April 2025 PDF Issue

Posted on April 23, 2025 by Catholic Candle

April 2025 PDF Issue Download

Posted on April 23, 2025 by Catholic Candle

Words to Live by – from Catholic Tradition

We Must Never, Ever Tell a Lie

To tell a lie is always evil and sinful. No end ever justifies a sinful means. Even if we were to suppose that a person had the very highest of all motives – which is to promote the glory of God – that would still never justify a lie.

Here is the very striking way in which St. Thomas Aquinas, greatest Doctor of the Catholic Church, teaches this truth:

A lie must be shunned to such an extent that, even if it seemed that the lie would increase the glory of God, we should still not tell a lie.[1]

Let us consider an example: Suppose a pagan were on his deathbed with only minutes to live. Suppose also that we happen to know that he would convert to the Catholic Faith and agree to baptism if we were to tell him a small (so-called) “harmless” lie, such as that the dog he loved would go to heaven. We can never justify even such a (so-called) “white” lie even to save his soul.

[1] Here is the Latin:

Adeo enim vitanda sunt mendacia, ut etiam si cedere videantur ad landem Dei, non sunt dicenda.

St. Thomas Aquinas’ Lectures on St. John’s Gospel, ch.13, lecture #3, section #1776.

The Man Whom the Whole Church Accepts as Pope, Is the Pope

Posted on April 23, 2025 by Catholic Candle

Catholic Candle note: Sedevacantism is wrong and is (material or formal) schism. Catholic Candle is not sedevacantist.

Below is the eighth article in a series which covers specific aspects of the error of sedevacantism. As context for this eighth article, let us recall what we saw in the earlier seven articles:

In the first article, we saw that we cannot know whether Pope Francis (or anyone else) is a formal heretic (rather than a material heretic only) – and thus whether he is outside the true Catholic Church – based simply on his persistent, public teaching of a heretical opinion.[1]

Then in the second article, we saw that we must not judge a man to be a formal heretic if he professes to be Catholic and says he believes what a Catholic must believe now, in order to be Catholic now. When a person professes a heretical opinion, we must judge him in the most favorable light (if we judge him at all). So, we must avoid the sin of rash judgment and we must not judge negatively the interior culpability of the pope and the 1.3 billion[2] people who profess that they are Catholic. We must not judge they are not “real” Catholics if they tell us that they are Catholics. Instead, we should count them as Catholics who are very confused.[3]

Thus, we must judge Pope Francis to be a material heretic, not a formal heretic, and that he was the pope (until his death on April 21, 2025). Regarding any of the world’s 1.3 billion self-described Catholics who hold heresy, we must judge them (if we judge them at all) to be material heretics only, unless they themselves tell us that they know they don’t qualify to be Catholics.[4]

In the third article, we examined briefly the important difference between persons in authority who fulfill their duty to judge those under their charge in the external forum, as contrasted to a sedevacantist or anyone else except God who judges the interior culpability of other persons and (rashly) judges them to be formal heretics.[5]

In the fourth article, we saw that it does not help us to protect ourselves better from Pope Francis’ heresy (or the heresy taught by any pope) by declaring that he is not the pope.[6]

In the fifth article, we saw that it is possible for a pope to teach (or believe) heresy and, in fact, popes have taught and believed heresy at various times during Church history.[7]

In the sixth article, we saw that the Church infallibly assures us that we will have a pope at all times until the end of the world, except during very short interregnums between papal reigns, during which the Church is in the process of electing a new pope and during which the Church’s unified government continues to function.[8]

In the seventh article of this series, we saw that the Catholic Church is a visible Body and will be visible to all. The Catholic Church has a visible monarchical government and the pope is visible to all. Thus, we know we have a pope and that he is visible to all.[9]

Below, in the eighth article of this series, we see that the necessary visibility of the Catholic Church and the pope, requires as a corollary that whoever all Catholics see (believe) is pope must be the pope, since the pope must be visible to all.

Because the pope must be visible, a necessary corollary of this truth is that whoever is accepted as the pope by nearly all Catholics, we know must be the pope by that very fact, since the pope must be visible to the Church as the pope. This is true because, if almost all Catholics accepted the legitimacy of an anti-pope, then the true pope would be “invisible”, i.e., unknown to the Church. Thus, because the pope must be visible to all, whoever is accepted as pope by virtually all Catholics, we know must be the pope.

St. Alphonsus de Liguori, Doctor of the Church, explained this truth as follows:

It is of no importance that in past centuries some Pontiff was illegitimately elected or took possession of the Pontificate by fraud. It is enough that he was accepted afterwards by the whole Church as Pope, since by such an acceptance he would become the True Pontiff.”[10]

When teaching this same truth, Louis Cardinal Billot identified the cause of this truth, viz., the indefectibility of the Church:

Beyond all doubt, it ought to be firmly held, that the adhesion of the universal Church would, in itself, always be an infallible sign of the legitimacy of a particular pope, and even for the existence of all conditions which are required for his legitimacy as pope. Nor does it take long to identify the reason for this fact. For the reason is taken directly from the infallible promise of Christ and from Providence: “The gates of hell shall not prevail against Her [the Church]”. And again: “Behold, I am with you all days”, which is equivalent.[11]

In his book The Primacy of the Apostolic See Vindicated, Bishop Francis Kenrick discusses whether bribes (simony) can invalidate the election of a pope. He teaches that the Church’s acceptance of a pope cures any defect in his election but that the pope nonetheless has a moral duty to resign:

Should the contemplated case unfortunately occur, the guilty individual must know that he cannot conscientiously exercise the papal power. … [T]he acquiescence of the Church heals the defect as far as the faithful are concerned, although it does not relieve the delinquent from the necessity of abdicating the high office which he sacrilegiously assumed.[12]

Similarly, Outlines of Dogmatic Theology declares this same principle:

[W]henever the Church at large recognizes any man whatever as being Pope, that man is Pope, whatever many have been the circumstances that led to his being recognized. … [A]cceptance by the Church is a proof that such or such a person is lawful Pope.[13]

But a person could ask:

How does this fit with the historical fact of the occurrence of the Great Western Schism?

The answer is that this Western Schism in the 14^th and 15^th centuries shows nothing to the contrary. In that schism, lasting over 40 years, there was no single man recognized by virtually all Catholics living then, as the true pope. Instead, there was a very large faction which supported each of the two main claimants to the papacy (one of which was the true pope). Here is how the Catholic Encyclopedia explains this great division:

The greater number of the Italian and German states, England, and Flanders supported the pope of Rome. On the other hand, France, Spain, Scotland, and all the nations in the orbit of France were for the pope of Avignon.[14]

Thus, we see that the Great Western Schism was not a situation where almost all Catholics accepted an anti-pope as the real pope. Similarly, it would be impossible at any time for almost all Catholics to accept an anti-pope as the real pope.

There are Five Consequences of the Fact that Whomever the Whole Church Accepts as Pope, is the Pope.

1. Pope Francis was the pope until his death on April 21, 2025.

More than 1.3 billion people worldwide, profess to be Catholic.[15]

Virtually all 1.3 billion Catholics accepted Pope Francis as pope (until his death). Thus, we know that Pope Francis was the pope, i.e., until his death on April 21, 2025.

2. Pope Benedict XVI was not pope after his resignation in 2013.

The fact that Catholics universally accepted Pope Francis as pope, is one of many reasons why it is wrong to suppose that Pope Benedict XVI did not “really” resign, and continued to be the pope (instead of Pope Francis). Virtually the whole Church accepted Pope Francis as pope (until his death), and the whole Church could never accept an anti-pope (as shown above).

3. Each of the other post-conciliar popes was the pope in his turn.

Over the last 67 years (as of 2025), virtually the whole Church accepted each of the other post-conciliar popes, as pope in his turn. Thus, we know each was the pope.

4. This is a further reason we know Cardinal Siri was not pope.

It is clear that Cardinal Siri was not pope (as a tiny group supposed). Not only was his supposed “pontificate” invisible, but it would have opposed the pontificate of the pope universally accepted by Catholics.

5. This further shows the impossibility of the Church being now in a papal interregnum.

The Church accepted Pope Francis as pope and accepted each of his post-conciliar predecessors. This is one of many compelling reasons why we know the Church is not in a decades-long papal interregnum because, when the Church accepted each post-conciliar pope in his turn, each one became the true pope (even if we were to suppose that, somehow, his election was irregular and that he wasn’t pope already).[16]

Further Objection: “I understand the above reasoning showing that if virtually the entire Church accepts a man as a pope, that shows infallibly that he is the pope. But that reasoning does not hold if the man was already a heretic upon his acceptance of that office, as surely all the post-conciliar popes have been, including Jorge Bergoglio.”

Further Response: This objection is answered by the arguments contained in the first and second articles of this series. This objection fails to make the crucial distinction between formal and material heresy. Material heresy (alone) does not prevent a man from becoming or from being accepted universally as pope, no matter how publicly he insists on teaching his heretical opinion.

In those first two articles, we saw that we have no evidence that Pope Francis or any of the post Vatican II popes are/were formal heretics (rather than a material heretics only). Thus, we cannot conclude that they are/were outside the true Catholic Church, based simply on their persistent, public teaching of heretical opinions.^{^[17]} All of the post-Vatican II popes professed to be Catholic before and after their election. Thus, we cannot judge them to be formal heretics.

[1] Read this article here: https://catholiccandle.org/2024/09/26/cc-in-brief-sedevacantist-questions/

[2] https://www.vaticannews.va/en/church/news/2023-10/fides-catholic-church-statistics-world-mission-sunday.html

[3] Read this article here: https://catholiccandle.org/2024/10/24/are-we-allowed-to-decide-that-pope-francis-knows-he-is-not-catholic/

[4] Read this article here: https://catholiccandle.org/2024/10/24/are-we-allowed-to-decide-that-pope-francis-knows-he-is-not-catholic/

[5] Read this article here: https://catholiccandle.org/2024/11/26/bishops-have-excommunicated-heretics-cant-we-judge-the-pope/

[6] Read this article here: https://catholiccandle.org/2024/12/30/protecting-ourselves-from-a-bad-pope-or-bad-superior/

[7] Read this article here: It is Possible for a Pope to Teach Heresy and Remain the Pope?: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/01/27/it-is-possible-for-a-pope-to-teach-heresy-and-remain-the-pope/

[8] Read this article here that the Catholic Church’s unified government always continues, even during an interregnum: The Catholic Church Will Always Have a Pope: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/02/21/the-catholic-church-will-always-have-a-pope/

[9] Read this article showing that The Catholic Church Will Always be Visible, and Will Always Have a Pope Who is Visible to All, which can be found here: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/03/27/the-catholic-church-will-always-be-visible-with-a-pope/

[10] Verità della Fede, Part 3, Ch.8, §9, emphasis added.

This entire work of St. Alphonsus is available in an online library, for free, in Italian: http://www.intratext.com/IXT/ITASA0000/_P3BD.HTM

Here is the original Italian version, of the sentences quoted above:

Niente ancora importa che ne’ secoli passati alcun pontefice sia stato illegittimamente eletto, o fraudolentemente siasi intruso nel pontificato; basta che poi sia stato accettato da tutta la chiesa come papa, attesoché per tale accettazione già si è renduto legittimo e vero pontefice.

This work is also contained in Opera de S. Alfonso Maria de Liguori, vol. VIII, p.720, n.9, Marietti, Turin, 1887.

