Francis:

“A gesture that expresses something false is not a, ‘life that is greater than explanations and interpretations,’ but a lie.”

Read the whole thing HERE.

It really just comes down to the “nature of things.” Truth, objective reality, metaphysics, ontology. Read a book. Augustine, Aquinas, Garrigou-Lagrange. We are talking about the fundamental underpinnings of the created universe being attacked. Everything is tied together.

You need to be grounded in the real.

 

 

“You had better happily hand out that wafer, or give me my money back!”

Not a parody. This is really happening. HERE

The President of Germany…Frank-Walter Steinmeier said: “Let us seek ways of expressing the common Christian faith by sharing in the Last Supper and Communion. I am sure: Thousands of Christians in interdenominational marriages are hoping for this.”

 

 

Cardinal Marx echoed the words of the German President, saying: “When someone is hungry and has faith, they must have access to the Eucharist. That must be our passion, and I will not let up on this.”

Protestant German comedian Eckart von Hirschhausen caused particular controversy by demanding to be “handed that wafer” because, since he is married to a Catholic, he pays his Church tax. “I don’t see the point of a public debate about wafers,” …he said that, since he paid his Church tax, the Church had “better happily hand out a wafer for it, or give me back my money!”

The abomination of desolation much? First it’s Catholics in obstinate grave sin who get to receive, then proddies. Who’s next? Non-Christians. Who’s next? Atheists. Remember, there are atheist saints, you know, so why shouldn’t they have access to the Blessed Sacrament? Why would you deny them “food for the journey”? You’re mean!

As I wrote barely a week ago about this, it will be those bishops, priests and laymen who hold fast to true doctrine who will be accused of “eating and drinking unworthily,” and it’s going to get very, very nasty. It has all been laid out precisely in Amoris Laetitia #186 HERE.

#186 The Eucharist demands that we be members of the one body of the Church. Those who approach the Body and Blood of Christ may not wound that same Body by creating scandalous distinctions and divisions among its members. This is what it means to “discern” the body of the Lord, to acknowledge it with faith and charity both in the sacramental signs and in the community; those who fail to do so eat and drink judgement against themselves (cf. v. 29). The celebration of the Eucharist thus becomes a constant summons for everyone “to examine himself or herself ” (v. 28), to open the doors of the family to greater fellowship with the underprivileged, and in this way to receive the sacrament of that Eucharistic love which makes us one body. We must not forget that “the ‘mysticism’ of the sacrament has a social character”. When those who receive it turn a blind eye to the poor and suffering, or consent to various forms of division, contempt and inequality, the Eucharist is received unworthily. On the other hand, families who are properly disposed and receive the Eucharist regularly, reinforce their desire for fraternity, their social consciousness and their commitment to those in need.

Analysis:

Paragraph #186 teaches precisely the OPPOSITE of what St. Paul teaches. In this version, it is those who have failed to share the Eucharist (aka rigid doctors of the law who withhold the Eucharist from those unworthy to receive) who are guilty of taking the Eucharist unworthily themselves. Is it not abundantly clear what he means by “open the doors to greater fellowship with the ‘underprivileged’”? The people who fail to discern – the guilty ones – are the mean people who are blocking “unity” by denying the Eucharist to others. It’s the Faithful Catholics who are the ones creating “scandalous distinctions…divisions, contempt, inequality.”…

The logical ends of this are now playing out before our eyes:

  1. Unrepentant mortal sinners must be shown mercy, because unity is the ultimate commandment
  2. The law remains unchanged, but it is to be seen merely as an “ideal”
  3. The mercy of God transcends the reality of the law
  4. Those who refuse to accept this “greater reality” commit mortal sin themselves
  5. The transcendence of the Spirit also extends to protestants, non-Christians, and atheists, because “a little bread and wine does no harm”, we are all children of God, proselytizing is solemn nonsense, and atheists go to Heaven. Capiche?

Do you now understand why the non-response from Antipope Bergoglio to the dubia and every other letter, petition and plea put before him? The referential footnotes in Chapter Eight having been long ago exposed as completely dishonest, falsely claiming continuity with traditional thought, Bergoglio needs to lay claim to channeling a higher authority: The Third Person of the Trinity, of course. And so he will cite Holy Scripture as a CONTRAST to the closed-mindedness of the mean Old Church for failing to properly declare the “doctrine” of Unity through Diversity/Sharing, and will accuse orthodox Catholics of heresy for calling him out on it. This isn’t “big tent” Catholicism, this is the annihilation of Catholicism. Are you ready for what that means for you?

Please go read the whole post, so you fully understand.

 

“He considers that this title corresponds to reality.”

