The Conciliar Church is Anti-God and Anti-Catholic

The conciliar church scrapped the perfect Faith and perfect Church, founded by Christ while He was on earth, and started a false, anti-Catholic church.  It kept the name “Catholic” to deceive the laity – and most clergy, for that matter.

Lest one should be tempted to believe the changes were minor, and therefore, unimportant, let us once again review some of these changes.  Besides considering the Mass a meal, rather than a Holy Sacrifice, the conciliar church has its own:

  false doctrines (e.g., the teachings of VC II);  

  false and sacrilegious worship (e.g., Novus Ordo mass);

  places for these sacrileges (viz., the conciliar churches stolen from the Catholic church);

  false priesthood (with its new concept of priesthood; doubtfully valid ordinations, etc.);

  false laws (e.g., within the 1983 Code of Canon Law);

  false catechisms (e.g., the new conciliar Catechism of the Catholic Church);

  false bibles (e.g., instead of the Latin Vulgate and its English translation, the Douay Rheims Bible);

  new, politically-correct “Decalogue” (i.e., a new “10 Commandments”);

  new, politically-correct “beatitudes”;

  new Mysteries of the Rosary (the so-called “luminous mysteries”);

  new (supposed) “saints” and new canonization process (e.g., so-called “Saint” John Paul II), the first pope whom the conciliar church (supposedly) “canonized” but certainly not the last;

  new (supposed) “sacraments” with conciliar names and formulae (e.g., Catholics have the Sacrament of Penance; conciliars have its substitute called “Reconciliation”, and on occasion it’s “group Reconciliation”); and

  new (supposed) “miracles” and “apparitions”.

In the aggregate, these changes accomplished what they were meant to accomplish; they deceived laity and clergy alike, who were confused into believing that the conciliar, counterfeit “church” is the Roman Catholic Church, founded by Christ.

The scope of this evil deed is beyond comprehension by most.  There were hundreds of millions of devout Catholics in the world before the Second Vatican Council, which was promoted by Popes John the XXIII and Paul VI.  The conciliar church was developed by the Council and completely took the Faith from the hearts of those Catholics who, sadly, had no idea they were “joining” a new church.  Because it still called itself Catholic, it raised few alarms.

But as we know, the conciliar church was Catholic in name only.  In reality, it is anti-Catholic.  So, now those hundreds of millions of Catholics are members of the anti-Catholic conciliar church and have little or no connection with genuine Catholicism.

It is obvious that the devil is behind this; he is a master of deception.  And this time his deception is far worse than his efforts in starting the Protestant sects in the 1500s.  He has not destroyed the Catholic Church, but he has taken the substance of the true Faith and Catholic practice out of the hearts of hundreds of millions of Catholics and made them instead into lax, non-practicing, or apostate (former) Catholics. 

The conciliar church is a wasteland and complete disaster.  To prove my point: can anyone name one good thing the conciliar church has done?  I didn’t think so.

Remember:  there’s no salvation outside the Catholic Church.

 

Did the Pope’s Consecration Fulfill Heaven’s Command?  No!

 

As our readers know, Pope Francis[1] consecrated Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary on March 25, 2022.  Does this consecration fulfill Heaven’s request?  No!

 

We know that Our Lady of Fatima came to Sister Lucy in Tuy, in 1929, and told her:

The moment has come when God asks the Holy Father to make, in union with all the bishops of the world, the consecration of Russia to my Immaculate Heart, promising to save it by this means.

So numerous are the souls which the justice of God condemns for sins committed against me, that I come to ask for reparation.  Sacrifice yourself for this intention and pray.[2]

We are more familiar with the first paragraph of this quote, but Sr. Lucy assures us that Our Lady told her both paragraphs.


A similar, alternate, phrasing of Our Lord’s request for consecration

In 1930, Sr. Lucy repeated Heaven’s request in different words.  She wrote that:

The good Lord promises to end the persecution in Russia, if the Holy Father will himself make a solemn act of reparation and consecration of Russia to the Sacred Hearts of Jesus and Mary, as well as ordering all the bishops of the Catholic world to do the same.  The Holy Father must then promise that upon the ending of this persecution he will approve and recommend the practice of the reparatory devotion already described [viz., of the five First Saturdays].[3]

In this 1930 phrasing of what is necessary for this consecration, Sr. Lucy mentions two additional conditions which Heaven revealed to her, which are not mentioned in the 1929 quote.  The consecration must be to both the Sacred Heart of Jesus as well as the Immaculate Heart of Mary and also the pope must promise to approve and promote the reparatory devotion of the Five First Saturdays.

Thus, based on Our Lady’s words in 1929 and 1930, we know that the consecration has seven conditions.  It must be performed:

1.    by the pope;

2.    together with all of the bishops;

3.    consecrating Russia specifically;

4.    to Our Lord’s Sacred Heart specifically and

5.    to Our Lady’s Immaculate Heart specifically;

6.    to make reparation for sins against Our Lady; and

7.    must be accompanied by the pope’s promise to approve and promote the reparatory devotion of the Five First Saturdays.

Below we examine each of these seven conditions to determine whether it was fulfilled in Pope Francis’ March 25 consecration.

1.   Condition one was fulfilled by the pope performing the consecration.

Pope Francis actually recited the consecration prayer, fulfilling the condition that he must do it.

 

2.   Condition two was not fulfilled, since the consecration was not performed in union with all of the world’s bishops.

The consecration appears to plainly have not been performed as Our Lady (and Her Son) commanded because Condition 2 was not fulfilled, viz., it was not performed jointly with all of the bishops[4] of the world.

Although we do not know the exact number of Catholic bishops in the world, it seems certain there are thousands of them (including all those with doubtful consecrations but with true jurisdictional authority).  The leftist source, Wikipedia, says that in 2020, there were about 5,600 bishops in the world.[5] 

A relatively small number of local ordinaries announced they would join the pope in the consecration.  Whatever the number was of these “bishops” who joined in the pope’s consecration, we know of no reason to think it was even a quarter of the total number in the world.  In fact, the video of Pope Francis reciting the consecration show cardinals and “bishops” attending but not participating.

We note that the 1930s statement of Heaven’s request says that the pope must order the world’s bishops to participate.  Presumably this is necessary because otherwise many (most) of them would not do so.  However, we note that a question would arise under the strange (hypothetical) circumstance where the pope failed to order the world’s bishops to perform the consecration but they all joined in voluntarily.  Perhaps the consecration would suffice to fulfill Heaven’s command, although the pope did not fulfill Heaven’s command that he order the “bishops” to join him, under obedience.

 

3.   Condition three was probably fulfilled, relating to the consecration of Russia in particular.

Condition 3 required Russia specifically, to be consecrated.  This condition was not fulfilled in the plainest and most straightforward way.

The text of Pope Francis’ consecration states:

Mother of God and our Mother, to your Immaculate Heart we solemnly entrust and consecrate ourselves, the Church and all humanity, especially Russia and Ukraine.  …  To you we consecrate the future of the whole human family, the needs and expectations of every people, the anxieties and hopes of the world.[6]

It is true that Russia was mentioned specifically.  However, there were other subjects of the consecration including “all humanity”.  Although Heaven required Russia to be consecrated by name, Our Lady did not say that the consecration must be of “only Russia with absolutely nothing else”. 

On the other hand, Heaven simply and straightforwardly commanded the consecration of Russia in particular.  This aspect was at least not fulfilled in the simplest, most straightforward way possible.   

Although Russia is specifically named, nonetheless, when other subjects are added to the consecration of Russia, it detracts from the focus on consecrating Russia.  If we were to take this point “to the extreme”, in the case of the pope mentioning hundreds of other subjects in the consecration, this would seem to entirely nullify the mention of Russia.  For example, suppose the pope had individually mentioned each and every one of the countries in the world.  That is, Russia is just one of 195 countries consecrated by name.  Would that fulfill Heaven’s command to consecrate Russia?   It would seem not.  That consecration would seem not to differ from consecrating “the world” to the Immaculate Heart – and that (previous) consecration was insufficient. 

Although Pope Francis did not mention every country, yet the principle stands: viz., at least “in the extreme” a consecration would be insufficient even when Russia is named in particular – viz., if the mention of Russia were diluted by too many other subjects of consecration. 

Catholic Candle tends to think that Pope Francis’ consecration was not so extremely diluted so as to fail to fulfill Condition #3 (see above) that Russia in particular be consecrated.  But the consecration did fail to pertain simply to Russia, and it failed to fulfill this aspect of Heaven’s simple, straightforward command in the simplest, most straightforward way.

4.   Condition four was not fulfilled, because there was no consecration to the Sacred Heart of Jesus.

There was no consecration to the Sacred Heart of Jesus, as Sr. Lucy affirms to be necessary, in her 1930 letter on this subject.  The Sacred Heart of Jesus was not even mentioned in Pope Francis’ consecration.

5.   Condition five was fulfilled, because the consecration was specifically made to the Immaculate Heart of Mary.

As quoted above, the text of Pope Francis’ consecration states:

Mother of God and our Mother, to your Immaculate Heart we solemnly entrust and consecrate ourselves, the Church and all humanity, especially Russia and Ukraine.[7]

6.   Condition six was not fulfilled, because the consecration was not made in reparation for sins against Our Lady.

To make reparation is to amend or repair a wrong done.  Here is how one dictionary defined “reparation”:

1. The act or process of making amends for a wrong.

2. Something done or money paid to make amends or compensate for a wrong.

3. reparations, compensation or remuneration, as for damage or economic loss, required from a nation defeated in war.

4. The act or process of repairing or the condition of being repaired.[8]

In Pope Francis’ consecration, there is no mention of reparation for sins against Our Lady in particular, as she requested.  In fact, there is no mention of reparation at all. 

Pope Francis’ consecration asks for forgiveness.  The prayer states: “with shame we cry out: Forgive us, Lord!”[9]  However, there is nothing promised or done in reparation.  Although contrition is an essential element of forgiveness, asking for forgiveness is not amending the wrong.  For example, if one man damaged another man’s car, apologizing is appropriate but that apology does not repair the wrong (the damage).  An example of reparation which Pope Francis could have made – but didn’t – would be approving and promoting the Five First Saturdays of reparatory Holy Communions, as Our Lady requested. 

Likewise, Pope Francis’ consecration prayer asks for other things that are not reparation.  He asks Our Lady to:

Ø  “help us and grant us your comfort”;  

Ø  “grant that war may end and peace spread throughout the world”; and.  

Ø  “help us to foster the growth of communion”.[10]  

But none of these requests are reparation, i.e., amending past wrongs (sins).  Again, there is no reparation made or promised in these requests for help.

7.   Condition seven is not fulfilled (so far) by Pope Francis promising to approve and promote the reparatory devotion of the Five First Saturdays.

The consecration which Heaven requests includes the requirement that the pope must “then” make a promise.  We do not know if this must be part of the consecration prayer itself.  Here is how Sr. Lucy phrased Our Lady’s request for this:

The Holy Father must then promise that upon the ending of this persecution he will approve and recommend the practice of the reparatory devotion already described [viz., of the five First Saturdays].[11]

If this promise must be made at the time of the consecration, then it plainly was not done and cannot be done now.  During the consecration, the pope did not mention or promise to approve and recommend this devotion.  Thus, this condition was not fulfilled – as least so far.  Perhaps this promise could yet be made.

Summary and assessment

For the above reasons, it seems clear that Heaven’s command has not been fulfilled and the consecration has not occurred as Heaven ordered.

Conditions 1 and 5 were fulfilled.  Conditions 2, 4, and 6 were not fulfilled. Condition 7 was not fulfilled, at least so far.  And condition 3 was probably fulfilled.


A few additional observations

In the cover letter addressed to the world’s bishops, the pope does not request them to recite the consecration with him, much less does it command them to do so (as Our Lady directed).  The pope says that the way they can join him is by inviting their subordinates to recite this consecration.  Here are his words:

I[12] ask you to join in this Act by inviting the priests, religious and faithful to assemble in their churches and places of prayer on 25 March, so that God’s Holy People may raise a heartfelt and choral plea to Mary our Mother.[13] 

Maybe one could suppose that the pope implied that he wanted the world’s “bishops” to join in the consecration also.  Perhaps this is true.  Nonetheless, the pope does not specifically ask them to consecrate Russia in union with him, much less does he command them to do so.

Also, the pope does not ask that anyone recite this consecration at the same time he does.  He says people can recite it “throughout the day”.  Here are his words:

I am sending you the text of the prayer of consecration, so that all of us can recite it throughout that day, in fraternal union.[14]

Further, there is a conciliar and globalist “stench” to the text of the consecration, implying or saying things such as:

Ø  it is a sin for a nation to “stockpile weapons”, thereby implying that unilateral disarmament is necessary;

Ø  we must all be stewards of the world because it is our “common home”, suggesting that nations must support global environmental projects;

Ø  we sinned because we “ravaged the garden of the earth” apparently because we were not environmentally conscious; and

Ø  Pope Francis says "we have disregarded the commitments we made as a community of nations”.  This certainly seems to refer to the globalist commitments of the United Nations, the European Union, the World Economic Forum, etc., where nations have committed themselves to the globalist agenda, e.g., ecological targets to reduce carbon emissions.[15]  

Then after listing the world’s “failures” to sufficiently promote globalist evils, Pope Francis – ever the showman – dramatically exclaims “Forgive us, Lord”.  However, it is these globalist evils themselves, not failure to implement them, which anger God.