[11] Cardinal Billot, Tractus De Ecclesia Christi, Book 1, Q.14, De Romano Pontifice, Thesis 29, §3, 3^rd Ed., Prati, 1909; emphasis added.

[12] Bishop Francis Kenrick, The Primacy of the Apostolic See Vindicated, 3^rd Ed., 1848, Dunigan & Bro., New York, pp. 287-8.

[13] Outlines of Dogmatic Theology, Sylvester J. Hunter, S.J., 2^nd ed., vol. 1, pp. 394 & 395, Benziger Brothers, N.Y. 1894 (emphasis added).

[14] 1917 Catholic Encyclopedia, Article: Western Schism.

[15] https://www.vaticannews.va/en/church/news/2023-10/fides-catholic-church-statistics-world-mission-sunday.html

[16] St. Alphonsus de Liguori, Verità della Fede, Part 3, Ch.8, §9.

[17] Read these articles here:

Ø https://catholiccandle.org/2024/09/26/cc-in-brief-sedevacantist-questions/

Ø https://catholiccandle.org/2024/10/24/are-we-allowed-to-decide-that-pope-francis-knows-he-is-not-catholic/

The “New” SSPX Promotes Praying in Conciliar Churches during the “Holy Year”

Posted on April 23, 2025April 23, 2025 by Catholic Candle

Pope Francis declared that, in the 2025 “holy year”[1], people can gain a plenary indulgence by praying in one of many churches throughout the world, viz., the cathedral in any diocese, plus many other churches. He did this in 2015 too.

The “new” liberal SSPX promotes participation in this “holy year” and encourages its followers to pray in conciliar churches. One of the “new” SSPX priests, Fr. Peter Scott, who had previously been uncompromising, promotes this evil in these words:

Of course, most of us cannot go in person to Rome, but in this case, we can gain the plenary indulgence by visiting and praying a Rosary in the cathedral of our town, and fulfilling all the other conditions required.[2]

The now-liberal Fr. Peter Scott is simply following his now-liberal group. When Pope Francis declared a “holy year” about ten years ago and declared that people can gain a plenary indulgence by praying in one of many churches throughout the world, viz., the cathedral in any diocese, plus many other churches, Bishop Fellay strongly urged his followers to participate in the so-called “holy year” by going to conciliar churches to pray. He wrote:

Must we then deprive ourselves of the graces of a Holy Year? Quite the contrary. When the floodgates of grace are opened wide, we must receive abundantly![3]

The “new” SSPX has been weakening for a long time and has long blurred the difference between the conciliar church – which is a new religion[4] – and the true Catholic Church of all time. This causes the “new” SSPX to increasingly promote praying in conciliar churches, which are occupied by the modernists and which for almost 60 years have been used to further Revolution.

For example, the “new” SSPX was thrilled that one of its priests said Mass in St. Peter’s Basilica in Rome. http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2014/08/sspx-priest-celebrates-mass-in-saint.html (Fittingly, this new-SSPX video showing the Mass in this basilica is posted by a person whose user name is New Catholic.)

Reminder: We Should Stay Out of Conciliar Churches and Other Compromise Chapels

There are three reasons we should not go into conciliar churches to pray:

1. Places of sacrilege are most unfitting places to pray;

2. We should abhor and shun places of sacrilege; and

3. We must avoid giving scandal.

Below, we discuss each of these points.

1. Sacrilege Makes a Conciliar Church Unfitting for Prayer

Places of evil are inherently very unfitting places for spiritual actions such as prayer. Prayer is among the very best and most sacred “Things”. To mix prayer with the worst (viz., an evil place) is most unfitting and offensive to God. It is like choosing the filthiest, most disgusting vessel as the container for the most precious liquid – it is wholly unfitting.

The Summa explains this truth admirably:

Now although, properly speaking, a corporeal thing cannot be the subject of the stain of sin, nevertheless, on account of sin corporeal [i.e., physical] things contract a certain unfittingness for being appointed to spiritual purposes; and for this reason, we find that places where crimes have been committed are reckoned unfit for the performance of sacred actions therein, unless they be cleansed beforehand.[5]

But sins directed against God are the gravest sins – much worse, for example, than the crime of murder, because murder is a sin directed against man, not God. Summa, IIa IIae, Q.13, a.3, ad 1.

The new mass is inherently protestantized and man-centered and so is always “an irreverent treatment of the Sacred” (the definition of a sacrilege). Summa, IIa IIae, Q.99, a.1.[6] Thus, the new mass is objectively worse than murder, since the new mass is objectively a grave offense directed against God Himself.

If a new mass is valid, that makes it objectively worse – by being a valid (rather than invalid) sacrilege. A valid sacrilege even more strongly calls down the wrath of God because a valid sacrilege compels God Himself (Sacramentally present) to take part in the sacrilege.

Thus, conciliar churches are inherent dens of sacrilege because the new mass is said there (and for many other reasons). As a den of sacrilege, it is a very unfitting place to pray. Summa Supp. Q.74, a.1, respondeo.

In conciliar churches also we find other evils such as scandalous conciliar sermons, “communion” in the hand and “eucharistic” ministers, gross immodesty, banal un-Catholic music, bookshelves full of poisonous materials, ugly conciliar “art”, “priests” walking around in street clothes, and so on. All of these things tend to weaken the Faith of good Traditional Catholics, as well as weaken the horror for sin and compromise that we must maintain.

2. Faithful and Informed Catholics Instinctively Abhor Conciliar Churches

In the proportion in which we love Our Lord, we should abhor conciliar churches. This is like a widow who loved her deceased husband. In proportion to her love for him, she would not wish to use as a place of amusement, rest, and comfort the location in which her husband had previously been tortured and brutally murdered. Her love would not permit it.

Similarly, those who love Our Lord and realize that the new mass is objectively a sacrilege, would never wish to be in a place which continues to be used for the new mass and other conciliar evils. And the more an informed Catholic loves Our Lord, the more he finds conciliar churches intolerably odious – more because of the sacrileges that continue to occur there than because of the buildings’ conciliar ugliness! This is a second reason informed Catholics do not enter conciliar churches.

3. Entering Conciliar Churches Causes Scandal

Scandal is giving the appearance of evil which makes another person more likely to sin. Summa, IIa IIae, Q.43, a.1, ad 2.

To the extent others see us entering a conciliar church, it gives scandal because this would tend to give credence (in their minds) to what goes on there. Most people would not make the distinction when we entered a conciliar church, e.g., to pray the rosary but not when the new mass is said there. Each person’s presence adds a little to the appearance that the conciliar church is more visited/attended and that what goes on there is more accepted.

Without thinking deeply about the matter, many people would tend to think that those entering a conciliar church approve what is happening there. Therefore, in the eyes of many people, we would indicate our approval generally for what goes on there, regardless of our real opinion. Because people are social creatures, they would tend to accept the conciliar church because they see other people accepting it. This is a third reason that informed Catholics do not enter conciliar churches.

Conclusion

For the three reasons given above, Catholics should never go into a conciliar church to pray. It is among the most unfitting places to pray and is among the places that a faithful and informed Catholic would least desire to be, because it is a place of sacrilege and grave offense to Our Lord.

What a contrast this Catholic position is to that of the “new” SSPX leaders, who urge us to pray in conciliar churches for the “holy year”! They see no reason why the new mass should make conciliar churches unfitting for prayer because they already say kind things about the new mass and are moving toward accepting it.[7]

Would the “new” SSPX tell the faithful to stay away from conciliar churches if, in those churches, people regularly and openly spit on the SSPX logo or on a picture of Bishop Fellay there? If so, that means the “new” SSPX is more offended at insults to their bishop and their own institution, than at the infinite offenses given to Our Lord God in the sacrileges of the new mass.

Postscript:

Because of the liberalism and other compromises of groups such as the “new” SSPX,[8] their Masses and other activities in their own chapels also offend God.[9] Thus, as outlined above, the “new” SSPX chapels are also unfitting places to pray, are places that faithful and informed Catholics should abhor, and are places where scandal would arise from persons entering there. Let us stay out of their liberal and compromise chapels as we should stay away from the mainstream conciliar churches!

[1] The conciliar church is a new and false religion. Read this analysis here: https://catholiccandle.org/2024/02/05/the-conciliar-church-is-anti-god-and-anti-catholic/

There has been nothing holy whatsoever about the new conciliar religion itself, arising out of the 16 documents of Vatican II, and perpetuated and strengthened through the gravely anti-Catholic words, actions, and omissions of the leaders of that false religion, such as the conciliar popes and the conciliar clergy.

But that does not mean that the leaders of this new religion might not (subjectively) believe that they can both be members of this new false religion while also being members of the Catholic Church, just as men could suppose that it is possible to be members of the freemasons at the same time as being Catholic. Such dual membership, while possible, would show their great confusion of mind but it would not make it impossible for them to be (confused) members of the Catholic Church.

[2] Fr. Peter Scott, 2- 20-25 Defende Nos, #123, p.3 (emphasis added).

[3] Quoted from Bishop Fellay letter #84, May 24, 2015.

[4] Read the analysis in these articles:

Ø https://catholiccandle.org/2024/02/05/the-conciliar-church-is-anti-god-and-anti-catholic/

and

Ø https://catholiccandle.org/2020/11/01/the-conciliar-church-is-anti-god-and-is-a-cult-of-man/

[5] Summa Supp. Q.74, a.1, respondeo (emphasis added; bracketed word added for clarity).

[6] Read this article about why the new mass never gives grace: https://catholiccandle.org/2020/03/01/the-new-mass-does-not-give-grace/

[7] See, e.g., example #6 in the list of 21 examples of “new” SSPX liberalism. This list is found here: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/03/27/21-examples-of-liberalism-in-the-new-sspx/

[8] See, e.g., the examples of 21 examples of “new” SSPX liberalism, found here: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/03/27/21-examples-of-liberalism-in-the-new-sspx/

[9] https://catholiccandle.org/2020/04/02/a-compromise-groups-masses-and-sacraments-do-not-give-grace-because-the-end-does-not-justify-the-means/

Warning about Lifesitenews.com: It Promotes Heresy

Posted on April 23, 2025April 23, 2025 by Catholic Candle

However well-intentioned Lifesitenews.com is, it has always published a mix of articles presenting the traditional teachings of the Catholic Church as well as articles promoting error. For example, that group promotes the conciliar heresy[1] of religious liberty (to teach error),[2] as well as the schismatic position of sedevacantism.[3]

One can suppose that, regarding all of the errors of Lifesitenews.com, it hasn’t done enough “digging” to discover the poisonous conciliar doctrine and other errors that they imbibed without knowing better. But that does not change the fact that they have a serious duty to not spread the heresies that they do.

Among other examples of Lifesitenews.com’s heresy is its recent article which concludes heretically, that all unbaptized babies go to heaven. For example, here are two ways that this heresy is stated in the article:

Do Aborted and Miscarried Babies Go to Heaven? … I conclude that babies are among the “loved by God, that he [sic] has chosen” (1 Thessalonians 1: 4) and are with him now. …

Trust that your babies are with the Lord and with perfect understanding, enjoying him [sic], as you will come to see.[4]

Lifesitenews.com recklessly publishes this article without considering the Catholic doctrine of the necessity of Baptism for a baby’s salvation and without considering the Limbo of the Children.

Lifesitenews.com should have known right away that it would not get the Catholic truth from the author of this article that it published, since, as Lifesitenews.com acknowledges,[5] that the author is a protestant. What could Lifesitenews.com expect from a protestant except protestant heresy?

