One Heretic Speaks, Another Listens

 

            

Christ or Chaos

                   March 31, 2013

One Heretic Speaks, Another Listens

by Dr. Thomas A. Droleskey

Among the “firsts” being established by Laypope Francis, Jorge Mario Bergoglio,  was the fact that the heretical “homily” delivered by arch-heretic Father Raniero Cantalamessa, O.F.M., Cap., was preached to Bergoglio, who is a lay arch-heretic in the Basilica of Saint Peter on Good Friday, March 29, 2013. The preacher was a priest, albeit a Judas priest of the Modernist and charismatic kind, and the layman believes that he exercises the “Petrine Ministry.”

Father Cantalamessa lived down to his reputation for preaching heresy on Good Friday in 2013 as he has done on so many occasions before the attentive ears of Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II, who was a true bishop, and Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI, who was a true priest. His principal audience two days ago was a layman, Jorge Mario Bergoglio/Francis, whose “theology” was expressed perfectly by the “preacher to the ‘papal’ household.”

After quoting from the lecherous anarchist, existentialist and patron of pornography named Franz Kafka’s “An Imperial Message,” Cantalamessa defamed our true popes and Holy Mother Church’s true general councils and the ceremonial majesty of her Sacred Liturgy that is to give honor and glory to the Most Blessed Trinity and to transmit the simple fact that He is immutable and without any shadow of change or alteration whatsoever:

We must do everything possible so that the Church may never look like that complicated and cluttered castle described by Kafka, and the message may come out of it as free and joyous as when the messenger began his run. We know what the impediments are that can restrain the messenger: dividing walls, starting with those that separate the various Christian churches from one another, the excess of bureaucracy, the residue of past ceremonials, laws and disputes, now only debris.

In Revelation, Jesus says that He stands at the door and knocks (Rev 3:20). Sometimes, as noted by our Pope Francis, he does not knock to enter, but knocks from within to go out. To reach out to the “existential suburbs of sin, suffering, injustice, religious ignorance and indifference, and of all forms of misery.”

As happens with certain old buildings. Over the centuries, to adapt to the needs of the moment, they become filled with partitions, staircases, rooms and closets. The time comes when we realize that all these adjustments no longer meet the current needs, but rather are an obstacle, so we must have the courage to knock them down and return the building to the simplicity and linearity of its origins. This was the mission that was received one day by a man who prayed before the Crucifix of San Damiano: “Go, Francis, and repair my Church“.

“Who could ever be up to this task?” wondered aghast the Apostle before the superhuman task of being in the world “the fragrance of Christ”; and here is his reply, that still applies today: “We’re not ourselves able to think something as if it came from us; our ability comes from God. He has made us to be ministers of a new covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit; because the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life”(2 Cor 2:16; 3:5-6).

May the Holy Spirit, in this moment in which a new time is opening for the Church, full of hope, reawaken in men who are at the window the expectancy of the message, and in the messengers the will to make it reach them, even at the cost of their life. (Clerical Heretic Cantalamessa Preaches to Lay Heretic Bergoglio.)

 

What are “dividing walls?” you might ask.

Catholic doctrines, especially as proclaimed in the Second Millennium without the assent of the Orthodox and under the influence of the “rigid” Scholasitcist named Saint Thomas Aquinas. That’s what.

Cantalamessa’s “excess bureaucracy” is not merely the existence of different dicasteries in the Vatican but of the very fact that even the counterfeit church of conciliarism’s alleged Code of Canon Law and the judicial machinery necessary to interpret and enforce gets “in the way” of “evangelization.” This is seen clearly when one considers the heretical charismatic’s description of “the residue of past ceremonials, laws and disputes, now only debris.”

Yes, the Immemorial Mass of Tradition? Just debris, the residue of past ceremonials.

Disputes? Well, little things such as the Filioque, the Council of Trent’s condemnation of Protestantism, Pope Pius IX’s The Syllabus of Errors, Pope Saint Pius X’s Pascendi Dominici Gregis and The Oath Against Modernism. So much complexity, so much pettiness, you understand.

Laws? Among other things, Cantalamessa was condemning the 1917 Code of Canon Law’s prohibition against “inter-religious prayer services” whose origins date back to Apostolic times (see (The Laws of God Forbidding All Communication in Religion With Those of a False Religion) and that was referenced by the late Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre in 1986:

 

And most recently, the Pope has been in the synagogue of the Jews in Rome. How can the Pope pray with the enemies of Jesus Christ? These Jews know and say and believe that they are the successors of the Jews that killed Jesus Christ, and they continue to fight against Jesus Christ everywhere in the world. At the end of the Pope’s visit, the Jews sang a “hymn” that included the line “I believe with all my heart in the coming of the Messiah,” meaning that they refuse Jesus as the Messiah, and the Pope had given permission for this denial of Christ be sung in his presence, and he listened, head bowed! And the Holy See announces that in the near future that he will visit Taize to pray with the Protestants, and he himself said in public at St. Paul Outside the Walls that later this year he will hold a ceremony gathering all of the religions of the world together to pray for peace at Assisi in Italy, on the occasion of the Feast of Peace proclaimed by the United Nations due to take place on October 24.