Conclusion: Pope Francis’ consecration does not fulfill Heaven’s command!  Let us pray for the Triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary by the Consecration of Russia to her Immaculate Heart in the way that Heaven has commanded for almost 100 years!

 

Postscript:  The SSPX continues to find ways to praise what comes from the conciliar church and to obscure the truth.

 

The SSPX publicly said how “happy” it is that Pope Francis’ consecration has “taken into account” Our Lady of Fatima’s request, even though the consecration fails to fulfill Heaven’s command.  Here are the SSPX’s words:

 

After a long wait, punctuated by fervent crusades and assiduous recitation of rosaries, the Society of Saint Pius X is happy to see the request of Our Lady of Fatima taken into account, which called for a solemn act by the Pope in union with all the bishops.[16]

 

 

In this public statement, the SSPX scandalously implies that Pope Francis is following Our Lady’s request.  That is false!

 

To “take into account” means to “make allowances for”.[17]  Pope Francis did not change his planned consecration to comply with Our Lady’s request.  Perhaps it is even true that, if Pope Francis took Our Lady’s request “into account”, it was in order to reject her wishes.

 

On the day of the consecration, Bishop Fellay said:

 

We have for years and years asked for this, begged God for this consecration to happen.  Thus, we rejoice, we do rejoice, with our whole heart we unite ourselves to this act of consecration.  The promise is not directly in the message of the pope’s text: Russia will convert.  …  [L]et’s hope that this is the right one … this consecration.  …  It is not certain that this is the right one ….[18]

 

Lastly, notice that the “new” SSPX impliedly takes credit Pope Francis is performing this consecration.  The “new” SSPX points to its own “fervent crusades”, “assiduous recitation of rosaries”, and its years of “begging God for this consecration”.[19]



[1]           Sedevacantism is a grave error.  Catholic Candle is not sedevacantist.  For an explanation of why sedevacantism is an error and why Francis is our pope (as bad as he is), read the small book, Sedevacantism, Material or Formal Schism, by Quanta Cura Press: which is available here:

 

Ø  Here, for free: https://catholiccandle.neocities.org/faith/against-sedevacantism.html 

or

 

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

[2]           The Whole Truth About Fatima, Frére Michel de la Sainte Trinité, translator John Collorafi, vol. II, Immaculate Heart Publications, Buffalo, NY, © 1989 for English translation, p.464 (emphasis added).

[3]           The Whole Truth about Fatima: The Secret and the Church, Volume II, by Br. Michel de la Sainte Trinité, Immaculate Heart Pub., 1989, Chapters 6, p. 465, quoting a letter received by Father Gonçalves on May 29, 1930 (Doc., p. 405). The letter of next June 12, addressed to the same person, literally employs the same formula (Doc., p. 411).

[4]           It might occur to the reader here that the new conciliar rite of consecration of a bishop is inherently doubtful.  For an explanation of why this is true, read this analysis: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B49oPuI54eEGZVF5cmFvMGdZM0U/view?resourcekey=0-d98Ksw0xkbtafE2fYSTq8A


Because this conciliar rite is doubtfully valid, it should be treated as invalid (as far as having the effect of the sacrament).  Read this explanation here of why a doubtful sacrament should be treated as invalid: https://catholiccandle.neocities.org/faith/new-ordination-doubtful.html

 

However, the Catholic Church continues to have a full hierarchy (a pope and the local ordinaries governing the dioceses of the world).  The Church leaders’ jurisdictional power (authority to govern) remains intact (including the pope’s) even though their Episcopal consecrations are doubtful (including the pope’s) and should be treated as invalid.  For a full explanation of this fact, read the article at this link: https://catholiccandle.neocities.org/faith/against-sedevacantism.html#section-10

 

These local ordinaries of the world’s dioceses can be called “bishops” even if they lack Episcopal sacramental powers because they are bishops in their authority and office governing the Church.  Look how the Catholic Encyclopedia uses that term to refer to a man who has Episcopal governing authority but not Episcopal sacramental power:

 

Internal jurisdiction is that which is exercised in the tribunal of penance.  It differs from the external jurisdiction of which we have been speaking, in that its object is the welfare of the individual penitent, while the object of external jurisdiction is the welfare of the Church as a corporate body.  … 

[F]or the exercise of external jurisdiction the power of orders is not necessary.  A bishop, duly appointed to a see [i.e., a diocese], but not yet consecrated, is invested with external jurisdiction over his diocese …

 

The 1913 Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. 3, article: Church, §VIII (2), p.755 (emphasis added; bracketed words added).

 

Liturgical Historian, Fr. Adrian Fortescue, used the term “bishop” to describe those possessing the power to rule a diocese but who were not yet consecrated a bishop.  Here are his words:

 

The bishop must be canonically appointed and confirmed, otherwise he is not mentioned [in the Canon of the Mass].  But he need not yet be consecrated.

 

The 1913 Catholic Encyclopedia, article Canon of the Mass, author: Fr. Adrian Fortescue, vol. 3, article Canon of the Mass, p.262 (emphasis added; bracketed words added).

 

Of course, we should avoid confusing such bishops (who govern the world’s dioceses), with those bishops who without any doubt possess Episcopal sacramental powers.  For this reason, we suggest that, presently, it is better not to refer to the local ordinaries as bishops simply (i.e., without qualification) wherever there might be confusion, because their conciliar episcopal “consecrations” make it doubtful that they possess a bishop’s sacramental power.  Catholic Candle makes this distinction clear by referring to the local ordinaries as “bishops” (in quotes).

 

The consecration of Russia apparently does not require Episcopal sacramental powers.  This consecration must be performed by the Catholic Church’s rulers, who govern the Church.  Thus, it seems, this consecration invokes the bishops’ governing (jurisdictional) authority under, and in union with, the pope.

[6]           This is the official text published by the Vatican’s website and found here: https://www.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/letters/2022/documents/20220321-lettera-consacrazione-cuoredimaria.html (emphasis added).

[7]           This is the official text published by the Vatican’s website and found here: https://www.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/letters/2022/documents/20220321-lettera-consacrazione-cuoredimaria.html (emphasis added).

[9]           This is the official text published by the Vatican’s website and found here: https://www.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/letters/2022/documents/20220321-lettera-consacrazione-cuoredimaria.html (emphasis added).

[11]         The Whole Truth about Fatima: The Secret and the Church, Volume II, by Br. Michel de la Sainte Trinité, Immaculate Heart Pub., 1989, Chapters 6, p. 465, quoting a letter received by Father Gonçalves on May 29, 1930 (Doc., p. 405). The letter of next June 12, addressed to the same person, literally employs the same formula (Doc., p. 411), which indissociably unites the Holy Hearts of Jesus and Mary.

[12]         The pope uses the singular pronoun “I” to refer to himself, not the plural pronoun “we”, continuing this practice of his post-conciliar predecessors.  This is a departure from the traditional practice of the popes using the “royal we” before Vatican II. 

[15]         This is the official text published by the Vatican’s website and found here: https://www.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/letters/2022/documents/20220321-lettera-consacrazione-cuoredimaria.html (emphasis added).

[17]         Webster’s Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary, Definition: “to take into account”.

[18]         March 25, 2022 Interview of Bishop Bernard Fellay, quoted in April 8, 2022 letter of Fr. Yves le Roux, to friends and benefactors.


[19]         This last quoted phrase was grammatically changed from “begged” to “begging” for grammatical agreement.

VC II Set Up a Distinction of Compromises Without a Difference

Catholic Candle note:  The article below refers to Rome’s betrayal of the Catholic Faith.  However, a reader would be mistaken if he assumed that Pope Francis’ betrayal somehow means that he is not the pope.

Sedevacantism is wrong and is (material or formal) schism.  Catholic Candle is not sedevacantist.  On the contrary, we published a series of articles showing that sedevacantism is false (and also showing that former Pope Benedict is not still the pope). 

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

  Here, for free: https://catholiccandle.neocities.org/faith/against-sedevacantism.html  

or

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

Here is what St. Bernard of Clairvaux, Doctor of the Church, teaches concerning the need to recognize and respect the authority of a superior – such as the pope – even when he is bad:

Even should the life of any superior be so notoriously wicked as to admit of no excuse or dissimulation, nevertheless, for God’s sake, Who is the source of all power, we are bound to honor such a one, not on account of his personal merits, which are non-existent, but because of the divine ordination and the dignity of his office.[1]

However, even while recognizing the pope’s authority and our duty to obey him when we are able, we know we must resist the evil he says and does.  Read more about this principle here: https://catholiccandle.neocities.org/faith/against-sedevacantism.html#section-7

 

VC II Set Up a Distinction of Compromises

Without a Difference


Starting in 1965, most Catholics compromised their Faith and followed liberal leaders into what became the conciliar church.

In 2015, most Traditional Catholics compromised their Faith by following liberal leaders into a changed SSPX which accepted increasing liberalness.

After the Second Vatican Council, when the conciliar church of the ‘60s and ‘70s set out to destroy the traditional Catholic Church, they depended on the love and trust of most Catholics for their cardinals, bishops, and priests, plus the average layman’s love for his Church, plus their assumption that Church leaders neither would nor ever could do anything contrary to the welfare of Christ’s Church.  After all, the bishops confirmed them, and the priests baptized, instructed, and confessed them with a father-like affection. Why wouldn’t they accept and believe their pastor of many years?  And besides, everyone else went along (i.e., to get along). 

In addition to that, they were told repeatedly that the Catholic Church is old and slow and needs to keep up with the ever-changing world.  Their pastor said change is good and necessary to improve church attendance (and revenue), and that it was also necessary to be “open to the world”.  Moreover, (the pastor added) the Church has to be more like the world, more accepting of humanism, and more open to compromise, in order to be with the world.

So, what did nearly all low-information “Sunday” Catholics do?  They accepted wholeheartedly the conciliar church because their Faith became more fun with clown masses, no more confession “box”, etc.  There was group reconciliation with our fellow man, etc.  And besides, everyone goes to heaven now.

A billion or so Catholics went along with the changes, placing their salvation in ever-greater danger.  They went along to get along.  They tried to avoid losing friends or family by not objecting to what was happening to their Church and by not fighting against the changes listed below.

  The “elimination” of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass and its replacement with a non-Catholic service designed with the help of six Protestant ministers under the direction of a notorious Mason.

  The “elimination” of the Holy Sacrament of Penance and its replacement with “reconciliation” with your fellow man.

  The “elimination” of the truth that there is No-Salvation-Outside-the-Catholic-Church, and promotion of Religious Liberty for error.

  The “elimination” of the need for the Sacrament of Extreme Unction by promoting Universal Salvation (i.e., everyone goes to heaven)

  The “elimination” of the Sacrament of Confirmation (no need now with universal salvation).   There is no need in the conciliar church to fight for Christ the King.  There is only the “entrance into the [so-called] adult christian community.”

  The “elimination” of the primacy of the pope in favor of a democracy of bishops and cardinals, as well as the parish and diocesan councils.

  The rejection of the one true Church founded by Christ, in favor of a pan-religious aggregate of hundreds of protestant and other “churches” with “various degrees of communion” (as VCII and the conciliar church likes to say).

  The acceptance of easy (so-called) annulments which function as divorce on demand.

Archbishop Lefebvre fought hard against the errors of Vatican II and set up an uncompromising Traditional Catholic Society (i.e., SSPX) to help followers to fight against the evils of VC II that have deprived most Catholics of the usual sources of sanctifying grace which are so essential for salvation. 

The Society remained an uncompromising traditional Catholic haven throughout the world until the death of the Archbishop.  The new leaders of the Society were not opposed to compromise.  They were most interested in being in a “partnership” with the anti-Catholic conciliar church.  They wanted to be accepted by them and wield some influence in Rome, with the false dream of converting them.

In reality, Rome won’t convert until the pope and the bishops of the world consecrate Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary.

With the increasing liberalism in the SSPX, there is less and less difference between the positions of that group and the liberalism which has been promoted by the conciliar church for decades.

The following is a list of conciliar liberalism, showing that the distinction between the mainstream conciliar church and the “new” SSPX increasingly is a “distinction without a difference”.  The now-liberal SSPX and its compromised followers must now accept/condone: 

  That the religious liberty taught by Vatican II is “a very, very limited one, very limited”.[2]  The truth is that the scope of religious liberty which Vatican II teaches is unlimited as long as public order is not breached.[3]

  That there are no errors in the important Vatican II document, Lumen Gentium.  The SSPX now teaches that this document is free from errors/liberalism.[4]  The truth is that there are hundreds of liberal and false statements in Lumen Gentium.[5] 

 

  That Vatican II does good, because the “Second Vatican Council … illuminates – i.e., deepens and further makes explicit – some aspects of the life and of the doctrine of the Church”.[6]  The truth is that Vatican II does not do good.