Protestants deny the importance (or existence) of Original Sin. They do not consider prompt infant Baptism to be necessary or important. Why would Lifesitenews.com expect the truth from such a heretic?

The protestant author purports to be “biblical”. But he is not. He quickly segues into his squishy protestant heresy, namely, that Baptism is not crucial for salvation because the Father is so loving.

This protestant author’s supposed “biblical” analysis is so shallow that he neither mentioned nor showed how his protestant heresy fits with Our Lord’s words:

Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

St. John’s Gospel, 3:5.

Shame on Lifesitenews.com! Lifesitenews.com should know better – more than that protestant author who did not have the light of the Catholic Faith. Lifesitenews.com professes to publish a “Catholic edition” which includes not only pro-life articles but other articles directed to Catholics in particular.

If the Catholics of Lifesitenews.com do not know the truth on a matter of Catholic doctrine, they should study their Catholic Faith. If they don’t know whether one of their draft articles is heretical, they should hold it back from publication to be on the safe side, in order to at least do no harm.

Let us close this present article with a quick summary of the truths that Lifesitenews.com denies, at least implicitly, by publishing that heretical article.[6]

❖ Original Sin makes us enemies of God. As the psalmist teaches: “I was conceived in iniquities; and in sins did my mother conceive me.” Psalm 50:7. St. Paul teaches that, because of Original Sin, we are all “by nature children of wrath”. Ephesians, 2:3.

❖ No One Can Go to Heaven Without Grace.

Here is one way that St. Thomas shows the connection between sanctifying grace and salvation:

[M]an is not justified from sin[7] [including Original Sin] except by grace … [and] the very least grace is sufficient to … merit eternal life.[8]

St. Thomas teaches the same truth in these words:

The holy Fathers [of the Old Testament] were delivered from hell by being admitted to the glory of the vision of God, to which no one can come except through grace; according to Rom. 6:23: ‘The grace of God is life everlasting.’ ”[9]

❖ But babies (and retarded persons who have never had the use of reason) can only receive grace through Baptism (because they cannot use their reason and so cannot have Baptism of Desire[10]). As the Summa explains:

[S]ometimes Baptism cannot be omitted without loss of eternal salvation, as in the case of children who have not come to the use of reason.[11]

In other words, because there is no way for a baby to receive grace except through Baptism, if a baby is not baptized, he cannot go to heaven.

Here is another way to state this same explanation that an unbaptized baby does not go to heaven:

1. No one goes to heaven unless he is a friend of God.

2. No one is a friend of God without the (supernatural) Theological Virtue of Charity.

3. There is no way for a baby to obtain this (supernatural) Theological Virtue of Charity except through Baptism.

4. Therefore, a baby does not go to heaven unless he is baptized.

Because a baby cannot go to heaven without grace and cannot obtain grace without Baptism, the Church insists on prompt Baptism. As St. Thomas explains:

We must make a distinction and see whether those who are to be baptized are children or adults. For if they be children, Baptism should not be deferred. First, because in them we do not look for better instruction or fuller conversion. Secondly, because of the danger of death, for no other remedy is available for them besides the sacrament of Baptism.[12]

This phrase “no other remedy is available for them” refers to a baby’s inability to be purged of Original Sin and to receive Grace, in any way besides Baptism. By contrast, a person who has the use of reason could possibly receive Baptism of Desire, if he were unable to be Baptized.

In the book, The Teaching Of The Catholic Church, Canon Smith explains the reality for parents of a baby who died without baptism:

[U]nbaptised children, not having received the sacrament of faith [i.e., Baptism], have not the supernatural knowledge, without which they cannot know what they have lost. Hence their loss causes them no anguish of soul. Although these considerations may bring some little consolation to the Catholic mother grieving over the fate of her child who has died unbaptised, they will not relieve the weight upon her conscience, should hers have been the fault, or free parents from the obligation to have their children baptised as soon as possible, since there is no measure or proportion between the natural happiness that will be their lot [i.e., the lot of the babies] in limbo, and the inconceivable felicity of heaven, of which man’s carelessness [viz., by delaying Baptism] may so easily deprive them.[13]

In his Constitution, Auctorem Fidei, on August 28, 1794, Pope Pius VI condemned the claim that the existence of the Limbo of the Children is a fable. Here is his condemnation:

Condemned:

The doctrine which rejects as a Pelagian fable, that place of the lower regions (which the faithful generally designate by the name of the limbo of children) in which the souls of those departing with the sole guilt of original sin are punished with the punishment of the condemned, exclusive of the punishment of fire, just as if, by this very fact, that these who remove the punishment of fire introduced that middle place and state free of guilt and of punishment between the kingdom of God and eternal damnation, such as that about which the Pelagians idly talk,–false, rash, injurious to Catholic schools.[14]

Thus, the article[15] published by Lifesitenews.com promotes one or more heretical doctrines:

➢ That all unbaptized babies have grace;

➢ That grace is not necessary to get to heaven; and

➢ That the Limbo of the Children is a fable, incurring the condemnation of Pope Pius VI.

The reality is inescapable that Lifesitenews.com is spreading heresy!

Abortion is the murder of innocent babies. It is very human for us to sympathize with the innocent and the weak. We would be inclined to “wish ourselves into” the error that unbaptized babies (including all those murdered in abortion), somehow go to heaven.

But we should love the truth more than the comfort of an appealing heresy! It is heresy to say those unbaptized babies can go to heaven. So that heresy is a false comfort.

Also, this demonic heresy deemphasizes the urgent need to baptize babies. When heretics deemphasize the necessity of infant Baptism, they promote the devil’s strategy of seeking to delay the Baptism of babies, even though it is the only way they can get to heaven.

Conclusion

Beware of the recklessness of Lifesitenews.com. Watch out for the heresies that it publishes!

[1] Heresy is an error about the Catholic Faith. Here is how St. Thomas Aquinas explains this truth:

We are speaking of heresy now as denoting a corruption of the Christian Faith. Now it does not imply a corruption of the Christian faith, if a man has a false opinion in matters that are not of faith, for instance, in questions of geometry and so forth, which cannot belong to the faith by any means; but only when a person has a false opinion about things belonging to the faith.

Now a thing may be of the faith in two ways, as stated above, in one way, directly and principally, e.g. the articles of faith; in another way, indirectly and secondarily, e.g. those matters, the denial of which leads to the corruption of some article of faith; and there may be heresy in either way, even as there can be faith.

Summa, IIa IIae, Q.11, a.2, respondeo (emphasis added).

[2] To read more about Vatican II’s teaching of religious liberty for error, read this catalogue of the Catholic Church’s condemnations of this religious liberty: https://catholiccandle.neocities.org/faith/religious-liberty-vatican-ii

[3] We recommend a small book explaining the errors of sedevacantism. It is available:

Ø Here, for free: https://catholiccandle.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/sedevacantism-material-or-formal-schism.pdf

Ø Here, at cost ($4): https://www.amazon.com/Sedevacantism-Material-Quanta-Cura-Press/dp/B08FP5NQR6/ref=sr_1_1

[4] Both of the above statements are quoted from: Do Aborted and Miscarried Babies Go to Heaven? Here’s What the Bible Says found here: https://www.lifenews.com/2025/03/04/do-aborted-and-miscarried-babies-go-to-heaven-heres-what-the-bible-says/?cmid=d5fc2db8-b428-4858-b3aa-6b8ade0ecdb7 (emphasis added).

[5] Read the brief author bio included with the article: https://www.lifenews.com/2025/03/04/do-aborted-and-miscarried-babies-go-to-heaven-heres-what-the-bible-says/?cmid=d5fc2db8-b428-4858-b3aa-6b8ade0ecdb7

[6] Do Aborted and Miscarried Babies Go to Heaven? Here’s What the Bible Says found here: https://www.lifenews.com/2025/03/04/do-aborted-and-miscarried-babies-go-to-heaven-heres-what-the-bible-says/?cmid=d5fc2db8-b428-4858-b3aa-6b8ade0ecdb7.

[7] i.e., so that his sins are forgiven.

[8] Summa, III, Q.62, a.6, ad 3 (bracketed words added).

[9] Summa, III, Q. 52, a.7, respondeo; the quote from St. Paul is in the original, bracketed words in the original.

[10] Contrary to the Feeneyite errors, the Catholic Church teaches the possibility of Baptism of Desire and Baptism of Blood. Read the explanation here: https://catholiccandle.neocities.org/faith/the-catholic-teaching-of-baptism-of-desire-and-baptism-of-blood.html

[11] Summa Supp., Q.8, a.1, ad 2.

[12] Summa, III, Q.68, a.3, respondeo (emphasis added).

[14] 2626 Dz 1526 26 (emphasis added).

[15] Do Aborted and Miscarried Babies Go to Heaven? Here’s What the Bible Says, found here: https://www.lifenews.com/2025/03/04/do-aborted-and-miscarried-babies-go-to-heaven-heres-what-the-bible-says/?cmid=d5fc2db8-b428-4858-b3aa-6b8ade0ecdb7

Lesson #44: Temperaments – Choleric Temperament – a Choleric’s Spiritual Combat – Part IX

Posted on April 23, 2025 by Catholic Candle

Philosophy Notes

Catholic Candle note: The article immediately below is part nine of the study of the Choleric temperament. The first eight parts can be found here:

1. Mary’s School of Sanctity – Lesson #36: About the Temperaments – Beginning our Study of the Choleric Temperament – Part I: https://catholiccandle.org/2024/08/27/lesson-35-about-the-temperaments-the-choleric-temperament/

2. Mary’s School of Sanctity – Lesson #37: About the Temperaments – Continuing Our Study of the Choleric Temperament– Part II: https://catholiccandle.org/2024/09/26/lesson-37-about-the-temperaments-continuation-of-the-choleric-temperament/

3. Mary’s School of Sanctity – Lesson #38 — About the Temperaments – Continuing our Study of the Choleric Temperament – Their Spiritual Combat – Part III:: https://catholiccandle.org/2024/10/24/lesson-38-temperaments-choleric-temperament-their-spiritual-combat/

4. Mary’s School of Sanctity – Lesson #39 About the Temperaments – Continuing Our Study of the Choleric Temperament – That Temperament’s Spiritual Combat – Part IV: https://catholiccandle.org/2024/11/26/lesson-39-temperaments-choleric-temperament-their-spiritual-combat-part-iv/

5. Mary’s School of Sanctity – Lesson #40: Temperaments – Choleric Temperament – Their Spiritual Combat – Part V: https://catholiccandle.org/2024/12/30/lesson-40-temperaments-choleric-temperament-their-spiritual-combat-part-v/

6. Mary’s School of Sanctity – Lesson #41 – About the Temperaments – Continuing Our Study of the Choleric Temperament: a Choleric’s Spiritual Combat — Part VI: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/01/27/lesson-41-temperaments-choleric-temperament-a-cholerics-spiritual-combat-part-vi/

7. Mary’s School of Sanctity – Lesson #42: About the Temperaments – Continuing Our Study of the Choleric Temperament – a Choleric’s Spiritual Combat – Part VII: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/02/21/lesson-42-temperaments-choleric-temperament-a-cholerics-spiritual-combat-part-vii/

8. Mary’s School of Sanctity — Lesson #43 About the Temperaments –Continuing Our Study of the Choleric Temperament — Their Spiritual Combat Part VIII: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/03/27/lesson-42-temperaments-choleric-temperament-a-cholerics-spiritual-combat-part-viii/

Mary’s School of Sanctity

Lesson #44 About the Temperaments – Continuing Our Study of the Choleric Temperament – Their Spiritual Combat, Part IX

Note: When referring to a person with a choleric temperament in this article we simply will label him as a choleric.