That headline was the response given by Abp. Ganswein to the question of certain irregularities in the papal abdication. Pope Benedict had supposedly decided to resign, yet had chosen to retain his vesture, retain his title as pope, albeit with ’emeritus’ added (which is impossible), retain his residency within the Vatican enclosure, and his form of address as remaining “His Holiness”. HERE

The press questioned, “Why?”

The answer, “He considers that this title corresponds to reality.”

In Pope Benedict’s mind (“he considers”) that the title “Pope (Emeritus)” and the formal address “His Holiness” corresponds to reality.

But hey, I’m the crazy one for pointing out obvious stuff. Just go ahead and try to suggest on the interweebs that Pope Benedict thinks he retained some portion of the papacy. YOU’RE TWISTING HIS WORDS! YOU’RE NOT A MIND READER! After all, we clearly had a conclave, and “Francis” was clearly elected, and this result seems to have been clearly greeted by peaceful universal acceptance by the cardinals, right?

Do you know what is coming up this Saturday? Everyone is talking about it… The Royal Wedding! Harry and Meghan! It will be televised all around the world, and tens of millions of people will watch. It will look spectacular. All the rituals will play out, the ceremony will unfold, vows exchanged, and the prince and princess will be husband and wife.

Except they won’t be. You see, Meghan is still married to her first husband, because divorce doesn’t exist. Divorce is anti-reality. So all that will take place on Saturday is the appearance of a wedding, but in reality is simply fancy formalized adultery and fornication. Even though everything will be done correctly according to formula, nothing will actually happen. It doesn’t matter that all the attendees and everyone watching on television will believe that a wedding just took place. The metaphysical reality of the situation is that nothing happened, because a prior event (her actual wedding) nullifies the “result” of Saturday’s proceedings. In the words of Louie Verrechio, an act of deception, no matter how cleverly conceived or convincingly executed, cannot change the objective reality of a given situation.“ HERE

Which is exactly why the 2013 conclave didn’t actually happen. It looked like it happened, everyone believed at the time it was real, but now we know that the weight of the evidence points towards a prior event nullifying its occurrence: Pope Benedict intending to hold on to at least part of the papacy. And if that is true, which I believe with moral certainty to be the case, then he didn’t resign any of the papacy, because Canon 188 says he didn’t. No resignation, no conclave.

“He considers that this title corresponds to reality.”

Out of error, truth.

“The “always” is also a “for ever” – there can no longer be a return to the private sphere. My decision to resign the active exercise of the ministry does not revoke this.” – Pope Benedict

Archbishop Gänswein…said that Pope Francis and Benedict are not two popes “in competition” with one another, but represent one “expanded” Petrine Office with “an active member” and a “contemplative.” “Therefore, from 11 February 2013, the papal ministry is not the same as before,” he said. “…before and after his resignation” Benedict has viewed his task as “participation in such a ‘Petrine ministry’. (Not in its “Office”, the governance of the Church in the world, but in its “essentially spiritual nature”, through prayer and suffering.) “He left the Papal Throne and yet, with the step he took on 11 February 2013, he has not abandoned this ministry,” Gänswein explained, something “quite impossible after his irrevocable acceptance of the office in April 2005.”

And lastly, Professor de Mattei: “Benedict XVI had the ability to renounce the papacy, but consequently, would have had to give up the name of Benedict XVI, dressing in white, and the title of Pope emeritus: in a word, he would have had to definitively cease from being Pope, also leaving Vatican City. Why did he not do so? Because Benedict XVI seems to be convinced of still being Pope, although a Pope who has renounced the exercise of the Petrine ministry. This conviction is born of a profoundly-erroneous ecclesiology, founded on a sacramental and not juridical conception of the Papacy. If the Petrine munus is a sacrament and not a juridical office, then it has an indelible character, but in this case it would be impossible to renounce the office. The resignation presupposes the revocability of the office, and is then irreconcilable with the sacramental vision of the Papacy.”

FINALLY someone else is talking about CCC675

Cardinal Eijk broke the taboo in NCRegister yesterday HERE.  Here finally is a Prince of the Church openly proclaiming that the Roman “situation” is so bad, he can’t help but be reminded of apocalyptic prophesy. Writing about intercommunion as proposed by the majority of German bishops, he said:

“…The Holy Father should have given the delegation of the German episcopal conference clear directives, based on the clear doctrine and practice of the Church. He should have also responded on this basis to the Lutheran woman who asked him on November 15, 2015 if she could receive Communion with her Catholic spouse, saying that this is not acceptable instead of suggesting she could receive Communion on the basis of her being baptized, and in accordance with her conscience. By failing to create clarity, great confusion is created among the faithful and the unity of the Church is endangered. This is also the case with cardinals who publicly propose to bless homosexual relationships, something which is diametrically opposed to the doctrine of the Church, founded on Sacred Scripture, that marriage, according to the order of creation, exists only between a man and a woman.