 

  That there are degrees of being in communion with the Catholic Church.[7]  The “new” SSPX indicates it accepts this conciliar theory by now using the term of “full communion”, as if there were any other kind.  Id.

 

  That Pope Francis’s exhortation on marriage “contains many things that are correct and beautiful”.[8]  The truth is that this is a vile, thoroughly-conciliar document.

  That Vatican II’s Optatam Totius is free from errors/liberalism.  The truth is that there are many liberal and false statements in it.[9] 

 

  That the Jews did not commit Deicide.  The truth is that, because Jesus Christ is God, the Jews committed Deicide because they killed a Person Who is God.  The “new” SSPX[10] joins Vatican II contradicting the traditional teaching from the time of the apostles, that the Jews committed Deicide.[11] 

 

  That by making a practical agreement with Rome, the “new” SSPX “will return to the Church”.[12]  The truth is that Traditional Catholics are in the Church and have no need to “return”.

The SSPX wants you to believe there can be necessary and good compromises to be made. That can never happen.  All compromises are bad when they are about the traditional Catholic Faith or morals.  The first compromise leads to the next one and a person becomes willing to accept progressively larger compromises. 

The distinction between 1960 and 2015 is merely a difference in time.  Both groups – not only the then-soon-to-be Novus Ordo Catholics of the 1960s but also the increasingly liberal SSPX followers of 2015 – had (have) to accept the evil changes of VC II.  But between the two groups, there is little actual difference.  Through these compromises, both groups increasingly jeopardize their salvation.



[1]           Quoted from St. Bernard of Clairvaux, Third Sermon for Advent, entitled: On the Three Advents of the Lord and the Seven Pillars which we ought to Erect within us.

 

[2]           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

 

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

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


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


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

[10]         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


[11]         Nostra Aetate, §4.

[12]         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.

The Devil + V.C. II = the Conciliar Church


If you read the
Catholic Candle every month, this indicates that you are among the relatively few who are trying to be faithful and informed Catholics after the Second Vatican Council.  Ever since the devil was cast into hell, his goal has been to oppose God and God’s Plan.  When Christ founded His Church, the devil planned to develop a counter-church in opposition to the True Church founded by Christ as the only means of salvation.

The devil has had some success in the past.  One success is Lutheranism.  The number of Lutherans in the world is about 80 million, a membership which far exceeds that of any other Protestant denomination.

The devil also succeeded with all of the other Protestant groups, which together claim approximately 800 million so-called-“christians” (including the Lutherans), who were led by scores of heretical leaders promoting their own novel ideas.  

After the above successful attempts at leading men astray, the devil concluded that he must corrupt Rome from the top down, and be sure to keep the name Catholic for his new church if there was to be a chance for real success.

So, the devil set out many years ago to thoroughly corrupt Rome, with the help of a group of like-minded followers, the Masons.  By 1960, he decided he had infiltrated Rome to such an extent that he could call and control a Vatican Council and launch his anti-Catholic conciliar church.

Well, by the end of the 1960s, after VC II, he had his counter-church, with all the changes (some of which are listed below) that he needed, plus keeping the Catholic name to seduce 1.3 billion Catholics into accepting his Conciliar church and into rejecting Christ's Own church.

This Conciliar church deceptively uses the name "Catholic" and has its own:

  • false doctrines (e.g., the teachings of VC II)';
  • false and sacrilegious worship (e.g., Novus Ordo mass);
  • places for sacrileges (viz., the Conciliar churches stolen from the Catholic Church);
     
  • false priesthood (with its new concept of priesthood; doubtfully valid ordinations, etc.);
  • false laws (e.g., within the 1983 Code of Canon Law);
  • false catechisms (e.g., the new Conciliar Catechism of the Catholic Church);
  • false bibles (e.g., replacing the Douay Rheims Bible);
  • new, politically-correct "Decalogue" (i.e., new 10 Commandments");
  • new, politically-correct "beatitudes";
  • new Mysteries of the Rosary (the so-called "luminous mysteries");
  • new (supposed) “saints” and new canonization process (e.g., so-called “Saint” John Paul II), the first pope whom the conciliar church (supposedly) “canonized” but certainly not the last;
  • new (supposed) “sacraments” with conciliar names and formulae: for Catholics, it’s Confession; for the conciliars, it’s “Reconciliation”, and on occasion it’s “group Reconciliation”; and
  • new (supposed) “miracles” and “apparitions”.

It’s hard to completely comprehend the extent of the devil’s success. Think about it. Over a billion confused Catholics worldwide who reject dogmas infallibly taught by the one true Church of Christ and who accept the corrupt conciliar church which is headquartered in Rome.  And yet, the N-SSPX wants acceptance and recognition from this church.

Yes, roughly 99% of those who profess to be Catholic belong to the Conciliar church, which gives no grace, thus making it seemingly impossible for them to reverse course and to begin to profess all of the traditions of the true, uncompromising Catholic Church.  The enormity of the devil’s success is hard to believe, but it is true.  Also true, is that when people lose their Faith, they usually don’t even realize it.

Besides the interior loss of Faith and grace, when Catholics and Catholic institutions accepted the Conciliar Church, this caused the evils listed below, which occurred between 1965 to 2016:

  1. 50% decrease in the number of those who are supposedly “priests” (their ordinations, though, are doubtful), compared to the number of valid priests at the end of Vatican II;
  2. 50% decrease in the number of those “ordained” to the priesthood (these ordinations, though, are doubtful), compared to the number of valid ordinations at the end of Vatican II;

  1. 74% decrease in the number of religious sisters;

  1. 66% decrease in the number of religious brothers; and
  2. 600% increase in the number of parishes without a resident priest pastor.[1] 

Well, let’s talk about life as Catholics striving always to be faithful to the traditions of the Catholic Church.  We are fighting from the catacombs against the Conciliar church.  We have a fight on our hands, but we are not alone because God is with us, supplying extra grace to strengthen us when needed.  Plus, we have the consoling knowledge that the gates of hell shall not prevail against His Church.  

In the decades since Vatican II, very many souls have been lost.  However, the pope and the bishops of the world will consecrate Russia to Mary’s Immaculate Heart, and then the true Catholic Church show Her great glory.


[1]          Taken from Frequently Requested Church Statistics, published by the Center for Applied Research in the Apostolate, Oct. 5, 2018.

Pope Francis stands condemned by Catholic Tradition for promoting unnatural impurity


Q:        What should I say when people tell me that the Catholic Church now accepts unnatural “lifestyles” because the pope does not condemn them and he says “Who am I to judge?”

A:      Although Pope Francis is our pope, he is a bad pope.  He is our father, but is a bad father.  He is reconciling himself with modern licentious, unnatural, and debauched views.  It is true that he scandalized the world with his refusing to condemn “lifestyles” of unnatural impurity, saying: “who am I to judge?”.  But this is merely the tip of the iceberg.  He has a long history of supporting and fostering the unnatural lifestyle itself.  For example, he suggested that those engaging in the unnatural vice as a pair should be given legal status and rights: “‘What we have to create is a civil union law.  That way they are legally covered,’ Francis said in the documentary, ‘Francesco,”[1]   He has issued many other such scandalous statements.[2]

But Sacred Scripture condemns the unnatural vice in over twenty places.  Here are just a few:

·         “For this cause God delivered them up to shameful affections. For their women have changed the natural use into that use which is against nature.  And, in like manner, the men also, leaving the natural use of the women, have burned in their lusts one towards another, men with men working that which is filthy, and receiving in themselves the recompense which was due to their error.”  Romans, 1:26-27.

·         “Do not err: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor the effeminate … shall possess the kingdom of God.”   1 Corinthians, 6:9-10

·         Genesis narrates the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrha and the cities around these, and shows clearly that it was in punishment for the unnatural vice, which God says is “very grave”.  Genesis 18:20-21, 19:1-15.

Catholic catechisms take note of such exceptionally strong condemnations of certain sins in Scripture, including this one, and label these as the sins “crying to heaven for vengeance”.

Besides Sacred Scripture, however, countless writings from early Church Fathers, popes, saints, and Church Doctors are in unanimous agreement in condemning this vice.  The quotes would be too numerous to list, but they share the strength of quotes like these:

·         “No sin in the world grips the soul as the accursed sodomy; this sin has always been detested by all those who live according to God ….  Deviant passion is close to madness; this vice disturbs the intellect, destroys elevation and generosity of soul, brings the mind down from great thoughts to the lowliest ….  They become blind and, when their thoughts should soar to high and great things, they are broken down and reduced to vile and useless and putrid things, which could never make them happy ….  Just as people participate in the glory of God in different degrees, so also in hell some suffer more than others ….  for this is the greatest sin.  St. Bernardine of Siena, Sermon XXXIX in Prediche volgari, pp. 896-897, 915.

·         "If all the sins of the flesh are worthy of condemnation because by them man allows himself to be dominated by that which he has of the animal nature, much more deserving of condemnation are the sins against nature by which man degrades his own animal nature….”  St. Thomas Aquinas, Super Epistolam B. Pauli ad Romanos, Cap. 1, Lec. 8.

Pope Francis appears to think all the above “was then, but this is now”.  But truth does not change, and he is condemned by the infallible condemnation in Pope Pius IX’s Syllabus of Errors:

Condemned statement #80:

The Roman Pontiff can, and ought to, reconcile himself, and come to terms with progress, liberalism and modern civilization.

Pope Francis appears to consider the above-quoted condemnations to be changeable and “subject to progress”, but this is condemned by Pope Pius IX’s Syllabus of Errors:

Condemned statement #5:

Divine revelation is imperfect, and therefore subject to a continual and indefinite progress, corresponding with the advancement of human reason.



[2]           For example:

·         Pope Francis told a man who openly lived an unnaturally impure “lifestyle” in Chile, “You know Juan Carlos, that does not matter.  God made you like this.  God loves you like this. The Pope loves you like this and you should love yourself and not worry about what people say.”    https://www.cnn.com/2018/05/21/europe/pope-francis-gay-comments-intl/index.html
Appallingly, in March 2021, Pope Francis appointed this man to a commission which is supposedly charged with protecting minors. https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/247035/pope-francis-appoints-juan-carlos-cruz-to-pontifical-commission-for-protecting-minors

·         Through an interpreter, he told another man who openly lived an unnaturally impure “lifestyle”, “Giving more importance to the adjective rather than the noun, this is not good.  We are all human beings and have dignity.  It does not matter who you are or how you live your life, you do not lose your dignity.  There are people that prefer to select or discard people because of the adjective – these people don’t have a human heart.”  https://cruxnow.com/church-in-uk-and-ireland/2019/04/pope-francis-tells-gay-man-you-do-not-lose-your-dignity-on-bbc-show/   

 

The pope’s claim that one cannot lose his dignity no matter what a person does, is a conciliar error in direct opposition to Traditional Catholic teaching – which states that man retains his dignity only by obeying God’s laws and the natural law, but loses his dignity through sin. 

 

St. Thomas Aquinas lucidly explains how man loses his dignity through sin:

By sinning, man departs from the order of reason, and consequently falls away from the dignity of his manhood, insofar as he is naturally free, and exists for himself, and he falls into the slavish state of the beasts ….  Hence, although it is evil in itself to kill a man so long as he preserves his dignity, yet it may be good to kill a man who has sinned, even as it is to kill a beast.  For a bad man is worse than a beast, and is more harmful, as the Philosopher states (Polit. i, 1 and Ethic. vii, 6).

 

Summa, IIa IIae, Q.64, a.2, ad 3 (emphasis added).

 

For a further treatment of this Catholic principle, read the explanation in Lumen Gentium Annotated, by the editors of Quanta Cura Press, © 2013, p.73, footnote 48.  This book is available:

  for free at: https://catholiccandle.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/Lumen-Gentium-Annotated.pdf


and

  sold at cost on Amazon.com at this link: https://www.amazon.com/Lumen-Gentium-Annotated-examination-revolution/dp/1492107476/ref=sr_1_1

“In Order To Remain Catholic, It Is Necessary to Become Protestant.”

The above statement summarizes the results of the Second Vatican Council in a uniquely profound, and meaningful way.  In one statement, it brings to mind just how anti-Catholic the Council was and is.  In order to remain “Catholic” as far as Rome and the Council are concerned, one has to accept, think, and follow Protestant-type religious formulas.

 

What are those anti-Catholic religious formulas and beliefs – which are promoted by Satan, the Protestants, and the Conciliar church of the Second Vatican Council?  Here are some of them:

 

1.    “Eliminate” the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass and replace it with a non-Catholic service designed with the help of six Protestant ministers and a Mason.

 

2.    “Eliminate” the Holy Sacrament of Penance and replace it with “reconciliation” with your fellow man.  God is not involved.

 

3.    “Eliminate” the truth that there is No-Salvation-Outside-the-Catholic Church and promote Religious Liberty.