In our last lesson we saw how anger is inherently caused by some slight that someone has felt. We had a list of questions that a choleric, in particular, can ask himself about feeling slighted and some means to take to prevent himself from getting angry.

Because anger becomes sinful when it is unreasonable, the choleric must learn to watch his feelings very closely. As we mentioned, St. Thomas reminds us that the person with a choleric temperament is prone to become “angry too quickly or for any slight [meaning small/trivial] cause.”[1]

In addition to these two ways for anger to become sinful, we discussed what St. Thomas said about anger being “too long in a man’s memory, the result being that it gives rise to a lasting displeasure, wherefore he is grievous and sullen to himself.”[2]

This brings us to the important topic of the choleric tendency to hold grudges. Let us take a brief look at the definition of the word grudge:

These meanings given for the word grudge plainly tell us that a grudge is something bad for the soul because these meanings refer to the ‘lasting displeasure’ that St. Thomas is talking about.

Recognizing and Squelching Anger/Not Allowing Anger to Linger

St. Paul warns us not to keep lasting anger in our hearts, “Be angry: and sin not. Let not the sun go down upon your anger.” [Ephesians 4:26].

Rightly does St. Paul warn us because he knows that anger can quickly become unreasonable and therefore sinful. This tendency of anger to be unreasonable is because anger has a close connection to pride. We know that pride blinds the soul. So pride makes it very difficult to discover that one’s anger is unfounded, hence, unreasonable. St. Paul says, “Be angry.” Be tough on yourself. Further, he says, “Sin not.” Don’t be unjustly angry with your neighbor. And again, St. Paul says, “Let not the sun go down upon your anger.” Do not let your anger linger.

Thus, it is crucial that a person must judge himself strictly when he feels anger flaring up in his soul. He must keep a close guard on himself. He must find the source or cause of his feeling of anger. This requires much self-knowledge. By studying himself and his tendencies closely, he can discover what types of things spark his anger into action. He must “nip-in-the-bud” his unjust anger. In other words, he must quench the fire of anger at its beginning.

We discussed in our last lesson how a choleric’s anger is usually attached to pride. This pride makes the choleric frequently view everything as an insult. We gave some typical things that a choleric feels slighted about. We showed how each of these was linked to pride. We gave some suggestions on how the choleric could counteract his pride and his anger for each case. We list here again some common links to pride.

A person feels slighted because:

1) He feels that he is not getting attention from others.

2) He feels that someone insulted him.

3) He thinks someone is making fun of him.

4) He feels that someone is getting in the way of his plans and his getting what he wants.

5) He thinks someone is insulting his (God-given) talents.

6) He does not like someone pointing out his defects or anything that he has done wrong.

A Strategy to Counteract His Tendency to Feel Slighted

A choleric must ask himself some hard-hitting questions and give himself some tough rebukes. He cannot be gentle with himself. He must be strict with himself. So here is a sample of the toughness the choleric has to have on himself and tell himself the following:

1) What do you want attention for? Who do you think you are? You act as if you are God’s gift to mankind!! You are not the center of the universe! Stop being so self-centered! And how many times have you failed to give others the attention they deserved?

2) So, you think you have been insulted? What makes you think that? Do you really think that everyone must treat you as a king? Treat you with kid-gloves? Why are you so sensitive? Most likely you deserve to be insulted. Think of all your past sins and how you yourself have insulted God and then you will not be so prone to think that you deserve anything better than you have. In fact, you have gotten far better than you have ever deserved! And how many times have you insulted others?

3) Likewise, you feel that you have been mocked/made fun of? Haven’t your past sins truly mocked Our Lord? And here you allow yourself to take offense at the tiniest word spoken about you or to you. Further, how many times have you mocked/made fun of others?

4) Now you are upset because your plans are disrupted in any way whatsoever? What makes you think that God is pleased with your plans? Did you pray to God about them and think deeply whether your plans would help you save your soul or help you to become a straight-to-heaven saint?

5) You are so upset because you think your (God-given) talents are being insulted? If they are truly God-given talents, then you are not acting grateful for them by getting upset. God did not have to give you anything and you should not act as if you were not given these talents from God and as if they were simply automatically yours. God could, if He wanted to, take these away from you in an instant.

6) So now you are upset because someone pointed out a defect in you/or something that you have done wrong? Do you really think you are perfect and there is absolutely no room for improvement in you? Do you think you are without sin? Shouldn’t you be grateful that someone is trying to help you improve? Do you not feel ashamed for your ingratitude toward the person trying to help you become holy?

Grudges Come When One Does Not Humble Himself and Is Not Willing to Forgive

Grudges, because they are unreasonable, are always sinful. One must see himself in the true light, and thereby see that he deserves slights, insults, chastisements, admonishments, and punishments. These are needed not only for the strengthening of the soul in virtue, but also to make reparation for one’s past sins.

Grudges may not necessarily be because one is seeking to get revenge, but is rather the case of a person not being willing to forgive his neighbor. Our Lord speaks many times in the Gospel about forgiving one’s neighbor. He says we should always forgive from our hearts even if we were treated unjustly. The following (from St. Matthew’s Gospel) is a good example:

Then came Peter unto Him and said: Lord, how often shall my brother offend against me, and I forgive him? till seven times? Jesus saith to him: I say not to thee, till seven times; but till seventy times seven times.

St. Matthew’s Gospel,18:21-22.

Our Lord here means to forgive always.

Again, in St. Matthew’s Gospel [18:23-35] we find the parable about the man being forgiven a huge debt and then he went out and throttled his fellow servant and demanded prompt payment of a very small debt.

[Our Lord says:] Therefore is the kingdom of heaven likened to a king, who would take an account of his servants.

And when he had begun to take the account, one was brought to him, that owed him ten thousand talents. And as he had not wherewith to pay it, his lord commanded that he should be sold, and his wife and children, and all that he had, and payment to be made. But that servant falling down, besought him, saying: Have patience with me, and I will pay thee all. And the lord of that servant being moved with pity, let him go and forgave him the debt. But when that servant was gone out, he found one of his fellow-servants that owed him a hundred denarii: and laying hold of him, he throttled him, saying: Pay what thou owest. And his fellow-servant falling down, besought him, saying: Have patience with me, and I will pay thee all. And he would not: but went and cast him into prison, till he paid the debt. Now his fellow servants seeing what was done, were very much grieved, and they came, and told their lord all that was done. Then his lord called him: and said to him: Thou wicked servant, I forgave thee all the debt, because thou besoughtest me. Shouldst not thou then have had compassion also on thy fellow servant, even as I had compassion on thee? And his lord being angry, delivered him to the torturers until he paid all the debt. So also shall my heavenly Father do to you, if you forgive not everyone his brother from your hearts. [bold emphasis added]

And if these quotes are not enough to convince a choleric to keep a close eye on his pride and beware of the beginning of his anger, then simply looking at the Our Father that Our Lord taught us shows us plainly enough that we must forgive our neighbor if we are going to expect forgiveness from God.

Let’s face it. We have all known someone who has held a grudge. We can see that the grudge is very ugly and ridiculous. Holding a grudge truly shows the pride and foolishness of the one holding it. The grudge shows a gross lack of compassion and patience. Most importantly, grudges show a grave lack of charity in the person holding the grudge. It is as we have seen from what we have studied in St. Thomas, anger and pride married together and kept for a long time, engender hatred. How can someone willing to hold a grudge really think he will be able to meet His Judge Who has been so forgiving and meek to him, when the reality remains that he was not willing to show any mercy and meekness to his neighbor?

Let the choleric remind himself of Our Lord’s words:

Amen I say to you, unless you be converted, and become as little children, you shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven. Whosoever therefore shall humble himself as this little child, he is the greater in the kingdom of heaven. [St. Matthew 18:3-4]

And let us all – especially cholerics – often pray: “Jesus, meek and humble of Heart, make our hearts like unto Thine.”

A Preview…

In our next lesson we will study another character flaw of the choleric which is directly linked to his pride—his tendency to criticize and misjudge others. Again, our goal will be to investigate this bad trait and strategize on the means to amend it.

[1] Summa Theologica IIa IIae, Q. 158, a. 6, Respondeo [bracketed words added for clarity]

[2] Summa Theologica IIa IIae, Q. 158, a. 6, Respondeo [Bold emphasis added.]

March 2025 PDF Issue

Posted on March 10, 2025April 23, 2025 by Catholic Candle

March 2025 PDF Issue Download

The Catholic Church Will Always be Visible with a Pope

Posted on March 10, 2025April 23, 2025 by Catholic Candle

Catholic Candle note: Sedevacantism is wrong and is (material or formal) schism. Catholic Candle is not sedevacantist.

Below is the seventh article in a series which covers specific aspects of the error of sedevacantism. As context for this seventh article, let us recall what we saw in the earlier six articles:

Then in the second article, we saw that we must not judge a man to be a formal heretic if he professes to be Catholic and says he believes what a Catholic must believe now, in order to be Catholic now. When a person professes a heretical opinion, we must judge him in the most favorable light (if we judge him at all). So, we must avoid the sin of rash judgment and we must not judge negatively the interior culpability of the pope and the 1.2 billion people who profess that they are Catholic. We must not judge they are not “real” Catholics if they tell us that they are Catholics. Instead, we should count them as Catholics who are very confused.[2]

Thus, we must judge Pope Francis to be a material heretic, not a formal heretic, and that he is the pope. Regarding any of the world’s 1.2 billion self-described Catholics who hold heresy, we must judge them (if we judge them at all) to be material heretics only, unless they themselves tell us that they know they don’t qualify to be Catholics.[3]

In the fourth article, we saw that it does not help us to protect ourselves better from Pope Francis’ heresy by declaring that he is not the pope.[5]

In the fifth article, we saw that it is possible for a pope to teach (or believe) heresy and, in fact, popes have taught and believed heresy at various times during Church history.[6]

Below, in the seventh article of this series, we see that the Catholic Church is a visible Body and will be visible to all. The Catholic Church has a visible monarchical government and the pope is visible to all. Thus, we know we have a pope and that he is visible to all.

The Catholic Church Will Always be Visible, and Will Always Have a Pope Who is Visible to All

From the preceding articles, we know that we must have a pope. There are a few tiny dispersed groups who so despise the pope in the Vatican, that they concoct theories that there is a hidden pope, whom only their tiny “elite” “knows” about or “knows” is the pope.

These tiny “elite” groups are disunited in their views about who the hidden “pope” is. Some hold that he lives in a farmhouse in Kansas. Others claim that the “pope” is in Montana, Croatia, Argentina, Kenya, Spain or elsewhere. Each of these “popes” is “known” and recognized only by his own tiny group.

The Catholic Church is Visible and will Always be Visible.

But we know from our catechism that the Catholic Church will always be visible. This is why Pope Pius XI declared that:

The one true Church of Christ is visible to all.

Mortalium Animos, January 6, 1928. ¶10.

Pope Leo XIII identified the cause of this visibility:

The Church is visible because She is a Body.

Satis Cognitum, ¶3.

Pope Pius XII affirmed this same truth, quoting these words of Pope Leo XIII. Mystici Corporis Christi, §14.

St. Francis de Sales replied to his adversaries who “would maintain that the Church is invisible and unperceivable” that he “consider[ed] that this is the extreme of absurdity, and that immediately beyond this abide frenzy and madness.” He then proceeds to discuss at length eight clear proofs that the Church is always visible. Catholic Controversy, Part 1, Ch. 5.