Observing that the bishops and, above all, the Successor of Peter fail to maintain and transmit faithfully and in unity the deposit of faith contained in Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture, I cannot help but think of Article 675 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

“The Church’s ultimate trial

Before Christ’s second coming the Church must pass through a final trial that will shake the faith of many believers. The persecution that accompanies her pilgrimage on earth will unveil the ‘mystery of iniquity’ in the form of a religious deception offering men an apparent solution to their problems at the price of apostasy from the truth.”

+Willem Jacobus Cardinal Eijk

Archbishop of Utrecht, Netherlands

Utrecht, 5 May 2018

Everybody wants to pretend it’s not a possibility, because everyone is afraid of being called crazy-pants conspiracy chemtrails. Well it obviously doesn’t bother me much, as I’ve been quoting this paragraph of the Catechism as well as CCC677 and the corresponding scripture references for years. Here is one example:

Have you noticed the headlines? Have you noticed that we are SPRINTING toward… something?

 

The Church’s ultimate trial

CCC675 Before Christ’s second coming the Church must pass through a final trial that will shake the faith of many believers. The persecution…will unveil the “mystery of iniquity” in the form of a religious deception offering men an apparent solution to their problems at the price of apostasy from the truth. The supreme religious deception is that…by which man glorifies himself in place of God and of his Messiah come in the flesh.

CCC677 The Church will enter the glory of the kingdom only through this final Passover, when she will follow her Lord in his death and Resurrection. The kingdom will be fulfilled, then, not by a historic triumph of the Church through a progressive ascendancy, but only by God’s victory over the final unleashing of evil, which will cause his Bride to come down from heaven. God’s triumph over the revolt of evil will take the form of the Last Judgment after the final cosmic upheaval of this passing world.

———————————————

“And many false prophets shall rise, and shall seduce many.  And because iniquity hath abounded, the charity of many shall grow cold. But he that shall persevere to the end, he shall be saved. And this gospel of the kingdom, shall be preached in the whole world, for a testimony to all nations, and then shall the consummation come.  When therefore you shall see the abomination of desolation, which was spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place: he that readeth let him understand.” Matt  24:11, 13-15

“And he opened his mouth unto blasphemies against God, to blaspheme his name, and his tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven. And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them. And power was given him over every tribe, and people, and tongue, and nation. And all that dwell upon the earth adored him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb, which was slain from the beginning of the world. If any man have an ear, let him hear.” Rev 13:6-9

“For there shall be then great tribulation, such as hath not been from the beginning of the world until now, neither shall be.  And unless those days had been shortened, no flesh should be saved: but for the sake of the elect those days shall be shortened.  Then if any man shall say to you: Lo here is Christ, or there, do not believe him.  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. Behold I have told it to you, beforehand.” Matt 24:21-25

 

——————————————————–

Crazy-pants, right?

False Unity through False Transcendence and the Holy Spirit of “disaster”

Excerpt from a blog post I wrote at the time of this tweet, December 2016:

“Creativity! The FrancisGenius is going to provide creative answers to mercyproblems, enabling new undertakings, because Francis has the Spirit!

The endgame to implementation and enforcement of Amoris Laetitia is not in yes or no answers. The endgame will be to assign the questions and criticisms to a malformed, primitive, simplistic moral theology, which needs to be enlightened by the Third Person of the God of Surprises. That is why you are hearing all the talk lately about spirits, and it will soon become clear which Spirit or spirits are on which side.

The endgame will be false transcendence. If twitter allowed more than 140 characters (and now it does), it might sound something like this:

“Doctors of the law remain fixated on the ‘ideals’ of the Gospel, and indeed the ‘ideals’ remain unchanged. But the God of Surprises demands us to unleash the creativity of mercy at this time, to bring about new undertakings amidst the concrete situations of real life. This is the fruit of grace to which the spirit is calling. It is a grace that transcends mere ideals, bringing God’s profound mercy and hope to those on the peripheries.”

Does that sound about right? “Francis” laid the groundwork for all this through a diabolical twisting of 1 Cor 11:17-34, buried deep within AL, paragraphs #185-186.”

I started writing another essay around the same time, based on those two paragraphs #185-186 from Amoris. I shelved it, because I thought that maybe I was too far out over my tips. But the last few weeks have revealed a pattern that points directly toward what I had foreseen back then: An attempt at marketing a One World Religion, in which no one is ever excluded, and thus unity is achieved through “diversity”. There have been several trial balloons lately: The denial of Hell on Holy Thursday, the assurance of atheist saints, the “we are all children of God, even the unbaptized”,  the Truth can be made into an idol, and of course the latest, “the Holy Spirit is a disaster”. There are others.