 

4.    Disregard any facts and information against all false religions, and praise Martin Luther on the 500th anniversary of his heretical sect (i.e., promoting Religious Liberty).

 

5.    “Eliminate” the need for the Sacrament of Extreme Unction by promoting Universal Salvation, (i.e., everyone goes to heaven).

 

6.    “Revise” the Sacrament of Holy Orders, causing real doubt of a valid ordination.

 

7.    “Eliminate” the Sacrament of Confirmation.

 

8.    Insist that we can live how we want and do not need to perform good works (i.e., Universal Salvation).

 

9.    “Eliminate” the primacy of the pope in favor of a democracy of bishops and

cardinals.

10. Reject the Christ-established one, united Church; (Christ never referred to His Churches, but to His Church.)  There are 200 different Protestant churches in the United States alone.[2]

 

11. “Eliminate” belief in Divine Tradition, with the false belief that the Bible holds all the truth.

 

12. Accept divorce as proper and necessary, (i.e., easy annulments).

 

13. Accept that it was necessary to kill Catholics in 1560 England to establish the Protestant faith.

 

14. Accept all faiths as the road to salvation (i.e., Religious Liberty).

 

15. When Pope Francis states, “Who am I to judge?” on the evils of unnatural lifestyles, he is suggesting that he agrees with the Protestants that private judgment is a rule of faith.

 

The above is a partial list of what it means to become Protestant in order to remain Catholic per the Second Vatican Council.  An additional result of the Council was the self-destruction of once-vital Catholic religious organizations.  There were great reductions in the number of vocations, priests, sisters, monks, churches, Catholic schools, convents, seminaries, and monasteries. 

 

What more could the leaders in Rome and the Conciliar church do to fulfill the requests of Satan?  Not much, if anything, with the complete destruction of the human element in the Catholic Church.

 

I believe that uncompromising traditional Catholics are experiencing a bloodless type of martyrdom – with a martyrdom of blood to follow in the future, as in 16th century England.  Satan is not going to change course now, after all his many current successes. Sixty years ago, who would have believed that it would be possible that the Catholic Church’s human element would be on “life support” by the year 2021?

 

Fear not; we are not alone.  Our Lord gave you all the graces needed to stand firm as an uncompromising Catholic fighting for Christ the King up until now.  You will get all the necessary graces to withstand what is coming. 

 



[1]              I Accuse the Council, Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, 1982, p. 79.

 

[2]              My Catholic Faith, Bishop Louis Morrow, ©1949, p. 102.

 

The Conciliar Church is Anti-God and is a Cult of Man

The Conciliar Church is Anti-God and is a
Cult of Man

All religions – with the notable exception of the Catholic religion – are man-made.  The Catholic Faith was established by God to give grace for the salvation of souls.  This salvation is accomplished mainly through Our Lord’s Passion and Death, renewed in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. 

The Second Vatican Council’s conciliar church has an anti-God Cult-of-Man service which they deceptively call “the mass” but which gives no grace.  Without grace, one loses the Faith.

Webster’s Dictionary tells us a cult is a faddish devotion.  It is the faddish devotion of man in the conciliar church service.  Speaking for the council, at its close, Pope Paul VI addressed the “modern humanists” (an anti-God movement) and told them that “we too, in fact, we more than others, honor mankind.”

Below is a partial list of facts of the Catholic Tridentine Sacrifice of the Mass and Sacraments, along with the Faith-destroying changes made by the conciliar church to their anti-God Cult-of-Man service and sacraments.

  Fact #1:  The Mass is the Sacrifice of the New Law in which Christ, through the ministry of the priest, offers Himself to God in an unbloody manner under the appearance of bread and wine.[1]   St. Paul implies this when he says, “We have an altar (i.e., not a table) from which they (i.e., the Jews) have no right to eat”.[2]

Faith-destroying Change #1:  The conciliar “mass” is not a sacrifice but a meal on a table, not an altar.  It is an occasion to socialize, i.e., shake hands, hug and kiss, and be entertained.  It sometimes features dancing girls or clowns, for example.  The priest is “the presider.” 

  Fact #2:  In a Catholic church, the Tabernacle – which holds the Body and Blood of Our Lord – is in the center of the altar, at the front of the church, for maximum attention and worship.

 

Faith-destroying Change #2:  In a conciliar church they moved the Tabernacle to one side, almost out of sight and all but forgotten.  This clears the table and re-focuses attention on the meal.

  Fact #3:  The main purposes of the priesthood are “to offer (the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass), bless, preach, and baptize” [3] (i.e., all Sacraments).

Faith-destroying Change #3:  In the conciliar church meal, the “cook” is called the presider and sits on a “throne” in place of the Tabernacle that was moved off to the side.  Almost anyone can preach from the pulpit, male or female.  Diversity is all-important.  You can be certain that the sermons will be liberal and modernist.

  Fact #4:  For a Tridentine Mass, there is always strict silence in order to move the mind and heart to worship and pray.

 

Faith-destroying Change #4:  Silence at the meal is not necessary for those in attendance.  Instead they are asked to shake hands, hug, or kiss to promote friendliness.

  Fact #5:  Mass attendance is required every Sunday and Holy Day for all baptized Catholics, especially those who are 7 years old or older.

Faith-destroying Change #5:  Attendance at their “mass” is treated as not obligatory – you are “required” to attend only if you really want to.  Or as they say, if it’s “meaningful to you”.  You’re not obliged to go if you really want to do other things instead.  However, conciliar leaders start to push for attendance if the collection basket runs too low.

  Fact #6:  You always dress for Mass in clothes that demonstrate your respect for Christ the King, Whom you will receive in Holy Communion.

Faith-destroying Change #6:  Dress as you wish, for comfort or according to the latest fad.   Anything goes; modesty is irrelevant.

  Fact #7:  Only devout, holy, and religious music is allowed in order to ensure that the best that man has to offer is presented to our Creator.  It is designed to be prayerful and to lift hearts and minds to God.  It is principally a cappella or is accompanied by an organ. 

Faith-destroying Change #7:  The musical instrument of choice at their “meal” is the guitar, playing the latest fad tunes.  Worship and prayer are not involved, so the latest tune is best for entertainment.

  Fact #8:  In the Sacrament of Confession, we accuse ourselves of our sins to a priest who has the authority to give absolution.[4]  The penitent must accept and complete the penance given.

Faith-destroying Change #8:  One “has a discussion with” a priest to help the person to reconcile with his fellow man (not with Our Lord).  Because the conciliar church teaches that no one goes to hell (i.e., universal salvation), God is not involved.

  Fact #9:  The priesthood is reserved specifically for male persons because Our Lord decreed this while on earth, when founding His Church.  This includes restricting servers and acolytes to boys.

Faith-destroying Change #9:  In the conciliar church females serve, preach, and distribute communion.  (!)  In some dioceses, there are women priests (undercover for now, but not for much longer).  And as for the communion they distribute in conciliar churches, it is an interesting fact that those who promote the black mass do not want conciliar hosts because they don’t think they are really the Body and Blood of Our Lord.  They want Hosts from a valid Tridentine Mass.

The conciliar church, without grace, has lost the Faith and destroyed the human element of the Catholic Church, along with all its affiliated religious organizations (e.g., the missions, the schools, the seminaries, the convents).  Without grace and with the resultant loss of faith, don’t expect anything but faith-destroying liberalism, modernism, and heresies from the hierarchy in Rome until the triumph of the Immaculate Heart, after the consecration of Russia. 

Isn’t it amazing (really shocking) how the devil and church leaders in Rome were able to convince the vast majority of Catholics to give up the teachings of their Catholic Faith and join the conciliar church with all those faith-destroying changes?  It is even more painful that the now-liberal N-SSPX wants very much to be “recognized” and accepted as part of this evil Cult-of-Man conciliar church.  How can they possibly want to make a deal with them?  But they do.

We must pray and do penance to offset such evil!  We must also fight against the conciliar church wherever possible for it is an evil new church from the Second Vatican Council, deceptively called “Catholic,” but which it is so in name only.

 




[2]           Hebrews, 13:10.

 

[3]           Catholic Dictionary, Addis & Arnold, Catholic Publication Society, 3rd ed., New York, 1884, article: Priest, Christian, page 691.

[4]           Catholic Dictionary, Addis & Arnold, Catholic Publication Society, 3rd ed., New York, 1884, article: Confession, Sacramental, page 206.

 

St. Gregory Nazianzen and the church crisis

St. Gregory Nazianzen explains the current disaster in the Church’s human element

More than 1600 years ago, St. Gregory Nazianzen, Doctor of the Church, warned us that the human element of the Church suffers shipwreck when She has evil bishops.  Here are his words:

The light and eye of the Church is the Bishop.  It is necessary then that as the body is rightly directed as long as the eye keeps itself pure, but goes wrong when it becomes corrupt, so also with respect to the Bishop, according to what his state may be, must the Church in like manner suffer shipwreck, or be saved.[1]

As the Catholic Church’s bishops go, so go their flocks.  With the spectacular betrayal by the Church’s bishops beginning with Vatican II, it is no wonder that their flocks suffered the shipwreck of heresy and vice, following their bishops! 

With the more recent, spectacular betrayal of the bishops consecrated through Archbishop Lefebvre – who are supposedly faithful to Catholic Tradition – it is no wonder that their flocks are suffering the shipwreck of liberalism, compromise, and laxity, following their bishops (e.g., accepting 95% of Vatican II and countless other evils[2])!



[1]           Words of St. Gregory Nazianzen quoted in the Catena Aurea on St. Luke’s Gospel, St. Thomas Aquinas, editor, explaining Our Lord’s words:

 

The light of thy body is thy eye.  If thy eye be single, thy whole body will be lightsome; but if it be evil, thy body also will be darksome.

 

St. Luke’s Gospel, Ch. 11, v. 34.

 

[2]           Here is a list of many other N-SSPX evils, cited to the N-SSPX’s own sources: https://catholiccandle.neocities.org/priests/sspx-simoulin-challenge-answered.html 

 

Bishop Williamson’s group is not better but is liberal in a somewhat different way.  See, e.g., https://catholiccandle.neocities.org/priests/williamson-the-evil-of-comfortably-tolerating-heresy.html

Vatican II Gave the Devil Everything He Wanted

What a victory for the devil, sending so many people to hell!  The devil could not have planned a better Second Vatican Council to achieve his goals.  So it is reasonable to believe that he and Rome’s Masons were partners in the planning (in secret) of the Second Vatican Council.  For the past 50-plus years VC II has helped the devil ensnare souls and start their trip to hell.

It is time to understand just how much of a disaster it was for those foolish souls who cared so little for their salvation that they willingly went along with the evils of VC II.  And we must fight today against those who are willing to accept even a part of those evil results, (i.e., the liberal N-SSPX which openly accepts 95% of VC II.)

A review of just what the devil gained should concern and motivate a traditional Catholic living in the catacombs to fight against the results of VC II.  The following list will demonstrate just how much the devil achieved during and after the Council.

1.    Loss of the Tridentine Mass, the main source of grace.  Replaced by an anti-Catholic service (i.e., Novus Ordo) that does not give grace.  Without grace you cannot avoid sin and will lose the Faith.  And if you lose the Faith, you lose everything, since there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church.  And which group accepts 95% of VC II?

2.    Religious liberty is now taught and accepted – thanks to Vatican II.  That is, you can be saved no matter what faith you prefer.  Perhaps one that will overlook your sinful life.  Thus, there is no need for the Catholic Church after the Second Vatican Council.  And which group accepts 95% of VC II?

3.   Universal Salvation is another evil of Vatican II, (i.e., everyone goes to heaven).  Thus, there is no need for penance, religious fervor, sacrifice, prayer for yourself or others, etc.  Your somewhat-sinful lifestyle will be overlooked by a merciful God at your personal judgment.  You no longer need to consider God as all-just (i.e., people must do penance for their sins).  Universal Salvation is so anti-Catholic that only someone who has lost the Faith would believe it.  For one thing, most want to believe that they and their loved ones will be happy in heaven for all eternity.  When you think about it, if everyone goes to heaven, there is no real need for the Catholic Church.  But to keep the Novus Ordo parishes viable, they are made into entertainment destinations (e.g., clowns, folk masses, kissing, handshaking, etc.)  And which group accepts 95% of VC II?

 

4.    The Council shattered traditional grace-giving sacraments with its destructive changes to these basic building blocks of the Catholic Faith.  Demonstrating complete arrogance, it more than “tampered” with them – it altered meanings and words – as if Christ needed help in correcting His “mistakes.”  And which group accepts 95% of VC II?

5.    “Catholic divorce” – an annulment based on very doubtful reasons – was another product of VC II.  Almost anything goes, as long as you can pay what it “costs.”  With low church attendance, they have to keep the money coming in.  And which group accepts 95% of VC II?