Thus, because the Catholic Church will always be a body, she will always be visible.

This visibility of the Catholic Church shows that the Catholic Church has a visible head. We will discuss this in the next section of this article. But the visibility of the Catholic Church also shows that the sedevacantists are wrong in their claim that the 1.2 billion persons who claim that they themselves are Catholic are, in fact, not “real” Catholics and that only the sedevacantists’ own tiny group are the “real” Catholics. The truth is that the sedevacantists are rashly judging those confused Catholics. By contrast, faithful and informed Catholics do not declare that those 1.2 billion self-described Catholics are not “really” Catholics.[8]

This Visible Church will Always have a Visible Government with a Visible Head.

Because the Church will always be visible, and because unity of government is an element of the Mark of Unity[9] by which the Church can always be known, the Church will always have a visible government, so that the true Church can be recognized by this Mark of Unity of Government.

Because the Church’s government is visible and monarchical, “the Church, being a visible body, must have a visible head and centre of unity.”[10] This is obviously true. For the Church is not one, with a visible government, if it is unknown “who is in charge”. In fact, governing authority is the efficient cause giving unity as one body to any society of men.[11]

For there is not one visible society if it consists of men united only by ideas and not by a unified, visible government. That is why even basic catechisms teach us that the Catholic Church is “under one visible head.”[12]

Such a visible head has always been necessary, but even more evidently so as the Catholic Church spread throughout the world.[13] That is why Pope Pius XII sums up Catholic teaching by declaring that “it is absolutely necessary that the Supreme Head, that is, the Vicar of Jesus Christ on earth, be visible to the eyes of all”.[14]

Conclusion of this Article

We have no assurance that the pope will be holy or will govern well. We have no assurance that the pope’s words and deeds will not be shocking and repulsive. However, we do know that the Catholic Church is a visible body and that her head, the pope, is visible to all. Thus, the pope is not living unknown and hidden from the attention of the world, in some Kansas farmhouse or similar place.

Further, it is clear that the pope is also not someone such as Cardinal Siri (whom a tiny group had supposed to have been a secret pope). Such a supposed “pontificate” was not visible. In other words, he was not the pope who is “visible to the eyes of all”. Mystici Corporis, ¶69.

Thus, we must have a pope who, as pope, is visible to all. In other words, who the pope is, is not a secret. The pope’s identity is known to all, however bad he is. As of March 5, 2025 (the date of this article), that pope is Francis, although as of this date, he is in the hospital and possibly near death.

[1] Read this article here: https://catholiccandle.org/2024/09/26/cc-in-brief-sedevacantist-questions/

[2] Read this article here: https://catholiccandle.org/2024/10/24/are-we-allowed-to-decide-that-pope-francis-knows-he-is-not-catholic/

[3] Read this article here: https://catholiccandle.org/2024/10/24/are-we-allowed-to-decide-that-pope-francis-knows-he-is-not-catholic/

[4] Read this article here: https://catholiccandle.org/2024/11/26/bishops-have-excommunicated-heretics-cant-we-judge-the-pope/

[5] Read this article here: https://catholiccandle.org/2024/12/30/protecting-ourselves-from-a-bad-pope-or-bad-superior/

[6] Read this article here: It is Possible for a Pope to Teach Heresy and Remain the Pope?: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/01/27/it-is-possible-for-a-pope-to-teach-heresy-and-remain-the-pope/

[7] Read this article here that the Catholic Church’s unified government always continues, even during an interregnum: The Catholic Church Will Always Have a Pope: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/02/21/the-catholic-church-will-always-have-a-pope/

[8] Read this article about the sin of rash judgment: https://catholiccandle.org/2024/10/24/are-we-allowed-to-decide-that-pope-francis-knows-he-is-not-catholic/

[9] Read this article: The Catholic Church Will Always Have a Pope, available here: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/02/21/the-catholic-church-will-always-have-a-pope/

[10] Catholic Dictionary, Addis & Arnold, Catholic Publication Society, 3^rd ed., New York, 1884, article: Church of Christ, page 176.

[11] Summa Supp., Q.40, a.6, Respondeo.

[12] See, e.g., Baltimore Catechism #4, Q.115.

[13] A Full Catechism of the Catholic Church, Joseph Deharbe, S.J., Catholic Publication Society, New York, 1889, p.132.

[14] Pope Pius XII, Mystici Corporis, ¶69.

A Lenten Reflection – a Deeper Look into Our Lord’s Passion

Posted on March 10, 2025April 23, 2025 by Catholic Candle

Note: Below is an extract from St. Teresa of Avila’s Interior Castle or The Mansions with a few brief comments that we give afterwards.

In obedience to her superiors, St. Teresa wrote this book for her spiritual daughters in the convent.

Extract:

How good Thou art, O God! All is done for us by Thee, Who dost but ask us to give our wills to Thee that we may be plastic as wax in Thy Hands. You see, sisters, what God does to this soul [meaning the soul He is drawing to higher perfection] so that it may know that it is His. He gives it something of His own – that which His Son possessed when living on earth – He could bestow no greater gift on us. Who could ever have longed more eagerly to leave this life than did Christ?

As He said at the Last Supper: “With desire have I desired” this. O Lord! Does not that bitter death Thou are to undergo present itself before Thine eyes in all its pain and horror? “No, for My ardent love and My desire to save souls are immeasurably stronger than the torments. This deeper sorrow I have suffered and still suffer while living here on earth, makes other pain seem as nothing in comparison.”

I have often meditated on this and I know that the torture a friend of mine [this is really St. Teresa herself] has felt, and still feels, at seeing Our Lord sinned against is so unbearable that she would far rather die than continue in such anguish. Then I thought that if a soul whose charity is so weak [viz., the soul to which she just referred] compared to that of Christ – indeed, in comparison with His, this charity might be said not to exist – experiences this insufferable grief, what must have been the feelings of Our Lord Jesus Christ and what must His life have been? For all things were present before His eyes and He was the constant witness of the great offences committed against His Father. I believe without doubt that this pained Him far more than His most sacred Passion. There, at least, He found the end of all His trials, while His agony was allayed by the consolation of gaining our salvation through His death and of proving how He loved His Father by suffering for Him. Thus, people who, urged by fervent love, perform great penances hardly feel them but want to do still more and count even that as little. What, then, must His Majesty have felt at thus publicly manifesting His perfect obedience to His Father and His love for His brethren? What joy to suffer in doing God’s will! Yet I think the constant sight of the many sins committed against God and of the numberless souls on their way to hell must have caused Him such anguish that, had He not been more than man, one day of such torment would have destroyed not only His life but many more lives, had they been His.[1]

Comments:

This extract is very striking for several reasons. One does not often find books written about the Passion which dwell on the fact that Our Lord suffered primarily because the honor of His Father has been insulted by sin. So many books focus on Our Lord suffering because He loves us. The typical books on the Passion seem to ignore the fact that Our Lord loves His Father with an Infinite Love. Instead, many books teach the perverse error that Our Lord died primarily for us because He loves us infinitely.[2] Although Our Lord is infinite in His nature and all His perfections, yet His external effects in His creatures are not infinite. Thus, Our Lord loves us with a finite love because we are finite beings, therefore, unworthy and unfit to be loved infinitely.

Thinking about how Our Lord, in His Divine Nature, loves His Father with an Infinite Love and wanted to show publicly how much He honored His Father adds such a deep dimension to one’s meditation on the Passion! When we ponder all the physical pain of Our Lord, we must not forget to add to this the constant thought that He suffered even far greater mental anguish and spiritual pain because sin is such an enormous insult to His Heavenly Father – the Supreme Godhead. Mankind has committed countless sins since the beginning of time and will continue until the end of time – and He suffered for every single sin!

St. Teresa also ties together for us the two anguishes Our Lord suffered, namely, the offenses to the Divine Majesty and the ingratitude of souls who damn themselves. She strikingly reminds us that Our Lord wants to save souls from hell and He is sorely grieved when men reject His redemptive sacrifice and plunge themselves headlong into hell anyway. Hence, she vividly demonstrates to us the hideousness of sin.

In this Lent and Passiontide, let us beg Our Lord to forgive us for our wretched sins which caused and continue to cause Him such bitter pain and mental anguish. Let us also beg Him to help us penetrate and better understand His Infinite Love for His Father so we can learn to love Him more deeply and have an ever-increasing gratitude to Him for all He suffered.

[1] Extract taken from St. Teresa’s Interior Castle Fifth Mansion chapter II #12-13 (bracketed words and emphasis added).

[2] For a refutation of the heresy that God loves any creature infinitely, read this article: God Does Not Infinitely Love Any Creature. This article is found here: https://catholiccandle.neocities.org/faith/god-does-not-infinitely-love-any-creature

This refutation was a response to this heresy taught by Bishop Williamson’s Group.

Lesson #43: Temperaments – Choleric Temperament – a Choleric’s Spiritual Combat – Part VIII

Posted on March 10, 2025April 23, 2025 by Catholic Candle

Philosophy Notes

Catholic Candle note: The article immediately below is part eight of the study of the Choleric temperament. The first seven parts can be found here:

1. Mary’s School of Sanctity – Lesson #36: About the Temperaments – Beginning our Study of the Choleric Temperament: https://catholiccandle.org/2024/08/27/lesson-35-about-the-temperaments-the-choleric-temperament/

2. Mary’s School of Sanctity – Lesson #37: About the Temperaments – Continuing Our Study of the Choleric Temperament: https://catholiccandle.org/2024/09/26/lesson-37-about-the-temperaments-continuation-of-the-choleric-temperament/

3. Mary’s School of Sanctity – Lesson #38 — About the Temperaments – Continuing our Study of the Choleric Temperament – Their Spiritual Combat: https://catholiccandle.org/2024/10/24/lesson-38-temperaments-choleric-temperament-their-spiritual-combat/

Mary’s School of Sanctity

Lesson #43 About the Temperaments – Continuing Our Study of the Choleric Temperament—Their Spiritual Combat Part VIII

Note: When referring to a person with a choleric temperament in this article, we simply will label him as a choleric.

In our last lesson we studied more about the nature of anger, both just anger and unjust anger. We also saw the various ways in which anger becomes sinful. Since St. Thomas explained to us how the choleric is prone to anger, it is important to help the choleric analyze his anger.

Since one of our intentions for studying the temperaments is to gain self-knowledge and improve our spiritual lives, it is important to make the appropriate connections between the weaknesses found in each temperament. Making these connections really helps one to find good strategies on how to conquer his bad tendencies which lead him to sin. Thus, we need to look at the weakness of anger in the choleric and see how it is linked to the other weaknesses the choleric has.

St. Thomas tells us that:

The inordinateness of anger may be considered in relation to two things. First, in relation to the origin of anger, and this regards choleric persons, who are angry too quickly and for any slight cause. Secondly, in relation to the duration of anger, for that anger endures too long; and this may happen in two ways. In one way, because the cause of anger, to wit, the inflicted injury, remains too long in a man’s memory, the result being that it gives rise to a lasting displeasure, wherefore he is grievous and sullen to himself. In another way, it happens on the part of vengeance, which a man seeks with a stubborn desire: this applies to ill-tempered or stern people, who do not put aside their anger until they have inflicted punishment.[1]

In Lesson #42 we spoke of long-lasting anger leading to the horrible sin of hatred. This, of course, means that the choleric must work hard to keep a sharp eye on his anger and be able to discern whether his anger is just or sinful.