“Now all these facts are public, you have seen them in the newspapers and the media. What are we to think? What is the reaction of our Catholic Faith? That is what matters. It is not our personal feelings, a sort of impression or admission of some kind. It is a question of knowing what our Faith tells us, faced with these facts. Let me quote a few words – not my words – from Canon Naz’s Dictionary of Canon Law, a wholly official and approved commentary on what has been the Catholic Church’s body of law for nineteen centuries. On the subject of sharing in the worship of non-Catholics (after all, this is what we now see Pope and bishops doing), the Church says, in Canon 1258-1: ‘It is absolutely forbidden for Catholics to attend or take any active part in the worship of non-Catholics in any way whatsoever.’ On this Canon the quasi-official Naz Commentary says, and I quote, ‘A Catholic takes active part when he joins in heterodox; i.e., non-Catholic worship with the intention of honouring God by this means in the way non-Catholics do. It is forbidden to pray, to sing or to play the organ in a heretical or schismatic temple, in association with the people worshipping there, even if the words of the hymn or the song or the prayer are orthodox.’ The reason for this prohibition is that any participation in non-Catholic worship implies profession of a false religion and hence denial of the Catholic Faith. By such participation Catholics are presumed to be adhering to the beliefs of the non- Catholics, and that is why Canon 2316 declares them ‘suspect of heresy, and if they persevere, they are to be treated as being in reality heretics.

“Now these recent acts of the Pope and bishops, with Protestants, animists and Jews, are they not an active participation in non-Catholic worship as explained by Canon Naz on Canon 1258-1? In which case, I cannot see how it is possible to say that the Pope is not suspect of heresy, and if he continues, he is a heretic, a public heretic. That is the teaching of the Church.

Now I don’t know if the time has come to say that the Pope is a heretic; I don’t know if it is the time to say that. You know, for some time many people, the sedevacantists, have been saying ‘there is no more Pope,’ but I think that for me it was not yet the time to say that, because it was not sure, it was not evident, it was very difficult to say that the Pope is a heretic, the Pope is apostate. But I recognize that slowly, very slowly, by the deeds and acts of the Pope himself we begin to be very anxious. I am not inventing this situation; I do not want it. I would gladly give my life to bring it to an end, but this is the situation we face, unfolding before our eyes like a film in the cinema. I don’t think it has ever happened in the history of the Church, the man seated in the chair of Peter partaking in the worship of false gods.

“What conclusion must we draw in a few months if we are confronted by these repeated acts of partaking in false worship? I don’t know. I wonder. But I think the Pope can do nothing worse than call together a meeting of all religions, when we know there is only one true religion and all other religions belong to the devil. So perhaps after this famous meeting of Assisi, perhaps we must say that the Pope is a heretic, is apostate. Now I don’t wish yet to say it formally and solemnly, but it seems at first sight that it is impossible for a Pope to be publicly and formally heretical. Our Lord has promised to be with him, to keep his faith, to keep him in the Faith – how can he at the same time be a public heretic and virtually apostatiseSo it is possible we may be obliged to believe this Pope is not Pope.(The Angelus, July 1986, transcripts of talks given by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre on March 30 and April 18, 1986.)

Men such Cantalamessa and Bergoglio just dismiss such talk as so much claptrap, so much archaism, so much Pharisaism. They are the “enlightened” ones, you understand. How do we know? Well, they keep telling us how “enlightened” and “humble” and “simple” they are.

Cantalamessa also managed to defame and blaspheme Saint Francis of Assisi himself, who loved the ceremonies of the Catholic Faith as one whose desire to repair Holy Mother Church was precisely what the conciliar revolutionaries have been doing and what Jorge Mario Bergoglio/Francis has done in the short space of seventeen days and what he intends to keep on doing until he returns to Buenos Aires after he decides to resign in order to pass on the baton of conciliarism to another revolutionary layman.

Saint Francis of Assisi loved the integrity of Catholic doctrine and he desire to rebuild the Church Militant earth whose clergy and laity had grow lax in their moral lives and to live a life of profound Eucharistic piety and deep devotion to the Mother of God so that more and more people would embrace Lady Poverty so that their souls, purified of earthly attachment, would recognize and reject any doctrine or way of living contrary to the Deposit of Faith. This effort to make Saint Francis of Assisi as a witness in behalf of conciliarism is nothing other than contemptible. It is from the devil. Saint Francis of Assisi’s very Rule of Life was designed in its very simplicity to protect his mendicant friars from heresy.