So I’ve updated the essay, and hopefully you make it through the next 3000 words. I’ll give you the conclusion up front: Having tried and failed in claiming that their heresies are consistent with perennial Church teaching, by referencing and footnoting previous magisterial documents in a way that was not very clever, and their unpopularity now growing day by day, they need to sweep these things away and claim that none of it matters:  The doctrines remain as they always were, but to speak only of doctrine is very small-minded. We are now called to the higher duty of UNITY above and beyond the mere doctrinal “ideals”. God’s mercy extends always and everywhere for everyone; it TRANSCENDS the doctrines. In fact, it transcends Catholicism itself, and it also transcends other religions and even atheism.  The Telos toward which the God of Surprises is calling is “Unity through Diversity”, always going out to the margins, never being close-minded, abstract or rigid, because “no one can be condemned forever.”

The time bomb is planted deep in Amoris Laetitia, way before Chapter Eight, in paragraphs #185-186. Before we look at those paragraphs, let’s examine the scripture passage *supposedly* being explained therein. The referenced scripture text is 1 Cor 11:17-34. The principle subject is eating and drinking unworthily. Note well: The beginning and ending of this passage (v.17-22, 33-34) refer to an abuse having to do with the context in which the Eucharist was celebrated, that is, the “Lord’s Supper” or agape meal preceding the Mass. The middle part (v.23-32) refers to the actual Eucharist itself. This distinction is extremely important.

Here is St. Paul to the Corinthians (footnotes in italics, must of which are Haydock):

[17] Now this I ordain: not praising you, that you come together not for the better, but for the worse. [18] For first of all I hear that when you come together in the church, there are schisms among you; and in part I believe it. [19]For there must be also heresies: that they also, who are approved, may be made manifest among you. [20] When you come therefore together into one place, it is not now to eat the Lord’s supper.

[19] “There must be also heresies”: By reason of the pride and perversity of man’s heart; not by God’s will or appointment; who nevertheless draws good out of this evil, manifesting, by that occasion, who are the good and firm Christians, and making their faith more remarkable.

[20] “The Lord’s supper”: So the apostle here calls the charity feasts observed by the primitive Christians; and reprehends the abuses of the Corinthians, on these occasions; which were the more criminal, because these feasts were accompanied with the celebrating of the eucharistic sacrifice and sacrament.

[21] For every one taketh before his own supper to eat. And one indeed is hungry and another is drunk. [22] What, have you not houses to eat and to drink in? Or despise ye the church of God; and put them to shame that have not? What shall I say to you? Do I praise you? In this I praise you not. [23] For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, that the Lord Jesus, the same night in which he was betrayed, took bread. [24] And giving thanks, broke, and said: Take ye, and eat: this is my body, which shall be delivered for you: this do for the commemoration of me. [25] In like manner also the chalice, after he had supped, saying: This chalice is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as often as you shall drink, for the commemoration of me.

[26] For as often as you shall eat this bread, and drink the chalice, you shall shew the death of the Lord, until he come. [27] Therefore whosoever shall eat this bread, or drink the chalice of the Lord unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and of the blood of the Lord. [28] But let a man prove himself: and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of the chalice[29] For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh judgment to himself, not discerning the body of the Lord. [30] Therefore are there many infirm and weak among you, and many sleep.

[27] “Or drink”: Here erroneous translators corrupted the text, by putting and drink (contrary to the original) instead of or drink.

[27] “Guilty of the body”: not discerning the body. This demonstrates the real presence of the body and blood of Christ, even to the unworthy communicant; who otherwise could not be guilty of the body and blood of Christ, or justly condemned for not discerning the Lord’s body.

[28] “Drink of the chalice”: This is not said by way of command, but by way of allowance, viz., where and when it is agreeable to the practice and discipline of the church.

[31] But if we would judge ourselves, we should not be judged. [32] But whilst we are judged, we are chastised by the Lord, that we be not condemned with this world. [33] Wherefore, my brethren, when you come together to eat, wait for one another. [34] If any man be hungry, let him eat at home; that you come not together unto judgment. And the rest I will set in order, when I come.

Paul is writing around the year 54 to the church in Corinth, which he himself had founded. The referenced passage comes later in the letter, after Paul had already issued rebukes for some very serious sins, including fornication, adultery, and sodomy (“effeminates and sodomizers” in the Greek…Paul liked specificity). The main issue of this section is the importance of examining ones conscience and worthy reception of the Eucharist.