Before we discuss ways to help a choleric discern more about his anger, we need to recall that pride, a prominent weakness of the choleric,[2] is directly linked to his anger. Let us briefly look at St. Thomas’s definition of pride in order to see how pride is linked to the typical causes of anger which we discussed in Lesson #40.

St. Thomas defines pride as follows:

Pride (superbia) is so called because a man thereby aims higher (supra) than he is; whereby Isidore says (Etym. X): “A man is said to be proud, because he wishes to appear above (super) what he really is”; for he who wishes to overstep beyond what he is, is proud.[3]

With this definition in mind let us look at what St. Thomas taught us in Lesson #40. St. Thomas explained, “All the causes of anger are reduced to slight in these three forms: contempt, despiteful treatment (i.e. hindering one from doing one’s will), and insolence.”[4]

St. Thomas says that each of the three causes of anger really boils down to some kind of slight. Here are his words:

Each of those causes amounts to some kind of slight. Thus, forgetfulness is a clear sign of slight esteem, for the more we think of a thing the more is it fixed in our memory. [In other words, those things we often think about and which we care about, we do not tend to forget. So, forgetting about a person suggests we don’t care much about that person.]

Again, if a man does not hesitate by his remarks to give pain to another, this seems to show that he thinks little of him: and those too who show signs of hilarity when another is in misfortune, seem to care little about his good or evil. Again, he that hinders another from carrying out his will, without deriving thereby any profit to himself, seems not to care much for his friendship. Consequently, all those things, in so far as they are signs of contempt, provoke anger.[5]

There are two other aspects upon which St. Thomas touches in regard to a cause of anger. He asks two questions, namely, (1) whether a man’s excellence is a cause of his anger, and (2) whether a man’s defect is the cause of his anger. St. Thomas answers these questions as follows:

The cause of anger, in the man who is angry, may be taken in two ways. First, in respect to the motive of anger: and thus excellence is the cause of a man being easily angered, because the motive of anger is an unjust slight, as stated above (A. 2). However, it is evident that the more excellent a man is, the more unjust is a slight offered him in the matter in which he excels. Consequently, those who excel in any matter, are most of all angry, if they be slighted in that matter; for instance, a wealthy man in his riches, or an orator in his eloquence, and so forth.

Secondly, the cause of anger, in the man who is angry, may be considered on the part of the disposition produced in him by the motive aforesaid. However, it is evident that nothing moves a man to anger except a hurt that grieves him: while whatever savors of defect is above all a cause of grief; since men who suffer from some defect are more easily hurt. And this is why men who are weak, or subject to some other defect, are more easily angered, since they are more easily grieved.[6]

So now let us make a list of the causes of anger and see how each of them can be infected with pride. It should be noted that these apply to any human but we are here considering especially the choleric who St. Thomas has classified as getting “angry too quickly or for any slight cause.”

· A) Thus, forgetfulness is a clear sign of slight esteem, for the more we think of a thing the more is it fixed in our memory.

· B) If a man does not hesitate by his remarks to give pain to another, this seems to show that he thinks little of him.

· C) Those, too, who show signs of hilarity when another is in misfortune, seem to care little about his good or evil.

· D) He that hinders another from carrying out his will, without deriving thereby any profit to himself, seems not to care much for his friendship.

· E) A man who excels in an area is insulted by someone who slights his excellence.

· F) A man who is weak or has a defect is easily grieved and angered.

The list of slights when attached to pride and what remedies to take: (These are in connection with the typical pride of the choleric.)

A) When One Feels Slighted Because Someone Has Forgotten Him.

A proud choleric would assume that his friend is trying to hurt him or insult him. Thus, if he feels slighted he should first examine if the offense he feels is real or imagined. He needs to think on a more objective level. He should take care not to make a rash judgment. One thing he should do is give the benefit of the doubt to the one he feels slighted by. There may well be a logical reason why the friend could not accomplish what the choleric expected.

B) When One Feels Offended Because Of Something That Someone Has Said.

Here again, a proud choleric would automatically assume that there was an evil motive and premeditation involved in what was said to him. He must really make every effort to pull out of the situation and be objective. He should assume that no ill-will was intended.

He could forgive-and-forget or he could patiently communicate to the person who made the comment that he (the choleric) took it the wrong way. This communication is in itself an act of humility and will help the situation. He should try to “clear the air” and make sure there is no misunderstanding or hard feelings shown about the comment.

The choleric could also think that if someone said something that rubbed the choleric the wrong way, this proves that the choleric is proud and needs to admit to himself that he deserved the comment. Sometimes, people do not know how to approach a choleric to give him fraternal correction and consequently an admonishment or instruction can come out sounding harsh.

C) When One Feels Hurt Because Someone Found Humor in a Mishap/Misfortune that Occurred to the Choleric.

The proud choleric would usually take a great offense at this. Of course it is against charity to treat someone’s misfortune or accident as humorous. However, fallen human nature often finds humor in some silly circumstance and might laugh yet without intending any slight or insult.

What should one do if he should be laughed at? Our first thought should be of Our Lord who was unjustly mocked and laughed to scorn. He took it with meekness and forgave His offenders, and so we should do likewise.

Also, we can thank God for the humiliation and unite our embarrassment to Our Lord’s. We can remind ourselves that we really do not deserve any better. This is a good way to make reparation for our past sins and learn how to love others, especially our enemies.

D) When One Feels Angry Because Someone Interferes with His Plans, Even Though the Said Someone Does Not Gain Any Profit Thereby.

A proud choleric would typically get very upset about this situation. What should the choleric do? He should remember that when something happens that is outside of his control, then it is God’s Will for him at least at that present time.

He should first thank God for the cross. He should examine whether his plans were good for his salvation in the first place. If he finds that the plans were not conducive to his salvation then, of course, he should immediately abandon that plan.

If he is not sure whether his plan was good or not, he must pray for enlightenment from God. He should also seek advice and get help evaluating the situation. He could also use St. Ignatius’s technique of considering the plan as someone else’s. Then the choleric would ask himself if this plan is conducive to salvation. Likewise, he should ask himself what he would have wanted to do if he were on his deathbed and about to die. Then he could implement the results of his internal inquiry.

All of these thoughts would certainly curb his first inclination to get upset or angry.

E) When One Who Has a God-Given Talent Has Been Insulted by Someone Who Slights his Excellence.

A proud choleric is very prone to get upset and angry when his talents are not recognized. One could say that the proud choleric wants the whole world to acknowledge his talents. This may seem like an exaggeration to make a point, but we would have to admit knowing some choleric somewhere who acts exactly like this. What should this choleric do? First of all, if one has talents, he must give the glory to God. Our Lord and Our Lady are perfect examples of how to magnify God for the excellence they possessed. As St. Paul said, “What hast thou that thou hast not received? And if thou hast received, why dost thou glory, as if thou hadst not received it?” 1 Corinthians, 4:7.

We all have to thank God for what we have received. The choleric must do all he can to foster humility in himself and should try to form the habit of thanking God often for all the benefits he has received from God.

He should be meek and offer up the cross of being insulted. This is a great way to make reparation for his past sins and to imitate Our Lord.

He must remember that the insult may be a way for someone to subtly point out the choleric’s pride concerning his talents. So this is another reason for the choleric to be thankful that someone has insulted him. His conscience will undoubtedly tell him that he may really deserve the insult to curb his pride.

Of course, the choleric should forgive the person who insults him and this forgiveness must be with his whole heart. Otherwise he might get the temptation to harbor a grudge against the offender. [7]

F) When a Man Who Is Weak Has his Defect Pointed Out.

A proud choleric who has a natural weakness and/or a defect will find himself, as St. Thomas says, very easily irked and spontaneously lashes out if anyone makes a reference to his problem(s). Naturally, his pride does not want to face the fact that he has a problem. The most obvious reason for this is that the problem he has could in most circumstances be addressed and fixed. If someone points out his shortcomings, his conscience reminds him that his lack of effort to amend is the cause of the weakness/defect still abiding in him. The old adage, “God helps those who help themselves” is involved here. If the choleric worked hard, first to face himself, then to seek the means to improve and to take those means, then he would be on his way to overcoming the weakness and/or defect(s).

We all have tendencies which need to be conquered in us. As St. Paul says, “But I see another law in my members, fighting against the law of my mind, and captivating me in the law of my sin, that is in my members.” Romans, 7:23.

Of course, St. Paul here is talking about the concupiscence of the flesh which we all must deal with. Consequently, St. Paul exhorts us numerous times to use our reason. God intends each person to use his reason to avoid sin and to conquer the natural weaknesses which are in his temperament.

Therefore, the proud choleric, when his weakness and/or defect is revealed, should force himself to humbly be grateful to the person who makes it known.

We can readily see that if one does not view himself correctly, he would easily take offence at anything that he perceives as negative to him. It is truly a great blessing of God to help us see ourselves the way we really are, especially our defects. God often uses others as His tools to show us what we need to work on most in our souls. Therefore, we should not shun fraternal correction but embrace it to help us conquer pride.

A Short Self-Examination to Check if Pride is involved in One’s Anger (based on our discussion above)

➢ Do I feel slighted?

➢ Is this slight sent to me to show me that I need to amend some aspect of my life/character?

➢ Should I not take this opportunity to examine my conscience? {Because this occasion may seem to me to be a slight only because it pricks my conscience about one of my failings and in my pride I do not want to see myself as I really am.}

➢ Am I imitating Our Lord if I am unjustly accused?

➢ Am I offering up this humiliation for the Glory of God?

➢ Would it not be better to simply say a prayer for the person I feel slighted by and then forget about the incident?

This short examination can be very helpful to keep in mind the next time one, especially a choleric, feels like he is beginning to boil inside. When one humbles himself, especially seeing all things as coming from the Hands of God, then one can crush angry feelings which are often linked directly to pride.

In our next lesson we will deal more with various ways that a choleric can work on humility to restrain his anger. We will see more how pride greatly influences the choleric’s frame of mind. We will connect our investigation of slights (see above) with an examination of how a choleric can slow down his impulsive tendencies to take offense, get angry, and cling to anger for long periods of time.

[1] Summa Theologica IIa IIae, Q.158, a.6, Respondeo (emphasis added).

[2] See Lesson #39, in which the pride of the choleric is described.

[3] Summa Theologica, IIa IIae, Q.162, a.1, Respondeo.

In that Respondeo, St. Thomas further teaches regarding pride:

However, right reason requires that every man’s will should tend to that which is proportionate to him. Therefore, it is evident that pride denotes something opposed to right reason, and this shows it [pride] to have the character of sin, according to Dionysius (Div. Nom. iv. 4), “the soul’s evil is to be opposed to reason.” Therefore, it is evident that pride is a sin.

[4] Summa Theologica, IIa IIae, Q.47, a.2, Respondeo.

[5] Summa Theologica II IIae, Q. 47 a.3 Reply #3 (bracketed words added for clarity).

[6] Summa Theologica, Ia IIae, Q.47, a.3, Respondeo.

[7] One could ask the question, “What if the man (even a choleric man) was humble and is slighted for his excellence?” This excellent man would have to weigh the matter carefully and be sure if he should indeed show disapprobation against the offender. For example, if he would cause scandal by not expressing his just anger, then he must be sure to not simply blow off the incident but rather show that he has just anger and use this anger in an appropriate way.

21 Examples of Liberalism in the “New” SSPX

Posted on March 10, 2025April 23, 2025 by Catholic Candle

Catholic Candle note: Occasionally, we analyze the liberal statements of the SSPX. Someone could wonder:

Why mention the SSPX any longer, since they are unimportant as merely one of very many compromise groups?