A source that is not enough friendly to the great saint of Assisi’s zeal for orthodoxy demonstrates that Cantalamessa is a liar and a deceiver:

 

A few years previously, in 1201, the pope had formally approved the reconciliation and reorganization, into three orders, of a group of religious zealots from northern Italy, the Humiliati, who had been condemned as heretics along with many others by Pope Lucius III in 1184. The three orders comprised, respectively, canons serving their own churches, lay people living in separate male and female communities, and married lay people leading normal working lives at home but meeting together on Sundays to hear sermons delivered by members of their congregations. In return for being allowed to pursue their way of life unmolested, the Humiliati observed strict orthodoxy in doctrine and supported the established clergy in combating heresy in their districts. Thus Francis’ three orders, and especially the Tertiaries, were anticipated by the Humiliati. In 1208 Innocent III formally approved the reconstitution of another group of suspected heretics, the Poor Catholics, comprising disaffected clerics from Languedoc, when their leader, Durand of Huesca, swore loyalty to the pope and fidelity to orthodox doctrine. In 1210, yet another such group, mainly laymen called the Poor Men of Lyon, under Bernard of Prim, likewise received the pope’s approval in return for various loyalty oaths.

Thus the period in which Francis grew up was one of great spiritual ferment, in which the church hierarchy was struggling to find ways to combat a rising tide of heterodox opposition and religious diversity, in which evangelical poverty and the preaching of repentance were leading themes. Francis was only one of a succession of grassroots religious leaders who headed to Rome for papal approval early in the new century. Although the pope and local bishops at times resorted to violence to suppress these proliferating dissident groups, they also saw the value of harnessing the spiritual energy of zealots like Francis who were amenable to being drawn, with their followers, into the structure of the church while retaining the apostolic identity that was evidently so appealing to the general populace. The Franciscans would become one of the papacy’s most important and effective tools for implementing the new standards of pastoral care and parish life that were enunciated in the decrees of the Fourth Lateran Council of 1215, and the order’s development fell increasingly under the influence of the church hierarchy. (The Life of Saint Francis: Introduction.)

Some might to save Cantalamessa’s heresy in party by claiming that he is opposed to “religious ignorance and indifference.” Nice try. No sale.

The truth is that Cantalamessa believes that it is enough for people to be “believers” and that it is indifference to “belief” in general that is ruining the world. This is nothing other than Judeo-Masonry. It is diabolical.

Cantalamessa’s and Bergoglio’s desire for “simplicity”and “linearity” have been condemned many times in the two hundred nineteen years.

Pope Pius VI condemned it in Auctorem Fidei, August 28, 1794:

Obscuring of Truths in the Church [From the Decree de Grat., sec. I]

1.  The proposition, which asserts “that in these later times there has been spread a general obscuring of the more important truths pertaining to religion, which are the basis of faith and of the moral teachings of Jesus Christ,”—heretical.

The Power Attributed to the Community of the Church, in Order That by This the Power May Be Communicated to the Pastors

2. The proposition which states “that power has been given by God to the Church, that it might be communicated to the pastors who are its ministers for the salvation of souls”; if thus understood that the power of ecclesiastical ministry and of rule is derived from the COMMUNITY of the faithful to the pastors,—heretical.

The Name Ministerial Head Attributed to the Roman Pontiff

3. In addition, the proposition which states “that the Roman Pontiff is the ministerial head,” if it is so explained that the Roman Pontiff does not receive from Christ in the person of blessed Peter, but from the Church, the power of ministry, which as successor of Peter, true vicar of Christ and head of the whole Church he possesses in the universal Church,—heretical.’

The Power of the Church for the Establishing and the Sanctioning of Exterior Discipline

4. The proposition affirming, “that it would be a misuse of the authority of the Church, when she transfers that authority beyond the limits of doctrine and of morals, and extends it to exterior matters, and demands by force that which depends on persuasion and love”; and then also, “that it pertains to it much less, to demand by force exterior obedience to its decrees”; in so far as by those undefined words, “extends to exterior matters,” the proposition censures as an abuse of the authority of the Church the use of its power received from God, which the apostles themselves used in establishing and sanctioning exterior discipline—heretical.

5. In that part in which the proposition insinuates that the Church “does not have authority to demand obedience to its decrees otherwise than by means which depend on persuasion; in so far as it intends that the Church has not conferred on it by God the power, not only of directing by counsel and persuasion, but also of ordering by laws, and of constraining and forcing the inconstant and stubborn by exterior judgment and salutary punishments” leading toward a system condemned elsewhere as heretical.. . . .