In first century Corinth, the custom was for the Mass take place as part of an extended celebration, with a communal meal prior to the actual Mass, symbolic of the Passover setting in which Christ himself instituted the Eucharist. This communal meal, which was later abolished when fasting norms were introduced, is what St. Paul is talking about in vv. 17-22, 33-34. Go read it again. The problem was that the rich were overindulging, or keeping to themselves, thus leaving not enough for the poor, hence defeating the whole purpose of the pre-Eucharist charity meal. When he says “Don’t you have homes?” he means that if you’re really that physically hungry, have something at home before you come to church, so you can properly “share” in the celebration both materially and socially.

Sandwiched between the verses about the communal meal, we have the middle vv.23-32, where St. Paul is clearly shifting gears to talk about the actual Eucharist, not the communal meal. His tone turns far more grave (v. 27-29), because the sins he is referring to are not simply about failing to share/socialize at the communal meal, but rather all of those far worse sins he had called out earlier in the letter (Chapters 5-6). He issues a stern warning about those who eat and drink judgment unto themselves because they fail to examine (‘prove’) themselves and ‘discern’ before receiving the Body and Blood of Christ. Remember these words, because they will be twisted, in fact inverted, in truly diabolical fashion.

How do we know this is the correct interpretation of the passage?  Because it doesn’t make sense any other way.  Try reading v.29 and then v.33 in succession. Do you see how those two verses obviously refer to two different “meals”, because the instructions are opposed to one another?  v.29 says discern whether you are worthy to eat, v.33 says you should all eat together. Check out Haydock if you want more detail:

Verse 17: “S. Paul found that several abuses had crept in among the Corinthians at their Church meetings, where before the holy mysteries…they used to have those
charitable suppers, called the Agape. For as our Saviour eat first a common supper with his apostles, before he instituted the holy sacrament, so the Christians in many places brought meats with them, and eat a supper together, in token of that friendship and union, which they had with all their brethren, before they began to celebrate the holy mysteries. It is this supper, which according to the common interpretation S. Paul here (v. 20.) calls the Lord’s supper…”

Verses 23-32: “He puts every one in mind, that whosoever shall eat this bread, (v. 27.)
so called from the outward appearances, or drink the chalice of the Lord unworthily, shall, by such a sacrilege, be guilty of the body and of the blood of the Lord. And (v. 29.) that he eateth, and drinketh judgment, or condemnation to himself, not discerning the difference betwixt celestial food and other meats…This demonstrates the real presence of the body and blood of Christ, even to the unworthy communicant; who otherwise could not be guilty of the body and blood of Christ, or justly condemned for not discerning the Lord’s body.  The real presence in the sacrament is also proved by the enormity of the crime, in its profanation…Hence the dreadful punishments we read of in verses 27 and 30…To avoid this, let a man prove himself, examine the state of his conscience, especially before he receives the holy sacrament, confess his sins, and be absolved by those to whom Christ left the power of forgiving sins in his name, and by his authority. If we judge ourselves in this manner, we shall not be judged, that is, condemned.” HERE

By the way, it’s not a coincidence that this same passage was used first by protestants, and then by the Vatican II crowd, in their desire to destroy the sacrificial nature of the Mass, and deny the Eucharist itself, by falsely over-emphasizing the communal aspect in order to cover up the obvious teaching on the True Presence in vv.23-32. Their conflating of the communal meal with the actual sacrifice of Calvary re-presented on the altar is a prophetic set up to what comes next.  The entirety of Modernism, reaching its zenith in the Church with Vatican II and its aftermath, has led us unavoidably to this moment.

Now that we have an understanding of the scripture passage, let’s move on to the relevant paragraphs of Amoris Laetitia. Here are the two paragraphs that provide cover for the full blown heresy in Chapter Eight of the same document, and fuel the false narrative spouted by Bergoglio, Kasper, Marx, etc. #185 introduces 1 Corinthians into the “catechesis”:

  1. Along these same lines, we do well to take seriously a biblical text usually interpreted outside of its context or in a generic sense, with the risk of overlooking its immediate and direct meaning, which is markedly social. I am speaking of 1 Cor 11:17-34, where Saint Paul faces a shameful situation in the community. The wealthier members tended to discriminate against the poorer ones, and this carried over even to the agape meal that accompanied the celebration of the Eucharist. While the rich enjoyed their food, the poor looked on and went hungry: “One is hungry and another is drunk. Do you not have houses to eat and drink in? Or do you despise the Church of God and humiliate those who have nothing?” (vv. 21-22).