It is true that a priest (or group) is of small importance when he (or the group) is merely one of countless compromisers. By contrast, an uncompromising priest is of great importance, even though he is only one.

However, regarding the “new” SSPX: we sometimes mention them for at least these five reasons, motivated by charity:

➢ New Catholic Candle readers might not be sufficiently informed of the “new” SSPX’s liberalism to avoid that group. Out of charity for them we occasionally provide these warnings to help these new readers appreciate the danger of the N-SSPX.

➢ Some longtime Catholic Candle readers might forget the N-SSPX poison, or vacillate in their resolution to stay away from the N-SSPX if they never received a reminder warning about the danger of the N-SSPX. This is like the fact that all it takes for many people to become conciliar is to never be reminded about the errors of Vatican II and the conciliar church. Out of charity for them we occasionally provide these reminders for readers who would otherwise “forget” the danger of the N-SSPX.

➢ The N-SSPX serves as an important study case to examine how leaving the truth often happens. It is a warning to us all about a very common way to depart from the truth and become unfaithful. Out of charity for ourselves we occasionally provide these insights about becoming unfaithful by taking this common road of compromise the N-SSPX is taking.

➢ Over time, the N-SSPX provides us with a thorough catalogue of liberal compromises, and studying those compromises and errors with the contrasting Traditional Catholic truth is a helpful means of studying our Faith and guarding ourselves from the principal errors of our time. This helps us to fulfill our duty of continually studying the doctrines of our Faith. Out of charity for ourselves, we use the occasion of the N-SSPX’s liberalism to study our Traditional Catholic Faith better and the corresponding N-SSPX liberalism.

➢ If the SSPX ever abjured its liberalism, it could do great good as it used to do, since its bishops and its priestly ordinations so far have been valid (although the SSPX has taken in some conciliar and doubtfully-ordained “priests” whom it allows to administer “sacraments”). This validity of SSPX ordinations stands in contrast to many compromise groups (such as the FSSP, ICK, and others), all of whose “ordinations” were and remain doubtful from the very beginning of those groups.

For those readers who are firm in their resolution to completely avoid supporting the N-SSPX, they can receive just as much of the substance of those Catholic Candle articles, if they substitute the phrase “a liberal could say” anytime they read “the SSPX teaches”.

21 Examples of Liberalism in the “New” SSPX

Today’s SSPX is not the same SSPX as the one in the old days. There are countless examples of its teaching and practice to show this. Many are documented in Catholic Candle, both on its current website and in its old one, CatholicCandle.neocities.org.

Below are twenty-one examples of this SSPX liberalism, taken from many more which we could have listed here. We cannot ignore the mountain of evidence. You should not either.

1. The SSPX previously taught that the rubella vaccine and other vaccines developed through abortion are always sinful. By contrast, the SSPX now says not only that this same rubella vaccine is justifiable for some people, but also that the COVID vaccines, which were also developed through abortion, are also justified.[1] The SSPX’s new position is wrong, liberal, and contradicts its prior teaching on vaccines developed through abortion.

2. The SSPX says it now accepts 95% of Vatican II[2] and says that Vatican II contains no direct heresy and “not so many” errors.[3] The truth the “new” SSPX denies is that the documents of Vatican II are riddled with liberal teachings and heresies.

3. The SSPX now teaches that the religious liberty taught by Vatican II is “a very, very limited one, very limited”.[4] The truth that the “new” SSPX denies is that the scope of religious liberty that Vatican II teaches is unlimited as long as public order is not breached.[5] This is the same meager restriction that the French Revolutionaries insisted upon after the French Revolution. In other words, buddhists, protestants, and even satanists can do what they wish in public, as long as they are peaceful and don’t become violent.

4. The “new” SSPX falsely teaches that “many Vatican II texts are traditional”.[6] The truth that the “new” SSPX denies is that there are no traditional documents of Vatican II (much less “many”).

5. Among these Vatican II documents, is Lumen Gentium. The SSPX now teaches that this document is free from errors/liberalism.[7] The truth that the “new” SSPX denies is that there are hundreds of heresies, liberal and false statements in Lumen Gentium.[8]

6. The “new” SSPX called the new mass “Holy Mass”.[9] Besides the “new” SSPX calling the new mass “Holy Mass”, it now calls the Traditional Mass by its conciliar name, viz., the “Extraordinary Form”.[10] The SSPX taught that the new mass is good, but not as good, as the Traditional Mass by likening the new mass to a tin trumpet, and likening the Traditional Mass to a silver trumpet.[11] Indeed, while Bishop Fellay was superior general, he attended the new mass and afterwards praised it.[12] His two assistants (who were second and third in authority in the SSPX) attended a new mass on another occasion.[13] The “new” SSPX has blamed the dispute between the Vatican and the “old” SSPX concerning the new mass, on how “profound” Archbishop Lefebvre’s “motives” were and the bewilderment of the SSPX priests and followers because they were “fed up” with the “way in which the new mass was being celebrated.”[14] Bishop Fellay says that “what needs to be corrected” in the new mass are things like making a better vernacular translation.[15] The truth that the “new” SSPX denies is that the new mass itself is evil and sacrilegious.

7. The “new” SSPX falsely indicates that Pope Francis abides in the truth, and is preserved from error.[16] When he was superior general, Bishop Fellay declared that he is “very happy” with a lot of what Pope Francis teaches.[17]

8. Jesus Christ is God. For this reason, Mary is the Mother of God because she is the mother of a Person Who is God. For the same reason, the Jews committed Deicide because they killed a Person Who is God. Vatican II contradicted the traditional teaching from the time of the apostles, that the Jews committed Deicide.[18] The SSPX has adopted this conciliar error and denies the Church’s teaching that the Jews did commit Deicide.[19] The truth that the “new” SSPX denies is that the Jews did commit Deicide – as the Church has always taught.

9. Catholics should not hold it as certain that we will go to heaven. But that is what the SSPX now teaches.[20] The truth is that the (supposed) certainty of salvation is the vice of presumption.

10. The new SSPX falsely teaches that Vatican II does good, when Bishop Fellay, its then-superior general, stated that the “Second Vatican Council … illuminates – i.e. deepens and further makes explicit – some aspects of the life and of the doctrine of the Church”.[21] The truth is that Vatican II does no good.

11. Among countless other conciliar errors is the claim that there exist “degrees” of being in communion with the Catholic Church.[22] The “new” SSPX indicates it accepts this conciliar theory by now using the term of “full communion”, as if there were any other kind of communion. Id.

12. While he was superior general, Bishop Fellay said that Pope Francis’s exhortation on marriage (Amoris Laetitia) “contains many things that are correct and beautiful”.[23] The truth is that this is a vile, thoroughly-conciliar document. Bishop Fellay falsely says that Pope Francis’s abominable Amoris Laetitia is like a “beautiful boat” with a “very small” hole in it.[24] The “new” SSPX is grossly minimizing the evil of Pope Francis’s teachings.

13. The SSPX teaches that Vatican II’s Optatam Totius is free from errors/liberalism. The truth is that there are many liberal and false statements in it.[25]

14. The “new” SSPX published an article about Islam’s hostility toward other religions. This article stressed the importance of religious liberty for every religion and omitted to state the Catholic truth that error (including religious error) has no rights.[26] The truth is that only the true Catholic Faith has rights.[27]

15. The “new” SSPX says we must continually change.[28]This echoes the conciliar hierarchy, which continually emphasizes the need to change, to “renew” ourselves, and to “ride the wave of revolution of faith”.[29]

16. The conciliar church refers to promotion of conciliar errors as The New Evangelization.[30]The “new” SSPX declared that Pope Francis sees the SSPX as a help in The New Evangelization. Id. This is scandalous since it implies that the N-SSPX approves of and is willing to promote Pope Francis’ modernism.

17. The SSPX now blurs the difference between the Catholic Church and the modernist conciliar church.[31] Archbishop Lefebvre made this clear distinction.[32]

18. The SSPX and Archbishop Lefebvre used to say that the indult groups “are doing the devil’s work”.[33] Now the SSPX treats those groups as colleagues in the Lord’s vineyard.[34]

19. When he was superior general, Bishop Fellay said that by an agreement with Rome, the SSPX “will return to the Church”.[35] The truth is that the “old” SSPX (and other Traditional Catholics who correctly saw things) were already in the Church. Ironically, the more the “new” SSPX becomes conciliar, the more that “new” SSPX needs to “return to the Church” by rejecting its liberalism.

20. The “new” SSPX, through one of its bishops, approved of a booklet for use in the SSPX, which teaches the conciliar position that a patient or the patient’s caregiver is permitted to choose to starve that patient to death if keeping that patient alive through providing food and liquids is too much of a burden for that patient or caregiver.[36]

21. The “new” SSPX promotes the “no nukes” unilateral nuclear disarmament position of Pope Francis and leftist organizations such as Greenpeace. The N-SSPX argues against the pre-conciliar Catholic position that all weapons – including nuclear weapons – can be used as long as the Catholic teachings concerning war and a just defense are preserved.[37]

[1] Here are the SSPX quotes (both the new and old ones) in part 3 of this article: https://catholiccandle.org/2021/01/01/reject-the-covid-vaccines/

[2] https://web.archive.org/web/20130603054101/http://www.sspx.org/sspx_and_rome/is_the_sspx_heretical_4_12-19-2012.htm

[3] While he was superior general, Bishop Fellay said:

In Vatican II, there is no direct heresy. There are openings. Openings to the [sic] error. And some direct errors. Not so many direct errors.

Hear Bishop Fellay’s words here: August 24, 2016 video interview , beginning at the 50 seconds’ mark. This video interview used to be here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JuCOdk99mfA&spfreload=5 but has been made private.

[4] Listen to then-superior general Bp. Fellay’s exact words at the following link – listen at minute 1:25 of 6:00 at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DdnJigNzTuY&feature=topics

[5] Read the quote from Vatican II here: https://catholiccandle.neocities.org/faith/religious-liberty-vatican-ii.html

[6] https://web.archive.org/web/20130603061829/http://www.sspx.org/sspx_and_rome/is_the_sspx_heretical_3_12-11-2012.htm

[7] https://catholiccandle.neocities.org/priests/sspx-the-new-sspx-claims-archbishop-lefebvre-endorsed-vatican-iis-lumen-gentium,-as-free-of-all-errors-and-ambiguities.html

[8] https://catholiccandle.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/Lumen-Gentium-Annotated.pdf

[9] Bishop Fellay June 30, 2018 interview found at: https://fsspx.news/en/news/bishop-fellay-interview-are-disturbing-factor-church-19871 .

[10] One of countless examples of this is the SSPX superior general using this phrase to refer to the true Mass here: http://www.angelusonline.org/index.php?section=articles&subsection=show_article&article_id=4242

[11] Here are Bishop Fellay’s words:

If you welcome a head of state and have the choice between a silver trumpet and a tin trumpet, do you use the tin trumpet? That would be an insult; you don’t do that. And even the best new Masses are like tin trumpets in comparison to the old liturgy. We have to use the best for the dear Lord.

Quoted from the Bishop Fellay June 30, 2018 interview found at: https://fsspx.news/en/news/bishop-fellay-interview-are-disturbing-factor-church-19871 (emphasis added).