6.   Rome stated that the Second Vatican Council was necessary and needed to update the Catholic Faith to make it more relevant in our modern age.  “Open a window and let in some fresh air.”[1]  As it turned out, even Pope Paul stated that the “smoke of Satan has entered the sanctuary,” (in lieu of fresh air).  It is obvious that if you want to change, update, modernize the Catholic religion, you have already lost the Faith.  As the Blessed Virgin warned at La Salette, “Rome will lose the Faith and become the seat of the anti-Christ.”  And which group accepts 95% of VC II?

7.    The greatest victory for the devil was to replace the Catholic Church with the anti-Catholic conciliar church, joined and accepted by most Catholics in the 1960s and ‘70s with little regard or concern for their salvation.  Archbishop Lefebvre then made it clear that this new religion of Vatican II was a new church, and warned that there was no salvation outside the Catholic Church.  And which group accepts 95% of VC II?                                    

I’m sure the above is not a complete list of the devil’s total goals, (i.e., to reduce or eliminate the need for the Catholic Church).  What it does illustrate is that most people will continue to go to hell.  With no graces coming from the Novus Ordo, it is not possible to keep the Faith and avoid sin.  Thus, the leaders in Rome will not come back to tradition (before Russia is consecrated to Our Lady’s Immaculate Heart), no matter what the liberal N-SSPX claims will happen after a deal is signed. 

What are we to do?  Stand up fearlessly for the uncompromising traditional Catholic faith, and follow Christ’s instructions to Lucy at Fatima in 1943:

The sacrifice required of every person is the fulfilling of his duties in life and the observance of My laws.  Be an example of religious fervor, helping others to keep the traditional Catholic faith, love God, strive to be an ordinary saint, eternally happy.[2]



[1]           Words of Pope John XXIII.

[2]           Quoted from a pamphlet entitled Remember Our Lady of Fatima Said, published by Franciscan Marytown Press, Kenosha, WI.

Practical effects of Vatican II

Catholic Candle note:  The article below uses various objectively-measurable criterion (such as the number of priests) to show how Vatican II devastated the human element of the Church. 

However, this article uses the conciliar church’s own statistics, which don’t distinguish between certainly-valid priests and sacraments, compared to the doubtfully-valid ones which should be treated as invalid.  For this reason, the statistics given below are not nearly as bad as the real ones.

 

What Teaching of the Second Vatican Council “Eliminated” the Need for the Catholic Church?

Answer: The false teaching of universal salvation or everybody goes to heaven.  I’m afraid those in the conciliar church are willing to believe that error, because people tend to believe what they want to believe, and especially when it is easy and convenient.  In addition to the attractiveness of this error, people accept it because they were taught to follow the teachings of the Church’s leaders.

It is easy to understand who is behind the error of universal salvation and promotes it – the devil, the Masons, the leaders of false religions, and the liberal modernist leaders who are part of the human element of the Catholic Church (in Rome and elsewhere).  These leaders (or their like-minded colleagues), all took part in the Second Vatican Council. 

In addition, it is easy to see that the following would be the inevitable results.  Listed below are some statistics from 1965 – 2016[1] indicating just how devastating this false teaching has been on the religious and lay groups of the Catholic Church.  It has:

 

1)          All but eliminated religious fervor and the (perceived) need for the Catholic Church;

 

2)          Greatly reduced Mass attendance – down 33%;

 

3)          Greatly reduced financial support for the Church;

 

4)          Greatly reduced confessions;

 

5)          Greatly reduced family prayer;

 

6)          Greatly reduced priestly vocations – down 63%;

 

7)          Greatly reduced the number of Catholic schools – down 50%;

 

8)          Greatly reduced the number of marriages – down 42%;

 

9)          Greatly reduced the number of baptisms – down 51%;

 

10)       Greatly increased the number of cremations;

 

11)       All but eliminated Extreme Unction;

 

12)       Eliminated the (perceived) need for Requiem masses and prayers for the dead;

 

13)       Changed the “mass” into entertainment, rather than prayer for the poor souls;

 

14)       Eliminated Holy Days;

 

15)       Eliminated the (perceived) obligation to abstain from meat on Fridays;

 

16)       Greatly reduced the number of religious Sisters – down 262%!  (Most of the remaining sisters are elderly.)

 

17)       Increased divorces and troubled families;

 

18)       Increased the number of single parents;

 

19)       Greatly reduced the number of religious Brothers – down 300%!

 

20)       Greatly increased the number of parishes without a priest – up 600%!

 

21)       This false teaching (viz., universal salvation) suggests or fosters the idea of no punishment for sin.

 

Some of the above points have no statistics, but it is easy to believe the decline is taking place.  There will be other, worse statistics to come – as all religious fervor and morals are easily forgotten with “assured salvation.”

In the past, salvation was known to be uncertain, so many people developed religious fervor because they wanted to avoid hell and go to heaven.  If heaven is “assured” by VC II, religious fervor is not on people’s minds, and is believed to be unnecessary.

The fire and brimstone sermons from the pulpit are a thing of the past.  Now, at funerals the deceased are looking down on us, very happy and smiling.  It is what most of those still living want to believe about their deceased loved ones.  It is also comforting for everyone to think they will experience the same when it’s time for them to pass on.

Before Vatican II, Catholics knew that one of the main reasons for Christ coming to earth and suffering for us, was to show us how to save our souls and earn heaven.  So, Catholics supported the Church and worked to reach the goal of heaven.  But it is so much easier to believe that the goal is “assured” without any real effort on our part, and so people follow their liberal leaders, including the pastors of their conciliar parishes.

It is not enough to belong to the Church to be saved.   Only those Catholics who live according to the (traditional) teachings of the Catholic Church will be saved.[2]  Thus, there is no easy way out (i.e., everyone goes to heaven).  Christ showed us the way for 33 years on earth.  We must follow His example and carry our crosses, no matter how heavy, to reach our goal of salvation.



[1]               Center for Applied Research in the Apostolate, 2018, http://cara.georgetown.edu/frequently-requested-church-statistics/

 

[2]           My Catholic Faith, by Bishop Louis Morrow, My Mission House, Kenosha, WI, ©1948, p.141.

When will the pope consecrate Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary?

Catholic Candle note: In the article below, the pope is sometimes called a “papal monarch” – which he is – to draw attention to the comparison made below to the French monarch, because of their similar and mutual disobedience to God’s commands that they perform consecrations of their realms, as He directed.

 

Our Lady of Fatima revealed that God Wills that Russia be consecrated to her Immaculate Heart.  In 1929, Our Lady of Fatima told Sister Lucy:

The moment has come when God asks the Holy Father to make, in union with all the bishops of the world, the consecration of Russia to my Immaculate Heart, promising to save it by this means.…[1]

Earlier (viz., in 1917), Our Lady of Fatima revealed that the pope definitely will consecrate Russia to her Immaculate Heart and through this means God will grant peace.  Here are her words:

The Holy Father will consecrate Russia to me, and she [viz., Russia] shall be converted, and a period of peace will be granted to the world.[2]

However, Our Lady of Fatima warned in 1917 that, when she came in the future (viz., in 1929) to ask for the consecration, if the pope delayed this consecration, his delay would cause great harm throughout the world.  Here are Our Lady’s words:

I shall come [viz., in 1929] to ask for the consecration of Russia to my Immaculate Heart, by the Holy Father and all the bishops of the world.  If my request is heeded, Russia will be converted and there will be peace.  If not, she will spread her errors throughout the world, provoking wars and persecution against the Church.[3]

In 1931, Our Lord assured Sister Lucy that the pope and bishops will perform this consecration – but He revealed that there will first be a long delay.  Here are Sister Lucy’s words describing Our Lord’s revelation to her:

Later on, by means of an interior communication, Our Lord said to me, complaining: “They [viz., Pope Pius XI and the bishops of the world] did not want to heed My request!  …  Make it known to My ministers, seeing that they follow the example of the King of France in delaying the execution of My demand, they will also have to follow him into misfortune.  Like the King of France, they will repent and do it, but it will be late.[4]

 

What misfortune did the king of France suffer because of his disobedience in refusing to consecrate France to the Sacred Heart of Jesus?

Our Lord’s threat (viz., about the Church’s hierarchy following the king of France into misfortune), refers to King Louis XIV ignoring Our Lord’s request (through St. Margaret Mary Alacoque, on June 17, 1689), that France be consecrated to His Sacred Heart.  Our Lord’s request came exactly one hundred years before the Masonic French Revolution stripped the French king of his legislative power, on June 17, 1789.

Not only did that French king (Louis XIV) ignore Our Lord’s request, but the next king, Louis XV did so too.  Likewise, Louis XV’s son, King Louis XVI, also ignored Our Lord’s request until he was imprisoned and was about to be executed during the French Revolution, in 1793. 

Thus, Our Lord waited one hundred years to the day, before allowing the godless Masonic revolutionaries to declare the French monarch to be stripped of his legislative power.  Our Lord waited a little more than one hundred years (104 years) before allowing the French to kill their king.

 

Eight popes, beginning with Pope Pius XI, ignore God’s demand to consecrate Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary.

Pope Pius XI ignored God’s 1929 request that he consecrate Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, just as King Louis XIV ignored Our Lord’s request that he consecrate France to the Sacred Heart of Jesus.

This consecration of Russia has not yet been made.  After Pope Pius XI’s death, the next seven popes (Pius XII, John XXIII, Paul VI, John Paul I, John Paul II, Benedict XVI and Francis)[5] likewise ignored God’s request for this consecration of Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary.  This is like the next two kings after Louis XIV ignored Our Lord’s request for the consecration of France (until Louis XVI’s last, desperate days in prison, before his execution).

The present, worldwide, conciliar revolution is a Divine Punishment for our papal monarch’s disobedience, just as the French Revolution was a Divine Punishment for the French monarch’s disobedience.

Our Catholic Faith assures us that the Church can never be completely destroyed.  Further, Our Lord and His mother both assure us that the consecration of Russia will occur, although after a long delay.  As Our Lord predicted:

Like the King of France, they [viz., the pope and bishops of the world] will

repent and do it [viz., the consecration], but it will be late.[6]

 

When will the pope consecrate Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary?

How late will the consecration of Russia be and when will it be?  Although we don’t know for certain, here are four considerations which suggest the answer:

1.    If we infer the year the pope will consecrate Russia, by drawing a parallel to the time which elapsed before the consecration of France, this means that the pope will consecrate Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary in the year 2033.

2.    Using the parallel which Our Lord Himself drew to the consecration of France, it seems we must wait more years before the consecration of Russia, because matters are not yet quite extreme and desperate enough.

 

3.    Our Lady of Quito predicted that her victory in this Great Apostasy will not occur until all seems hopeless.

4.    It seems that God will allow a number of additional years to elapse, in order to increase the severity of our present conciliar crisis, so that the miraculous character of the Restoration will be all-the-more undeniable.

Below, we discuss each of these considerations.

 

1.   If we infer the year the pope consecrates Russia, by drawing a parallel to the time which elapsed before the consecration of France, this would mean that the pope would consecrate Russia in about 2033.

Our Lord patiently waited a little more than one hundred years (1689 – 1793) after His command for the consecration, during which time He endured the disobedience of a line of French monarchs.  After about 104 years, the French monarch finally obeyed and performed the consecration of France to the Sacred Heart of Jesus.

Our Lady of Fatima appeared in 1929 to ask for the consecration of Russia.[7]  The parallel which Our Lord Himself made to the consecration of France, would suggest that, a little after the year 2029, the pope will perform this consecration.  If the same number of years (104) separate Heaven’s two requested consecrations and their two fulfillments, the consecration of Russia would occur about the year 2033.

 

2.   Guided by the comparison which Our Lord Himself drew to the consecration of France, it seems that we must wait longer because the situation is not yet quite desperate and extreme enough.

Using the parallel which Our Lord Himself draws between the pope and the king of France, the consecration of Russia will seemingly occur when circumstances are extremely desperate and are seemingly hopeless, as they were for King Louis XVI when he consecrated France to the Sacred Heart of Jesus while in prison, when he was soon to be executed by the Masonic revolutionaries.

Faithful and informed Catholics might suppose that the situation now is so extreme and so desperate in the human element of the Church, that things seemingly cannot get worse.  However, using the parallel which Our Lord Himself draws between the Masonic French Revolution and the present Masonic conciliar revolution in the Church, circumstances in the human element of the Church are apparently not yet desperate enough. 

French King Louis XVI did not obey Our Lord’s command for the consecration of France when the situation in France became bad, even when it became very, very bad.  King Louis XVI saw and suffered many extreme events which alarmed him.  However, those events did not alarm him enough to end his refusal to obey Our Lord’s command to consecrate France to the Sacred Heart.  Here are events which, although dire, did not alarm the king enough to cause him to obey God:

  A mob ruled Paris;

 

  The king was forced to flee for his life from the revolutionary mob

 

  The revolutionaries “suspended” their king’s legislative authority;

  The revolutionaries “abolished” the monarchy;

 

  The revolutionaries overthrew the king’s established government assemblies;

  The long parade of public executions began (often using the guillotine), causing terror and executing loyal subjects of the king and the opponents of the revolution;

 

  Revolutionary forces attacked the king’s palace, killing hundreds of his defenders;

 

  The king was forced to place himself under the power of the “more moderate” revolutionaries, for his own protection against the more blood-thirsty wing of the same revolution;

 

  The revolutionaries placed their king under house arrest (until he was later moved to a jail);

 

  The revolutionaries stole the property of the Catholic Church and of the nobility; and

  The revolutionaries persecuted all priests who did not swear an oath to the Masonic, anti-Catholic errors of the revolution.