That first sentence is a hint about what comes next, but the rest of the paragraph is all well and good. It even makes the accurate distinction between the agape meal and the actual Eucharist. Now, watch this:

  1. The Eucharist demands that we be members of the one body of the Church. Those who approach the Body and Blood of Christ may not wound that same Body by creating scandalous distinctions and divisions among its members. This is what it means to “discern” the body of the Lord, to acknowledge it with faith and charity both in the sacramental signs and in the community; those who fail to do so eat and drink judgement against themselves (cf. v. 29). The celebration of the Eucharist thus becomes a constant summons for everyone “to examine himself or herself ” (v. 28), to open the doors of the family to greater fellowship with the underprivileged, and in this way to receive the sacrament of that Eucharistic love which makes us one body. We must not forget that “the ‘mysticism’ of the sacrament has a social character”. When those who receive it turn a blind eye to the poor and suffering, or consent to various forms of division, contempt and inequality, the Eucharist is received unworthily. On the other hand, families who are properly disposed and receive the Eucharist regularly, reinforce their desire for fraternity, their social consciousness and their commitment to those in need.

Paragraph #186 is a jaw-dropping diabolical inversion of truth. Antipope Francis here intentionally conflates the two separate admonitions from St. Paul, and the outcome is precisely the OPPOSITE of what St. Paul actually teaches. In this version, reading Paul through Jorge, it is those who have failed to share the Eucharist (aka rigid doctors of the law who withhold the Eucharist from those unworthy to receive) who are guilty of taking the Eucharist unworthily themselves.  Is it not abundantly clear what he means by “open the doors to greater fellowship with the ‘underprivileged’”?  The people who fail to discern – the guilty ones – are the mean people who are blocking “unity” by denying the Eucharist to others. It’s the Faithful Catholics who are the ones creating “scandalous distinctions…divisions, contempt, inequality.”  Read #186 again and again, until you understand.

The logical ends of this are now playing out before our eyes:

  1. Unrepentant mortal sinners must be shown mercy, because unity is the ultimate commandment
  2. The law remains unchanged, but it is to be seen merely as an “ideal”
  3. The mercy of God transcends the reality of the law
  4. Those who refuse to accept this “greater reality” commit mortal sin themselves
  5. The transcendence of the Spirit also extends to protestants, non-Christians, and atheists, because “a little bread and wine does no harm”, we are all children of God, proselytizing is solemn nonsense, and atheists go to Heaven. Capiche?

Do you now understand why the non-response from Antipope Bergoglio to the dubia and every other letter, petition and plea put before him?  The referential footnotes in Chapter Eight having been long ago exposed as completely dishonest, falsely claiming continuity with traditional thought, Bergoglio  needs to lay claim to channeling a higher authority: The Third Person of the Trinity, of course.  And so he will cite Holy Scripture as a CONTRAST to the closed-mindedness of the mean Old Church for failing to properly declare the “doctrine” of Unity through Diversity/Sharing, and will accuse orthodox Catholics of heresy for calling him out on it.  This isn’t “big tent” Catholicism, this is the annihilation of Catholicism. Are you ready for what that means for you?

Consider his scolding of the curia regarding “diseases impeding reform” in his Christmas address of 22 December 2016:

“There are also cases of malicious resistance, which spring up in misguided minds and come to the fore when the devil inspires ill intentions (often cloaked in sheep’s clothing).  This last kind of resistance hides behind words of self-justification and often accusation; it takes refuge in traditions, appearances, formalities, in the familiar, or else in a desire to make everything personal, failing to distinguish between the act, the actor, and the action.”

Imagine what this is going to mean not only for priests and bishops, but for every one of the faithful. You are going to be forced to play a part in this, and very soon. Start praying, or start praying harder, and prepare yourself and your family for what is coming. Matthew 24 is a great place to start.

“And many false prophets shall rise, and shall seduce many. And because iniquity hath abounded, the charity of many shall grow cold. But he that shall persevere to the end, he shall be saved. And this gospel of the kingdom, shall be preached in the whole world, for a testimony to all nations, and then shall the consummation come. When therefore you shall see the abomination of desolation, which was spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place: he that readeth let him understand.Then they that are in Judea, let them flee to the mountains: And he that is on the housetop, let him not come down to take any thing out of his house: And he that is in the field, let him not go back to take his coat. And woe to them that are with child, and that give suck in those days. But pray that your flight be not in the winter, or on the sabbath. For there shall be then great tribulation, such as hath not been from the beginning of the world until now, neither shall be. And unless those days had been shortened, no flesh should be saved: but for the sake of the elect those days shall be shortened. Then if any man shall say to you: Lo here is Christ, or there, do not believe him. 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. Behold I have told it to you, beforehand.” Matt 24:11-25

Well this explains a lot: It turns out that Satanism has gone totally mainstream (with pics)

WARNING: THIS POST CONTAINS EXAMPLES OF SATANIC PRAYERS AND BLASPHEMIES. ARM YOURSELF.