[12] Read the news report and quotes from Bishop Fellay here: https://catholiccandle.neocities.org/priests/fellay-promotes-hybrid-mass.html

[13] Read the news report here: https://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2014/05/rorate-exclusive-pope-francis-received.html

[14] Here is the longer quote from Bishop Fellay, starting with the question:

Q: Cardinal Ratzinger was a connoisseur and veteran promoter of Catholic Tradition and a friend of the Traditional Mass; why couldn’t he reassure the Archbishop?

Bishop Fellay: He did not understand how profound the Archbishop’s motives were or how bewildered the faithful and the priests were. Many were simply fed up with the post-conciliar scandals and nuisances and with the way in which the new Mass was being celebrated. If Cardinal Ratzinger had understood us, he would not have acted that way. And I think that he regretted it. That is why he then tried as Pope to repair the damage with the Motu Proprio and lifted the excommunication. We are truly grateful for his attempts at reconciliation.

Quoted from the Bishop Fellay June 30, 2018 interview found at: https://fsspx.news/en/news/bishop-fellay-interview-are-disturbing-factor-church-19871 (emphasis added).

[15] Quotation, citation, and analysis here: https://catholiccandle.neocities.org/priests/fellay-promotes-hybrid-mass.html

[16] Read the SSPX quotes and find the citations to the SSPX publications here: https://catholiccandle.neocities.org/priests/bouchacourt-francis-preserved-error.html#fnref1

[17] Read the SSPX quotes and find the citations to the SSPX publications here:

https://catholiccandle.neocities.org/priests/fellay-interview-liberal-timid.html

[18] Nostra Aetate, §4.

[19] Quotations, citations, and analysis of the Catholic teaching and of the “new” SSPX’s denial of the Catholic teaching, are here: https://catholiccandle.neocities.org/priests/2014-01-14-bp-fellay-ltr.html

[20] Here is one example of this SSPX teaching: in the November-December 2016 Angelus Magazine, Fr. Wegner declares:

Faith makes us know God: we believe in Him with all our strength but we do not see Him. Our faith, therefore, needs to be supported by the certitude that some day [sic] we will see our God, that we will possess Him and willl [sic] be united to Him forever. The virtue of hope gives us this certitude by presenting God to us as our infinite good and our eternal reward.

https://catholiccandle.neocities.org/priests/sspx-the-new-sspx-teaches-the-vice-of-presumption-as-if-it-were-the-virtue-of-hope.html

[21] Quoted from Bishop Fellay’s April 15, 2012 Doctrinal Declaration (dashes are in the original).

[22] Quotation, citation, and analysis here: https://catholiccandle.neocities.org/priests/schmidberger-conciliar-ideas-jargon.html

[23] Quotation, citation, and analysis here: https://catholiccandle.neocities.org/priests/fellay-francis-eroding-marriage.html

[24] Amoris Laetitia is Pope Francis’s scandalous and heretical document on marriage. The truth, of course, is that this document is a complete shipwreck! (continuing Bishop Fellay’s boat metaphor). Plainly, Bishop Fellay greatly minimizes the truth when he says Pope Francis’s “beautiful boat” has a “very small” hole, because most boats have very small leaks. That is why boats have bilge pumps – to remove the water from very small leaks. A very small leak is not ideal but is not a disaster like Amoris Laetitia and other teachings of the conciliar church.

Read the SSPX’s Amoris Laetitia quotes and find the citations to the SSPX publications here: https://catholiccandle.neocities.org/priests/fellay-francis-eroding-marriage.html

[25] https://catholiccandle.org/2019/01/08/the-evils-of-vatican-iis-decree-on-priestly-training/

[26] Quotation, citation, and analysis here: https://catholiccandle.neocities.org/priests/sspx-jourdan-religious-liberty.html

[27] https://catholiccandle.neocities.org/faith/religious-liberty-vatican-ii.html

[28] Quotation, citation, and analysis here: https://catholiccandle.neocities.org/priests/pfluger-traditional-catholics-change.html

[29] To read the conciliar quotes promoting continual change (and to read an analysis of them), see Lumen Gentium Annotated, by Quanta Cura Press, pp.66-78, ©2013, available at: https://catholiccandle.org/2023/06/23/lumen-gentium-annotated/ (free) & at Amazon.com (sold at cost).

[30] Quotation, citation, and analysis here: https://catholiccandle.neocities.org/priests/SSPX-promote-new-evangelization.html

[31] For example, here is Bishop Fellay: “The fact of going to Rome doesn’t mean that we agree with them. But it’s the Church! And it’s the true Church!” Bishop Fellay, Flavigny, 09/02/2012).

[32] For example, here is Archbishop Lefebvre relating his discussion with then-Cardinal Ratzinger:

Cardinal Ratzinger repeated it many times, “But Monsignor, there is only one Church, you mustn’t make a parallel church.” I told him: “Your Eminence, it is not us who are forming a parallel Church, as we are continuing the Church of all times, it is you who are forming the parallel church for having invented the Church of the Council, which Cardinal Benelli called the Conciliar Church; it is you all who have invented a new church, not us, it is you who have made the new catechisms, new Sacraments, a new Mass, a new liturgy, not us. We continue to do what was done before. We are not the ones who are forming a new church.

Econe, Press Conference, June 15, 1988. There are many other examples of Archbishop Lefebvre distinguishing between the Catholic Church and the conciliar church.

[33] See, e.g., https://sspx.org/en/two-years-after-consecrations

[34] See, e.g., https://remnantnewspaper.com/web/index.php/articles/item/2032-catholic-identity-conference-makes-history

http://histoirepatrimoinebleurvillois.hautetfort.com/archive/2015/09/13/premiere-messe-du-chanoine-pierre-dumain-en-la-basilique-de-5684030.html

[35] Here is the longer quote: “Anyway, the Pope said that it is only a problem of canonical discipline. An act of Rome will suffice to say it is finished and we will return to the Church. It will come. I am very optimistic!” Bp. Fellay, Interview with Les Nouvelles Caledoniennes, 12/27/10.

[36] https://catholiccandle.neocities.org/priests/tissier-praises-euthanasia-booklet

[37] http://catholiccandle.neocities.org/faith/nuclear-weapons-are-not-evil-but-their-misuse-is.html

Posted on February 21, 2025 by Catholic Candle

Words to Live by – from Catholic Tradition

Let Us Be Always Faithful to Our Faithful Divine Friend!

Concerning Our Lord Jesus Christ, My Imitation of Christ urges us in these words:

Love Him and keep Him for thy Friend, Who, when all go away, will not leave thee nor suffer thee to perish in the end.

February 2025 PDF Issue

Posted on February 15, 2025March 28, 2025 by Catholic Candle

February 2025 PDF Issue Download

The Financial Weakness of the U.S. Government in Three Graphs

Posted on February 15, 2025March 28, 2025 by Catholic Candle

Catholic Candle note: Below is an update written in late January 2025, concerning the dire condition of the U.S. Government’s fiscal condition and, by analogy, the fiscal condition of the governments of other Western countries which are trending in the same direction.

For reference, here is an earlier assessment and how the leftists hide the truth: The Condition of the U.S. Economy compared to Leftist Spin about the Economy. This article can be found here: https://catholiccandle.org/2024/03/21/the-u-s-economy-compared-to-leftist-spin-about-the-economy/

Catholic Candle usually writes on topics more directly related to the Catholic Faith, as well as Catholic philosophy and Catholic practice. But there is an ongoing cultural and political revolution all around us, and this revolution has other aspects too. That is why we also cover topics that could be called “political”, in order to shine a light on current evils in government and society as well as (in the present article) to highlight the leftist lie that the U.S. is in a strong economic condition.

The United States is being ruined in many ways, especially morally. But besides this moral ruin, the U.S. is being ruined financially by the enemies of the U.S. (inside and outside of the country), who seek to destroy its economy through extreme overspending, and to promote socialism through handing out government freebees of every description and in every direction.

The U.S. Government is moving the nation toward the socialist posture where money and decisions are increasingly controlled by the government and where the government increasingly spends money that it does not have (with strings attached) to promote socialism and to corrupt the nation.

Below is government data showing recent progress made in increasing U.S. economic instability and increasing government insolvency.

In the graphs below, it is a little hard to see the exact numbers that we give in the text of this article. But those precise numbers are available online by using the links we include below the graphs and then hovering with your cursor over the lines shown in those graphs. These graphs prominently say “FRED” on their upper left-hand corner, because they are from the U.S. Federal Reserve and “FRED” is an acronym meaning “Federal Reserve Economic Data”.

The U.S. National Debt

The U.S. National Debt has almost doubled in ten years – from about $17.8 trillion in the third quarter of 2014 to $35.5 trillion in the third quarter of 2024. (This is the latest ten year period available when this article was being written in late January, 2025.)

The data and graph (above) are from the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis and can be found here: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/GFDEBTN

Interest on the U.S. National Debt

The interest that the U.S. Government pays on this National Debt is now more than $1.1 trillion per year (as of the third quarter of 2024, which is the latest data available when this article was being written in late January, 2025). This is approximately a 262% increase in U.S. interest obligations in the last ten years. (The total interest obligation in the third quarter 2014 was $442 billion.)

This annual interest obligation (on the U.S. national debt), is now 250% larger than the entire annual federal deficit[1] (then $441 billion.[2]) ten years ago (in 2015).

The data and graph are from the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis and can be found here: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/A091RC1Q027SBEA

A New “Permanent” Higher Level of Annual Government Spending

The Government continues to spend at a reckless rate and way beyond its means. Even ignoring the spikes in excess spending during the period of the Covid alarmism, the U.S. government spending continues to trend dramatically upward, going from about $3.9 trillion per year to about $7 trillion per year over a period of ten years.

This data and graph are taken from the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis and can be found here: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/FGEXPND

Conclusion

The U.S. National Debt is accelerating. The huge and increasing interest payments exacerbate this problem. Meanwhile, the U.S. Government makes it worse by continuing to spend way beyond its means.

Dear Reader, notice this parallel: our society is ever more unreasonable and unrestrained in its evil decisions on moral matters. Similarly, our society is ever more unreasonable and unrestrained in its evil decisions on fiscal matters also.

The use of reason and restrain would solve everything in the moral, social, and the economic spheres. Truly, the virtue of Prudence and living the Catholic life are the answers to all of society’s problems, even those economic ones!

The grave condition of our nation is a reminder to pray harder for our country. We should add this intention to our daily prayers. Our course, despite our country’s problems, we should not be anxious. Although God can do all things, it seems that the worsening condition of our country and the human element of the Church will probably not be solved until the Triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary by the consecration of Russia to the Immaculate Heart. Adjutorium nostrum in nomine Domini!

[1] The federal government deficit is the amount that the U.S. Government spends in excess of the revenue that it has collected from taxes.

[2] See the graph of government data here: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/FYFSD

Catholic Candle

We share resources here to help you grow in the Catholic Faith and defend it against schism and heresy.

Author: Catholic Candle

April 2025 PDF Issue

The Man Whom the Whole Church Accepts as Pope, Is the Pope

The “New” SSPX Promotes Praying in Conciliar Churches during the “Holy Year”

Warning about Lifesitenews.com: It Promotes Heresy

Lesson #44: Temperaments – Choleric Temperament – a Choleric’s Spiritual Combat – Part IX

March 2025 PDF Issue

The Catholic Church Will Always be Visible with a Pope

A Lenten Reflection – a Deeper Look into Our Lord’s Passion

Lesson #43: Temperaments – Choleric Temperament – a Choleric’s Spiritual Combat – Part VIII

21 Examples of Liberalism in the “New” SSPX

February 2025 PDF Issue

The Financial Weakness of the U.S. Government in Three Graphs