Using the parallel which Our Lord Himself draws between the disobedience of the pope and of the king of France, it appears that, however desperate and alarming conditions are now in the human element of the Church, they can and will get worse before the pope is so completely frantic that he will consecrate Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary.[8]  This suggests that some more years will pass before the consecration of Russia, while conditions in the human element of the Church become more dire.

 

3.   Our Lady of Quito predicted that her victory in this Great Apostasy would not occur until all seems hopeless.

At Fatima, in 1917, Our Lady promised us that:

In the end, My Immaculate Heart will triumph![9] 

Our Lady also prophesized at Quito, Ecuador, that she will completely triumph.  However, she added that her triumph will only occur when all seems hopeless.  Here are her words:

When everything will seem lost and paralyzed, that will be the happy beginning of the complete Restoration. This will mark the arrival of My hour, when I, in a marvelous way, will dethrone the proud and cursed Satan, trampling him under My feet and chaining him in the infernal abyss.[10]

Our present situation in the human element of the Church does seem very bad.  However, the situation does not yet quite seem completely lost and hopeless.  Thus, it seems we must endure some additional years before the consecration of Russia and the triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, because the situation does not yet seem completely hopeless.

 

4.   It seems that God will allow a number of additional years to elapse, in order to increase the severity of our present conciliar crisis, so that the miraculous character of the Restoration will be all-the-more undeniable.

Our Lady predicted that her complete triumph will occur “in a marvelous way”.[11]  Her triumph will be miraculous, leaving no doubt that it is God’s work – and not merely a triumph caused through human efforts and human ability.

However, our fallen nature is quick to suppose that when we act as God’s tools, our own human efforts, not God, achieved the victory.  For this reason, God often chooses poor instruments for His work, to manifest that the victory belongs to Him.  Saint Augustine remarks that, when Our Lord founded His Church, “He chose not kings, senators, philosophers, or orators, but he chose common, poor, and untaught fishermen.”[12]

We see countless examples of God making sure that His victories are manifestly His work.  God leaves no doubt that His victories are not merely the result of human efforts.  One example of this is in the Old Testament, when the pagan Madianite army made war upon the Israelites.  Although the Madianites had 135,000 fighters, God Willed to give victory to the Israelites.[13]  He chose to give this victory through Gedeon, who was “the least” member of the lowest family in Manasses.[14]

Thirty-two thousand Israelites answered Gedeon’s call to fight against the far larger Madianite army.  In other words, Gedeon’s army was outnumbered more than 4:1.  But God refused to allow them to fight the Madianites yet.  God told Gedeon:

The people that are with thee are many, and Madian shall not be delivered into their hands: lest Israel should glory against me, and say: I was delivered by my own strength.[15]

God told Gedeon to send home all of his fighters who were afraid.  Gedeon sent home twenty-two thousand fighters and ten thousand remained.[16]

God then told Gedeon that his fighters were still too numerous.  God told Gedeon to bring his fighters to a river and watch them drink.  Some fighters lapped water like dogs, and God told Gedeon to keep those fighters.  Most fighters drank like men, and God told Gedeon to send those fighters home. 

Three hundred men lapped water like dogs and God instructed Gedeon to conquer the Madianites with these 300 men.[17]  Gedeon’s army was outnumbered 450:1.  With this tiny army, God gave Gedeon complete and sudden victory without losing a single man.

When Gedeon’s original army was outnumbered 4:1, those odds were bad.  After Gedeon sent home those men who were afraid, his army was outnumbered more than 13:1.  Those odds were very, very bad.  But Gedeon’s chances of victory were not yet so seemingly hopeless that the men would not credit themselves with the victory.  Only when the odds were 450:1 were things so “hopeless” that God allowed Gedeon to fight and to win the complete victory that God Willed.

In the present Great Apostasy, Our Lady promised that the consecration of Russia to her Immaculate Heart would bring about the coming complete Restoration.  But because of our fallen nature, man is ready to steal credit for this Restoration, like Gedeon’s men were ready to steal credit for their victory over the Madianites.  Thus, the situation is not yet dire enough because man remains ready to boast that God’s victory is really from us.

We see an example of this in the N-SSPX recently bragging that there is no other way for the Church hierarchy to be reminded about Catholic Tradition (concerning the Church’s form of government) except by the N-SSPX.  Here are the N-SSPX’s words:

Only the Society can help the Church, in reminding the popes and the bishops that Our Blessed Lord founded a monarchical Church and not a chaotic modern assembly.[18]

This recent example shows us that things do not yet seem hopeless enough, since the largest group that calls itself “traditional” remains ready to consider itself indispensable in the Catholic Restoration.  So, if the Restoration came now, the N-SSPX (and perhaps, any of the rest of us) would steal the credit from God for the return to Tradition.

Because the Great Apostasy is not yet so severe so as to make things look completely hopeless, things must continue to get worse so that human leaders do not deceive themselves that victory came from their own human efforts.

 

Conclusion

We know that the pope will consecrate Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary and that there will be a complete Restoration and peace in the Church and in the world.

However, this consecration and Restoration are likely still years away, perhaps in the year 2033 (calculated by using Our Lord’s Own parallel to the consecration He commanded of the king of France).

Further, the situation in the human element in the Church is not yet hopeless enough:

  To sufficiently correspond to the situation in France during the French Revolution;

 

  To sufficiently fit the circumstances prophesied by Our Lady of Quito; and

  To show everyone that the Restoration is miraculous and not caused by the N-SSPX or other human causes.

Meanwhile, let us be of good heart!  We are in a time of great merit!  The Imitation of Christ assures us:

When you are troubled and afflicted, that is the time to gain merit.[19]

The Restoration of the human element of the Church is God’s work and victory, not ours.  God only put us here to be His faithful little tools, to use however He sees fit – not more, not less.  What more could we ever want out of our life?

 

 



[1]           The Whole Truth About Fatima, Frére Michel de la Sainte Trinité, translator John Collorafi, vol. II, Immaculate Heart Publications, Buffalo, NY, © 1989 for English translation, p.464 (emphasis added).

 

The pope must perform this consecration together with all of the bishops of the world, as Our Lady instructed in the Third Apparition of Fatima, July 13, 1917.  These bishops do not need to have valid sacramental consecrations, but need only to validly wield the episcopal power to govern their respective dioceses.  For an explanation of this point, read this article: https://catholiccandle.neocities.org/faith/against-sedevacantism.html#section-10

 

[2]           This is a portion of Our Lady’s message during the Third Apparition of Fatima, July 13, 1917 (emphasis added), quoted from The Whole Truth About Fatima, Frére Michel de la Sainte Trinité, translator John Collorafi, vol. II, Immaculate Heart Publications, Buffalo, NY, © 1989 for English translation, pp.281-282.

.

 

[3]           This is a portion of Our Lady’s message during the Third Apparition of Fatima, July 13, 1917 (emphasis added; bracketed words added to clarify the timeline), quoted from The Whole Truth About Fatima, Frére Michel de la Sainte Trinité, translator John Collorafi, vol. II, Immaculate Heart Publications, Buffalo, NY, © 1989 for English translation, pp.281-282.


[4]           The Whole Truth About Fatima, Frére Michel de la Sainte Trinité, translator John Collorafi, vol. II, Immaculate Heart Publications, Buffalo, NY, © 1989 for English translation, p.464 (emphasis added; bracketed words added for clarity).

[5]           The sedevacantists reject the idea that a pope can be so extremely bad as to do what recent popes have done.  If Our Lady had requested the consecration of Russia after Pope Pius XII’s death, how quickly some sedevacantists would have trumpeted this as a “proof” that the Vatican II popes are not real popes, claiming that any real pope would have followed God’s request to perform the consecration.  However, faithful and informed Catholics know that popes, including Popes Pius XI and XII, are capable of such horrible disobedience to God.


[6]           The Whole Truth About Fatima, Frére Michel de la Sainte Trinité, translator John Collorafi, vol. II, Immaculate Heart Publications, Buffalo, NY, © 1989 for English translation, p.464 (emphasis added).

[7]           Our Lady did not ask for the consecration of Russia to her Immaculate Heart in 1917.  Rather, she told the Fatima children then that she would return in the future to ask for this consecration.  She returned to make this request in 1929.


[8]           Additional elements appear in this parallel between the disobedience of the French and papal monarchs.  For example, in the years before the French monarch finally consecrated France to the Sacred Heart of Jesus, the Masons gained increased influence in France.  Similarly, as we get closer to the time when a pope will consecrate Russia to the Immaculate Heart, we see the Masons’ increased influence in the Catholic Church (and in the world).

 

The king of France’s disobedience brought destruction and revolution upon the whole kingdom.  Likewise, the pope’s disobedience is bringing destruction and revolution upon the whole Catholic Church (in Her human element).

 

[9]           This is a portion of Our Lady’s message during the Third Apparition of Fatima, July 13, 1917, quoted from The Whole Truth About Fatima, Frére Michel de la Sainte Trinité, translator John Collorafi, vol. II, Immaculate Heart Publications, Buffalo, NY, © 1989 for English translation, p.297 (emphasis added).

 

Our Lady of Fatima revealed that we depend entirely on her and only she can help us.  Here are her words:

 

I want you to continue reciting the Rosary every day in honor of Our Lady of the Rosary to obtain peace in the world and the end of the war, because only She can help you.

 

The Whole Truth About Fatima, Frére Michel de la Sainte Trinité, translator John Collorafi, vol. II, Immaculate Heart Publications, Buffalo, NY, © 1989 for English translation, p.284 (emphasis added).


[10]         Words of Our Lady of Quito, Ecuador, in 1634, to Mother Marianna de Jesus.


[11]         Words of Our Lady of Quito, Ecuador, in 1634, to Mother Marianna de Jesus.

 

[12]         St. Augustine, Doctor of the Church, sermon #197, section 2, as quoted by St. Thomas Aquinas, greatest Doctor of the Church, in the Catena Aurea on St. Matthew’s Gospel, Ch. 4, vv. 18-22.

[13]         Judges, 8:10.

 

[14]         Judges, 6:11-16.

 

[15]         Judges, 7:1-2 (emphasis added).

 

[16]         Judges, 7:3.

 

[17]         Judges, 7:4-6.

 

[18]         December 28, 2018 interview of the SSPX’s new superior general Fr. Pagliarani (emphasis added; capitalization added for the first letter of the quotation).


[19]         My Imitation of Christ, by Thomas á Kempis, Book 1, Chapter 23.

The Conciliar Church is More Anti-Catholic Than Protestant Sects

The (false) conciliar church is, in a sense, even more anti-Catholic because it is able to hide behind a trusted name: Catholic.  Catholics were always instructed to obey

what they were taught in Catholic schools, heard from the pulpit on Sundays, or read in the diocesan newspaper.  Why wouldn’t we believe what they tell us?

God “called” them to the religious life; they studied God’s word for many years, and they have our salvation at heart.

Recent history shows that this false sense of obedience is the main reason for so many of the world’s Catholics accepting the (anti-Catholic) conciliar church.  The followers of all these churches found it was easier to go along (i.e., obey) to get along, and thus avoid controversy and criticism, and so, evade the responsibility of looking into (or resisting) what they saw going on in their church.

Decentralized Authority is at the heart of anti-Catholic churches.  As church authority goes, so go the churches.  As you know,

  • It began at the time of Creation, when Lucifer declared, “Non serviam.”  

  • Luther maintained “that the pope had no more jurisdiction than the archbishop of Magdeburg or the bishop of Paris.”[1] 

  • The Anglicans placed the king of England as the supreme authority of their church in England.  

  • And now, the Second Vatican Council’s conciliar church authorities are meeting regularly in order to promote decentralization.  

This deceptive tactic has the goal of having local dioceses or area bishops’ councils making decisions not properly theirs to make.

If this push for conciliar decentralization is more fully instituted, here are a few changes you will see in the conciliar church:

  1. married priests;

  1. women priests and bishops;

  1. acceptance of unnatural lifestyles;

  1. civil divorce;

     5. elimination of Holy Days of Obligation; and

     6. meat on all Fridays.

There will be many other destructive changes – to doctrine and morals.  The conciliar hierarchy will claim that modern life is full of changes so it is only natural that religious faith has to change and keep current and relevant.  Wrong, wrong!  God does not change.

Most Catholics don’t want to believe the truth – that the conciliar church in Rome is anti-Catholic and is the seat of the anti-Christ, as predicted by Our Lady at Fatima.  This is the same anti-Catholic conciliar church by which the liberal N-SSPX very much wants to be accepted and recognized and with which the N-SSPX is willing to compromise in whatever way is “necessary”.