Let us pray. Saint Michael the Archangel, defend us in battle, be our protection against the wickedness and snares of the devil. May God rebuke him we humbly pray; and do thou, O Prince of the Heavenly host, by the power of God, thrust into hell Satan and all evil spirits who wander through the world seeking the ruin of souls. Amen.

You may remember a week or so before the 2016 election, there was a wiki dump of Podesta emails wherein the Pizzagate story broke, and it was also revealed that a cadre of ‘cultural elite’ were involved with Marina Abramovic in Spirit Cooking — satanic rituals involving, well read about it HERE.  Now it was not at all surprising to find this out, and in fact, a lot of other pieces fall neatly into place when you think about it. I also surmised at the time that the scope of demonic activities, and the number of people involved, was likely far greater that what we knew from wikileaks. There was a new development last week when a C-List Hollywood actress, with a picture of  Marina Abramovic featured prominently on her Facebook page, was arrested and charged with sex trafficking as part of having a leadership role in a cult. You can be sure that for every one of these stories that breaks, there are dozens more we don’t know about.

While evidence for the spread of the demonic continues to grow, I have to admit being caught off guard by what I’m about to share. Even with the sense of the demonic being absolutely palpable in the course of the last few years — a sense that is shared by many good priests – I still wasn’t mentally prepared for what I found.

The story begins with naive old me casually checking out the summer music scene. I like outdoor concerts/fairs, and my current place is not hospitable to such in the summer. So I look to the coasts and try to build in some vacation time.

Disclaimer: Rock music certainly carries a well-deserved reputation for dragging incremental sinfulness, especially licentiousness and drug use, into the mainstream. This was true from its earliest roots, and exploded during the 60s and 70s. But the mainstreaming of the demonic itself has never been on full display like what I’m about to show you. This is way beyond “Sympathy for the Devil” or “Runnin’ with the Devil” or even “Highway to Hell”, although I realize it’s all part of a greater whole. A lot of people reading this are judging me right now, not without cause, but I grew up in the 70s and 80s and my ear just can’t unhear it. So try to set that “issue” aside for a moment, and examine the following data set for what it’s worth. There is great value in understanding exactly what we’re up against.

I clicked on the annual music fair called “MMRBQ”, held the weekend before Memorial Day in my native place HERE. The way it works on the poster below, the headliner is listed first, who will be the last to play at the show, and then the bands are listed in order of descending popularity. The last band listed will be the first to play.

I didn’t recognize the second band on the poster. Never heard of them. The first and third bands are very famous, so the second band must also be very famous and very popular. I sighed, having finally reached the age where the second most popular band at a very popular event was utterly unknown to me. They must be relatively new and got popular very quickly with their first record or two. They slipped in under my radar.

I wanted to get to know them.

So I googled.

And google served up this.

ghost2

Full on Satanists. Not just playing dress up. How do we know? Well first of all, speaking of dressing up, of course real Satanists are going to have the very best dress/vestments, and boy do they ever. Note the Roman cassocks, the pectoral inverted crosses, the watered silk chasuble, and that MITER.

ghost1

Taking it up a notch, here we add the pellegrina to the cassock. I’m not sure the meaning of the green inside the chasuble vs the violet in the first pic. Satanists tend to invert everything, so surely liturgical time would be bent somehow.

ghost3

They are from Sweden and they are famous all over the world. Mainstream.

Image result for ghost band

Which reminds me, if you like incense, the Monks of the Holy Rood Guild make the best HERE. Cantica is my favorite, but the Laudate is pretty good too, and it lingers longer.

Related image

What else do we know about real Satanists? They know the One True Faith. They learn it better than most of the faithful, and then they invert it. Like the Nicene Creed. Ready for some lyrics?

“Satan Prayer”
Believe in one god do we
Satan almighty
The uncreator of heaven and soil
And the unvisable and the visable
And in his son
Begotten of father
By whom all things will be unmade
Who for man and his damnation
Incarnated
Rise up from hell
From sitteth on the left hand of his father
From thense he shall come to judge
Out of one substance
With satan
Whose kingdom shall haveth no end

Hear our satan prayer
Our anti nicene creed
Hear our satan prayer
For the cuming of seed
Hear our satan prayer
Our anti nicene creed
Hear our satan prayer
For the cuming of seed

Unholy ghost
Overlord and taker of life

Hear our satan prayer
Our anti nicene creed
Hear our satan prayer
For the cuming of seed
Hear our satan prayer
Our anti nicene creed
Hear our satan prayer
For the cuming of seed

How about Black Masses and an inverted Pater Noster?