It is important to understand that Christ established His Divine Mystical Body, the Catholic Church, with one infallible head (i.e., the pope) to rule for Him on earth.

This doctrine is the platform that stabilized and expanded His Church worldwide, with millions of followers.  

Enemies of the Church realize that in order to eliminate the Catholic Church, they must destroy or greatly weaken God’s plan for Church authority.  Currently, Rome with a weak pope, is doing just that by having synods on changing the source of Church authority to a democracy, or to decentralized decision-making.

We must hold fast in the real Resistance, and to pray daily for Russia to be consecrated to the Immaculate Heart of Mary.  This is the solution to the problems in the human element of the Catholic Church.


[1]          The Catholic Dictionary and Encyclopedia of Religious Information, Addis & Arnold, The Catholic Publication Society, New York, ©1884, page 535.

Vatican II does not teach anything infallibly

The labels which Vatican II gives to its documents

do not show that any of them teach infallibly.  These labels merely show the council’s intellectual sloppiness.

There are many superficial reasons for supposing that Vatican II infallibly teaches truth and does not teach error.  However, those suppositions are false.  There are many proofs that Vatican II’s teachings are not infallible.  For example:

  • The council does not use the necessary language showing that it speaks infallibly.

  • The council’s statements were deliberately made ambiguous and contradictory, whereas nothing which is ambiguous or contradictory can be infallible.

  • The council’s teachings are novelties, whereas it is impossible for any novelties to be infallible.

  • Even the council fathers and the popes during and after Vatican II agreed and declared that Vatican II is not infallible.

Read the full explanations of these proofs that Vatican II is not infallible, in this article: https://catholiccandle.neocities.org/faith/vatican-ii-is-not-infallible.html

Examination of another argument, viz., that certain documents of Vatican II are infallible based on their being designated as “dogmatic constitutions”.

There is another superficial argument sometimes given for supposing that Vatican II’s teachings are infallible (however much they plainly seem to contradict the truth).  

According to this argument, Vatican II must teach infallibly at least in those documents which are called “dogmatic constitutions”, e.g., the council documents called Lumen Gentium and Dei Verbum.  This argument supposes that those documents are infallible because Catholic dogma is infallible and the council’s label shows (supposedly) that those documents teach dogma.

But this supposition contains an unsupported assumption.  Vatican II labeled these documents “dogmatic constitutions” but that label does not tell us that these documents infallibly define dogma.  Those documents could be labeled “dogmatic constitutions” because they discuss dogmatic subjects without themselves infallibly defining any dogma.  

On the other hand, other Vatican II documents which are not called “dogmatic constitutions” also discuss dogmas (and teach heresies against dogmas).  Why aren’t those other documents also called “dogmatic constitutions”?  What does that label tell us, if anything?

A prominent Protestant observer at Vatican II, Dr. Robert McAfee Brown, gave his eye-witness impression regarding the labels which the council placed on its documents:

In those early days of the Council there was much discussion about the relative degree of binding authority between, say, a ‘constitution’ and a ‘decree.’  It seemed fairly clear that a ‘constitution’ was of higher authority, and it would be a wise rule of interpretation to say that the ‘constitution’ On the Church [i.e., Lumen Gentium], for example, was the context in which to understand the ‘decree’ On Ecumenism, rather than vice versa.  As it actually worked out, however, there seemed little reason by the end of the Council why The Church in the World Today [i.e., Gaudium et Spes] should be a ‘constitution’ (albeit a ‘pastoral constitution’) while the document on Missionary Activity should be a ‘decree’ or the statement on Religious Freedom a ‘declaration’.[1]

Our own research supports McAfee Brown on this historical point, viz., that there was not, and still is not, any authoritative clarity or any consistent and comprehensive rationale regarding the respective weights of the documents, based on their designated labels (viz., “dogmatic constitution”, “pastoral constitution”, “decree” or “declaration”).  This lack of clarity is exemplified in Pope Paul VI calling the Declaration on Religious Liberty “one of the greatest documents of the Council”[2] even though it has what seems to be the lower status of a “declaration”.  

This uncertainty fits with the revolutionary character of the council (and of the conciliar church since then), viz., that just like in other revolutions, much that occurs is unclear and in flux.[3] 

All Vatican II documents are evil.[4]  But regardless of whatever authority the council might be supposed to give the documents, there is no reason to suppose that their labels designate any of them as teaching infallibly, i.e., by the fact that the council teaches in a document designated as a “dogmatic constitution”.

Nothing in the conciliar church is carefully done or well thought-out.

The fruits of the conciliar church are not only evil, but are shallow.  For example, the new mass is not only a sacrilege, but its inner emptiness is obvious from its banal outward manifestations, for example:

  • Burlap vestments;  

  • Guitar-strumming folk songs;

  • Childish banners;

  • Sports equipment and breakfast cereal used in “bringing up the gifts”[5] (viz., at the new mass’s substitute for a real Offertory); and

  • Countless other banalities.  

The conciliar church is empty of meaning and is being emptied of people.  

Protestant and conciliar intellectual bankruptcy

The conciliar church is merely “warmed over” Protestantism.  As a consequence, it has no serious intellectual content (as the Protestants have none either).  Before Vatican II, any large Catholic bookstore was replete with the riches and wisdom of 2000 years of the Church, e.g., St. Thomas Aquinas, the Imitation of Christ, St. Bernard of Clairvaux, St. Augustine, Gregorian Chant, and so many other works from many centuries ago.  

By contrast, walk into a Protestant bookstore before or after Vatican II, and you would find it is full of “bestsellers” and new, short-lived titles, because Protestantism has no serious legacy to offer from its five centuries of revolutionary existence.

The conciliar church is like Protestantism.  Conciliar bookstores are full of new (post-Vatican II) offerings which are quickly replaced by the next fad-of-the-day and are forgotten.  The conciliar church has no deep and penetrating theology or philosophy.  Nothing conciliar is carefully done or well thought-out.

Under the guidance of the Holy Ghost, the Catholic Church has comprehensively worked out true theology and philosophy.  In comparison, Protestant and conciliar thinkers are “lightweights” and amateurs (as well as revolutionaries).  The edifice of Catholic intellectual patrimony, compared to Protestant and conciliar thought, is like a magnificent cathedral compared to a few sticks leaning against each other.

 

The haphazard way in which the documents of Vatican II were labeled, is an example of intellectual sloppiness and was a harbinger of what would come (and now exists) in the post-conciliar church.

Conclusion

The conciliar church does not have the answers any more than Protestantism does.  They have nothing to add or give us except harm and evil.[6]  Let us be ever grateful for the great spiritual and intellectual treasures of Catholic Tradition and enrich ourselves with them every day through study and prayer!

Catholic Candle note:

The conciliar church is Catholic in name only.  A Catholic will gradually lose his Faith if he fails to understand that.  When he hears the word “Catholic” outside of the context of genuine Traditional Catholicism, he should guard himself against conciliar poison by understanding that this word refers to anti-Catholicism.

Archbishop Lefebvre declared the conciliar church is a different, false church.[7]  The “old” SSPX faithfully taught the same truth.[8]  The “new” SSPX rejects its founder’s position and denies that the conciliar church is a separate (and false) church.[9]  The N-SSPX priests and laymen will gradually lose their Faith under that delusion.


[1]          Robert McAfee Brown, Ecumenical Revolution, Doubleday, Garden City, 1967 (2nd ed., 1969), p.176 (emphasis in original; bracketed words added for clarity).

[3]          For an explanation why revolution is always wrong, read this article: https://catholiccandle.neocities.org/faith/against-sedevacantism.html#section-6

[4]          E.g., regarding the hundreds of errors in Vatican II’s document, Lumen Gentium, as they are compared to the consistent teaching of the Fathers, Doctors and popes throughout the ages, read this article: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B49oPuI54eEGbzRhdmQ3X0Z6RFE/view 

There are about 19 errors per page in Vatican II’s document, Lumen Gentium.  Read this explanation here: 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#fn17


See also, e.g., regarding how Vatican II’s Dignitatis Humanae, teaches religious liberty for error and contradicts what the Catholic Church has always infallibly taught, read this article:  https://catholiccandle.neocities.org/faith/religious-liberty-vatican-ii.html

[5]          For example, Cheerios and Chex were brought up as “gifts” during the new mass for the so-called “beatification” of Fr. Solano Casey.  Watch at minute marker 1:53:40, at this link: https://video.search.yahoo.com/search/video;_ylt=AwrBT74Jhx1aax4A8A1XNyoA;_ylu=X3oDMTEyZWVzMmpzBGNvbG8DYmYxBHBvcwMzBHZ0aWQDQjQ0ODNfMQRzZWMDc2M-

[6]          The conciliar church has nothing good in it.  Read the explanation of this fact here: https://catholiccandle.neocities.org/faith/nothing-good-conciliar-church.html

 

The conciliar church’s new mass never gives grace.  Read the explanation of this fact here: https://catholiccandle.neocities.org/faith/new-mass-never-grace.html

[8]          Here  are the words of the “old” SSPX (cited back to its own sources), that the conciliar church is a different and false church: https://catholiccandle.neocities.org/priests/sspx-faithful-and-informed-catholics-reject-even-the-concept-of-recognition-by-modernist-rome.html

[9]          Read the “new” SSPX’s own words (cited back to its own sources) in this article: https://catholiccandle.neocities.org/faith/archbishop-lefebvre-the-conciliar-church-is-not-the-catholic-church-nor-a-mere-mindset-but-is-a-new-church.html

The “New” SSPX Follows the Conciliar Popes in Minimizing the Abuse Crisis

Catholic Candle note: Pope Pius XI declared that “purity of morals” is a “most delicate matter”.[1]  When talking about the Sixth and Ninth Commandments, the Council of Trent Catechism warns that a person sins if he does not use “great caution and prudence, and … great delicacy”.[2]  The article below attempts to use that great delicacy which God requires.

Although this article involves conciliar clergy, the inherent doubts[3] concerning their “ordinations” and “consecrations” do not mean that those clergy do not possess the jurisdiction of their offices (for governing).  For a full explanation of this principle, read this article: https://catholiccandle.neocities.org/faith/against-sedevacantism.html#section-10

Honest Catholics know that Vatican II’s promotion of laxity and “openness to the world” has caused unimaginable harm to the morals of Catholics and (indirectly) to non-Catholics.  Since Vatican II, pornography, adultery, divorce, murder of the innocent, euthanasia, unnatural impurity, rejection of the children God Wills to send, and countless other grave vices, have dramatically multiplied.

The true Catholic Church is the Light of the world[4] and anchors the world regarding morals and the Natural Law.[5]  Beginning only at Vatican II, when the Catholic Church’s human element became increasingly lax, “decent” non-Catholics began to accept a great many vices they previously rejected.  For example, “decent” non-Catholics opposed cremation and tattoos before the Vatican II revolution.[6] 

Therefore, Vatican II’s very bad fruits will continue (and worsen) until the human element of the Catholic Church rejects Vatican II and the conciliar church through Our Lady’s miraculous intervention when Russia is consecrated to Her Immaculate Heart.  

Until then, no Catholics (if they have any common sense) are surprised by additional bad fruits when they hear of them.  One such example, is the impurity crisis of conciliar “priests” abusing the innocent.  Honest and informed Catholics would never deny the problem nor deny that the conciliar revolution caused it.

So many conciliar “priests” have committed these crimes that the attorneys general of all fifty United States (Republican as well as Democrat) are investigating this abuse within their states.[7]

One might hope that the “new” SSPX, as it ought, would accuse Vatican II and its resulting conciliar church of forming the lax “priests” who commit these crimes so widely.

One might further hope that, because of this crisis, the N-SSPX would warn its followers to stay away from the conciliar church and its horrific, evil fruits.  The N-SSPX does no such thing because the N-SSPX wants to join the anti-Catholic conciliar church.

Former Pope Benedict and the N-SSPX both minimize this Abuse Crisis

The N-SSPX follows the minimizing tactics of conciliar popes.  For example, while former Pope Benedict XVI oversaw (for the Vatican) all cases worldwide of these abuse crimes committed by “priests”, he downplayed the problem by falsely claiming that in the United States “less than 1% of priests are guilty of acts of this type.”[8]

The SSPX downplays yet more extremely than former Pope Benedict by hesitating to admit that any conciliar “priests” have committed this abuse.  Here are the N-SSPX’s words: “Even if perverts or unbalanced men can be found among consecrated men …” – thereby suggesting that it is doubtful that there are any abusers at all among conciliar “priests”.[9]

Who would say “if the devil is not God” unless the person was leaving open that the devil might be God?  Likewise, why would anyone who accepts these clergy crimes as fact say “if clergy are committing these crimes”?

By supposing that no conciliar “priests” are abusers when countless priests are, the SSPX fights the truth.

Pope Francis and the N-SSPX deflect blame away from the lax, conciliar “new priesthood”.

Pope Francis deflects blame from conciliar “priests” by blaming “clericalism”, i.e., blaming a lack of power-sharing by the hierarchy.[10]  Here are Pope Francis’ words:

Clericalism, whether fostered by priests themselves or by lay persons, leads to an excision in the ecclesial body that supports and helps to perpetuate many of the evils that we are condemning today. To say ‘no’ to abuse is to say an emphatic ‘no’ to all forms of clericalism.[11]

Thus, Pope Francis blames the conciliar “priest”-abuse on (comparatively conservative) Catholics who oppose democratic decision-making in the church.  Of course, the true blame for this abuse lies with the lax, conciliar “priesthood” which Archbishop Lefebvre rejected – calling it modernist Rome’s “new priesthood”.[12]

The N-SSPX uses a tactic similar to Pope Francis’ tactic – by deflecting the blame from where it belongs, viz., the lax, conciliar “new priesthood”.  The N-SSPX blames evil media outlets, saying that any problem is only with a comparatively “tiny” group and the media have exaggerated this problem.  Here are the N-SSPX’s words:

The media attacks the Church furiously while pretending to forget that these cases, as scandalous as they may be, are only a tiny minority compared to the abuse committed by adults on children in schools, sports activities, or stepfamilies, not to mention the shady circles of fashion, the show business and the media.[13]

The N-SSPX not only deflects blame from the lax, conciliar “priesthood” – which is where the blame belongs – but the N-SSPX falsely suggests the media is the problem “if” there are any pervert-“priests” and that this abuse involves only a comparatively “tiny” minority.  

The N-SSPX also deflects blame for the abuse caused in the lax, conciliar “new priesthood”, on the grounds that godless civil society is worse.  By contrast, relatively conservative Catholic media sound the alarm about abuse in the new, conciliar priesthood:  

  • Media such as (the relatively conservative, Catholic) Lifesitenews.com reports on a new study showing the “priest”-abuse crisis is worse than “commonly thought”.[14] 

  • Media such as Lifesitenews.com report increasing statistics of abuse.  (However much abuse actually occurred in 2002, temporarily fewer abuses came to light because the abusers were scared by the lawsuits and media then.)[15]

Whereas the N-SSPX faults the media for (supposedly) exaggerating the “priest”-abuse crisis, Lifesitenews.com reports on a new study which specifically blames this abuse on the immorality of the conciliar hierarchy and the “new priesthood”, i.e., upon that fact that:

you’ve got eight times the proportion of [unnaturally impure men in the conciliar priesthood] as you do in the general population – it’s as if the priesthood becomes a particularly welcoming and enabling and encouraging population for [that kind of unnaturally impure] activity and behavior.[16]

Lifesitenews.com cited a survey in which most of the recently “ordained” conciliar “priests” disclosed the existence of a subculture and network of men at their seminaries who were steeped in unnatural impurity.[17]

This is a crisis!  Yet the N-SSPX deflects blame from the lax “new priesthood” to the media.  Pope Francis could not ask for a better partner than the N-SSPX to deflect blame from that same conciliar “new priesthood” which Archbishop Lefebvre entirely rejected.

The N-SSPX minimizes the abuse crisis by citing the lower abuse numbers from a report which conciliar “bishops” commissioned and financed.

Honest Catholics know that they cannot trust the conciliar “bishops” to protect the innocent.  Those conciliar “bishops” want to appear to defend innocent victims.  However, they never implemented the “Dallas Charter” regulations to restrain their “priests”, until the media and other external pressure drove them to do so in 2002.  Even then, the “bishops” exempted themselves from this regulation.[18]

The Ordinary of the Diocese of Burlington, VT, “bishop” Christopher Coyne, admitted (concerning his own fellow-“bishops”), that “The mistrust underlying all this was earned ….  The bishops had proven over the last two decades that they had not been able to police themselves.”[19] 

The U.S. conciliar “bishops” hired and paid for a study by John Jay College which concluded that 4% of “priests” are credibly accused of committing abuse which became public (at least eventually).[20]

A different study, not paid for by the U.S. “bishops”, concluded that the actual percentage was about 50% higher than that, i.e., about 6%.  These statistics, of course, include only abuse for which there were complaints which were made public, at least eventually.[21]  In other words, these percentages leave aside unreported as well as privately-handled abuse.

Even using the lower statistics used by the U.S. “bishops” and the N-SSPX, this abuse still shows there is a crisis.  This abuse is a type of spiritual death caused by 4% (or 6%) of the “priests” not counting (maybe much higher incidences of) unreported abuse as well as privately-handled abuse.  Doubtlessly, the victims number in the thousands or tens of thousands in the U.S. alone.

Further, the “bishops” shuffle the “priest”-abusers from parish to parish to hide the spiritual death they cause.  Also, the conciliar dioceses settle confidentially with victims, to keep this spiritual death hidden.

Let us suppose an analogous crisis of physical death:

  • Suppose there were a soft drink which was sold throughout the U.S. (and throughout the world), of which, 4% (or 6%) of the cans caused death, killing thousands or tens of thousands of persons in the U.S. alone.  

  • Suppose further the stores and the soft drink’s manufacturer moved the cans from one store to another, when the people began to notice persons dying from the soft drinks they bought at a particular store.  

  • Suppose then (like the “bishops” in the current “priest”-abuse crisis) the soft drink’s maker made confidential settlements to keep the deaths hidden from the public.

No honest person would say the type of thing which the N-SSPX says about the spiritual deaths caused by “priest”-abusers, viz., Even if there are any poison soft drink cans, the media is blowing the matter out of proportion from what is only a tiny minority of soft drink cans.

Conclusion

Plainly, the “new” SSPX is trying to ingratiate itself with the conciliar revolutionaries.  The N-SSPX minimizes the evil of the conciliar hierarchy and the lax “new priesthood”.  The “new” SSPX will say anything to have its followers accept the coming deal with modernist Rome.  This shows that you should not expect the truth from the N-SSPX.[22]


[1]          Divini Illius Magistri, (On Christian Education), Pope Pius XI, 1929, §65.  

To learn more about this grave duty to use great caution in discussing the sins against purity and to discuss them only when necessary, read this article: https://catholiccandle.neocities.org/faith/sins-caused-by-obscene-speech.html

[2]
         Warning given by the
Council of Trent Catechism in the section on the 6th Commandment.

[3]          Faithful and informed Catholics know that conciliar ordinations and consecrations are inherently doubtful and so must be treated as invalid.  For an explanation why this is true, read these articles:

[4]

          St. Matthew’s Gospel, 5:14.

[5]          The Natural Law is what we know we must do by the light of the natural reason God gave us.  One example of the Natural Law is that we must never tell a lie.  We naturally know this because we know that the purpose of speech is to convey the truth and so we naturally know that telling a lie is abusing the purpose of speech.  

Here is how St. Thomas explains what the Natural Law is:

[L]aw, being a rule and measure, can be in a person in two ways: in one way, as in him that rules and measures; in another way, as in that which is ruled and measured, since a thing is ruled and measured, in so far as it partakes of the rule or measure.  Wherefore, since all things subject to Divine providence are ruled and measured by the eternal law, as was stated above [in Summa, Ia IIae, Q.91, a.1]; it is evident that all things partake somewhat of the eternal law, in so far as, namely, from its being imprinted on them, they derive their respective inclinations to their proper acts and ends.  Now among all others, the rational creature is subject to Divine providence in the most excellent way, in so far as it partakes of a share of providence, by being provident both for itself and for others.  Wherefore it has a share of the Eternal Reason, whereby it has a natural inclination to its proper act and end: and this participation of the eternal law in the rational creature is called the natural law.  Hence the Psalmist after saying (Psalm 4:6): "Offer up the sacrifice of justice," as though someone asked what the works of justice are, adds: "Many say, Who showeth us good things?" in answer to which question he says: "The light of Thy countenance, O Lord, is signed upon us": thus implying that the light of natural reason, whereby we discern what is good and what is evil, which is the function of the natural law, is nothing else than an imprint on us of the Divine light. It is therefore evident that the natural law is nothing else than the rational creature's participation of the eternal law.

Summa, Ia IIae, Q.91, a.2, respondeo.

[8]          Words of former Pope Benedict XVI before he became pope, in November 2002, when he was in charge of all abuse cases for the Vatican, quoted from an interview here:

http://www.bishop-accountability.org/AtAGlance/USCCB_Yearly_Data_on_Accused_Priests.htm

[9]          Emphasis added.  Here is the longer quote from the SSPX:

Even if perverts or unbalanced men can be found among consecrated men, we must not lose sight of the general hypocrisy that reigns in our “liberated” societies, where everything is permitted, and the worst depravities are encouraged.  

Here is the entire N-SSPX article: https://fsspx.news/en/news-events/news/300-priests-united-states-suspected-abuse-between-1947-and-2010-40486?utm_source=Society+of+Saint+Pius+X+%7C+Newsletter&utm_campaign=9d1eca99f1-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2018_09_21_04_48&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_8c13eb2341-9d1eca99f1-203947293 (emphasis added).

[10]          The Merriam-Webster Dictionary’s only definition of “clericalism” is “a policy of maintaining or increasing the power of a religious hierarchy”.  https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/clericalism

[12]          In his November 21, 1974 declaration of principles, Archbishop Lefebvre wrote:

We refuse, on the other hand, and have always refused to follow the Rome of neo-Modernist and neo-Protestant tendencies which were clearly evident in the Second Vatican Council and, after the Council, in all the reforms which issued from it. …

It is impossible to modify profoundly the lex orandi without modifying the lex credendi. To the Novus Ordo Missae correspond a new catechism, a new priesthood, new seminaries, a charismatic Pentecostal Church—all things opposed to orthodoxy and the perennial teaching of the Church.

This Reformation, born of Liberalism and Modernism, is poisoned through and through; it derives from heresy and ends in heresy, even if all its acts are not formally heretical. It is therefore impossible for any conscientious and faithful Catholic to espouse this Reformation or to submit to it in any way whatsoever.

http://sspx.org/en/1974-declaration-of-archbishop-lefebvre (emphasis added).

[13]          https://fsspx.news/en/news-events/news/300-priests-united-states-suspected-abuse-between-1947-and-2010-40486?utm_source=Society+of+Saint+Pius+X+%7C+Newsletter&utm_campaign=9d1eca99f1-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2018_09_21_04_48&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_8c13eb2341-9d1eca99f1-203947293

Here is the longer N-SSPX quote:

The Hypocrisy of the World and the Statistical Reality

Even if perverts or unbalanced men can be found among consecrated men, we must not lose sight of the general hypocrisy that reigns in our “liberated” societies, where everything is permitted, and the worst depravities are encouraged.  The media attacks the Church furiously while pretending to forget that these cases, as scandalous as they may be, are only a tiny minority compared to the abuse committed by adults on children in schools, sports activities, or stepfamilies, not to mention the shady circles of fashion, the show business and the media.

The creators of opinion, who are so careful to decry any form of amalgam on certain topics, between Islam and terrorism for example, or immigration and invasion, etc., are having a field day here.  And yet, as the blog “[], Church and Media” recalled in 2016, the most complete study on the cases of [] abuse in the Church is that of the John Jay College of Criminal Justice of the University of New York, published in February 2004.  Drawing up an inventory of all the court cases between 1950 and 2002, this study makes a strict distinction between allegations and condemnations.

Thus, out of the 4,392 allegations listed in the study, 1,021 led to police investigations resulting in only 384 criminal accusations. This enabled the blog to draw up more precise statistics on the cases of confirmed [abuse]. The numbers go from 4% of priests accused of alleged [] abuse, to 0.35% of priests actually convicted of these acts.  Of course, “in this difference, not all the priests are innocent (some are no longer alive, statute of limitations, etc.), but there are some who are innocent, for unfortunately, false testimony and defamation do exist.”  And based on the rate of convictions among the inquests that were conducted and completed without being interrupted by the statute of limitations or the death of the accused, the blog concludes that between 98.5% and 99.65% of American priests are innocent.  The black sheep represent between 0.35 and 1.5% of consecrated men. Obviously, this is still too many.

In France, statistics show, according to the National Observatory of Social Action, that in 75% of the cases recorded, abuse of minors happens in the family, and a quarter of these cases of abuse are committed by other minors.  The proportion of Catholic priests convicted and imprisoned for such acts, all sentences combined, represents 0.48% of the clergy in function, as the French Bishops’ Conference pointed out on January 23, 2017.  As serious as it may be, it remains a marginal reality, much more marginal, in any case, than the media, always ready to pounce on an opportunity to dishonor the Church, would have it.

The Church intercedes for her wounded children, not for this hypocritical and corrupt world for which Christ refused to pray (see Jn. 17:9).

Emphasis added; slightly edited (at brackets) for delicacy.

[16]          Read the longer Lifesitenews report here: https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/landmark-study-proves-homosexuality-is-strongly-linked-to-catholic-cle (bracketed synonyms substituted for delicacy).

[18]
         “The bishops specifically excluded themselves from the [2002 Dallas Charter] landmark child protection measures”.
 https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/landmark-study-proves-homosexuality-is-strongly-linked-to-catholic-cle