“Ritual”
Tonight we’re summoned for a divine cause
Remembrance – No
But for their future loss

This chapel of ritual
Smells of dead human sacrifices
From the altar…

Beduins and nomads
Carried through the times
Through pestilences and famines
These ancient scrolls of rhymes

“Our fallen angel vexed
Was banished from the sky
Recite now from the text
Pray for ALL to die”

This chapel of ritual
Smells of dead human sacrifices
From the altar bed
On this night of ritual
Invoking our master
To procreate the unholy bastard

“Our father
Who art in hell
Unhallowed be thy name
Cursed be the sons and daughters
Of thine Nemesis
Whom are to blame
Thy kingdom come
nemA”

Tonight we summoned for His unholy fiend
Now celebrate
The End

How about acknowledging and then mocking the Real Presence?

“Body And Blood”
This grave hill stinks of death
A reek from the ground
Catches whiff of the hound
A dead ones breath
The casket lid is cold
Waiting inside
Is someone petrified
That odours old

His body and blood
Sharing in common
His body and blood
His body and blood
Serving Messiah

Son of God
The bitter taste is sweet
So eat Nazarene
And you kiss the obscene
Anointed feet

His body and blood
Sharing in common
His body and blood
His body and blood
Serving Messiah

His body and blood
Sharing in common
His body and blood
His body and blood
Serving Messiah

Son of God
Receive, consume
Receive, consume
Digest
Defecate

His body and blood
Sharing in common
His body and blood
His body and blood
Serving Messiah
Son of God

How about the prophesy of the Antichrist born of a lustful nun?

“Prime Mover”
Clad in cloak
A secretive nun
Bearing the old ones´ bastard son
Varucose phallos
Obsessed and poised her
Cast a veil of dusk upon the cloister

Prime mover
Maternal slave
With child of her grave

Mother
Filth in her womb
Father
Waiting in tomb

Selected heir
Machinary insect
Bloodline of the dark architect
Toxic blood
Of not known birth
Antichrist will walk the earth

Prime mover
Maternal slave
With child of her grave

“Death Knell”
Say, can you see the cross?
Inverted solemnly
A symbol for the goat
Of a thousand young

Six, six, six
Evoke the king of hell
Strike the death knell
Death knell

Say, can you hear the chimes?
Tolls now for the end
Bells call out our doom
As victor reaches womb

Sex, sex, sex
Receive the beast of evil
Of evil…

Can you say his name?
Carrier of the light
Legions of his seed
A child you a spouse will feed

S-A-T-A-N
Under spell
of death knell
Death knell

What else do we know about real Satanists? They know Latin. Did you know that there is no “Novus Ordo” of the Black Mass? That’s right, every Black Mass said today is according to the old rite, diabolically inverted and perverted. Conversely, I’ve heard it said that the devil hates Latin. But man, these cats sure seem downright proficient.

“Infestissumam”
Il Padre
Il Filio
Et Lo Spiritus Malum
Omnis Caelestis
Delenda Est

Anti Cristus
Il Filio De Sathanas
INFESTISSUMAM

“Per Aspera Ad Inferni”
Unholy
Is the lust in your eyes
“Blasphemous”
Would not suffice

Perverted
Are your wishes and dreams
Tanning in Lucifer’s beams

Per Aspera Ad Inferi
Per Aspera Ad Inferi
Per Aspera Ad Inferi
Per Aspera Ad Inferi

All your dreams will come true
All your dreams will come true

Oh Satan
Devour us all
Hear our desperate call

Per Aspera Ad Inferi
Per Aspera Ad Inferi
Per Aspera Ad Inferi
Per Aspera Ad Inferi

Per Aspera Ad Inferi
Per Aspera Ad Inferi
Per Aspera Ad Inferi
Per Aspera Ad Inferi

Keep in mind, I’m not even posting the really sick stuff. Most of their songs are all about recruiting souls. It’s awful. My whole point for you to take away is the title of this post: This is not underground, this is not on the fringe, this is not niche, this is now TOTALLY MAINSTREAM. There are armies and armies of people who chant these lyrics. Is there any wonder the sense of the demonic is palpable? This is what we’re up against. Arm yourself with the armor of God. Say your Rosary every day. Set aside time devoted to prayer. While you’re at it, read up on why the collapse of (and now the suppression of) the contemplative orders, how this directly effects every one of us, and makes our jobs that much harder HERE.

I saved the best part for last. This band was formed in 2010, by the front man in the bishop’s miter. 2010 was fully three years before the faux abdication of Pope Benedict. Can you guess the stage name of the front man?

Wait for it…

“Papa Emeritus”

I kid you not.

So it turns out that title was invented by Satanists. Make of that what you will.