Calumnies Against Some Decisions in the Matter of Faith Which Have Come Down from Several Centuries

12. The assertions of the synod, accepted as a whole concerning decisions in the matter of faith which have come down from several centuries, which it represents as decrees originating from one particular church or from a few pastors, unsupported by sufficient authority, formulated for the corruption of the purity of faith and for causing disturbance, introduced by violence, from which wounds, still too recent, have been inflicted,—false, deceitful, rash, scandalous, injurious to the Roman Pontiffs and the Church, derogatory to the obedience due to the Apostolic Constitutions, schismatic, dangerous, at least erroneous.

The So-called Peace of Clement IX

13. The proposition reported among the acts of the synod, which intimates that Clement IX restored peace to the Church by the approval of the distinction of right and deed in the subscription to the formulary written by Alexander VII (see n. 1ogg),—false, rash, injurious to Clement IX.

14. In so far as it approves that distinction by extolling its supporters with praise and by berating their opponents,—rash, pernicious, injurious to the Supreme Pontiffs, fostering schism and heresy.

The Composition of the Body of the Church

15. The doctrine which proposes that the Church “must be considered as one mystical body composed of Christ, the head, and the faithful, who are its members through an ineffable union, by which in a marvelous way we become with Him one sole priest, one sole victim, one sole perfect adorer of God the Father, in spirit and in truth,” under-stood in this sense, that no one belongs to the body of the Church except the faithful, who are perfect adorers in spirit and in truth,—heretical. (Pope Pius VI, Auctorem Fidei, August 28, 1794.)

Pope Pius IX condemned men such as Cantalamessa and Bergoglio in his first encyclical letter, Qui Pluribus, November 9, 1846:

 

15. Also perverse is the shocking theory that it makes no difference to which religion one belongs, a theory which is greatly at variance even with reason. By means of this theory, those crafty men remove all distinction between virtue and vice, truth and error, honorable and vile action. They pretend that men can gain eternal salvation by the practice of any religion, as if there could ever be any sharing between justice and iniquity, any collaboration between light and darkness, or any agreement between Christ and Belial.

16. The sacred celibacy of clerics has also been the victim of conspiracy. Indeed, some churchmen have wretchedly forgotten their own rank and let themselves be converted by the charms and snares of pleasure. This is the aim too of the prevalent but wrong method of teaching, especially in the philosophical disciplines, a method which deceives and corrupts incautious youth in a wretched manner and gives it as drink the poison of the serpent in the goblet of Babylon. To this goal also tends the unspeakable doctrine of Communism, as it is called, a doctrine most opposed to the very natural law. For if this doctrine were accepted, the complete destruction of everyone’s laws, government, property, and even of human society itself would follow.

17. To this end also tend the most dark designs of men in the clothing of sheep, while inwardly ravening wolves. They humbly recommend themselves by means of a feigned and deceitful appearance of a purer piety, a stricter virtue and discipline; after taking their captives gently, they mildly bind them, and then kill them in secret. They make men fly in terror from all practice of religion, and they cut down and dismember the sheep of the Lord. To this end, finally — to omit other dangers which are too well known to you — tends the widespread disgusting infection from books and pamphlets which teach the lessons of sinning. These works, well-written and filled with deceit and cunning, are scattered at immense cost through every region for the destruction of the Christian people. They spread pestilential doctrines everywhere and deprave the minds especially of the imprudent, occasioning great losses for religion.

18. As a result of this filthy medley of errors which creeps in from every side, and as the result of the unbridled license to think, speak and write, We see the following: morals deteriorated, Christ’s most holy religion despised, the majesty of divine worship rejected, the power of this Apostolic See plundered, the authority of the Church attacked and reduced to base slavery, the rights of bishops trampled on, the sanctity of marriage infringed, the rule of every government violently shaken and many other losses for both the Christian and the civil commonwealth. Venerable brothers, We are compelled to weep and share in your lament that this is the case.

19. Therefore, in this great crisis for religion, because We are greatly concerned for the salvation of all the Lord’s flock and in fulfillment of the duty of Our Apostolic ministry, We shall certainly leave no measure untried in Our vigorous effort to secure the good of the whole Christian family. Indeed, We especially call forth in the Lord your own illustrious piety, virtue and prudence, venerable brothers. With these and relying on heavenly aid, you may fearlessly defend the cause of God and His holy Church as befits your station and the office for which you are marked. You must fight energetically, since you know very well what great wounds the undefiled Spouse of Christ Jesus has suffered, and how vigorous is the destructive attack of Her enemies. You must also care for and defend the Catholic faith with episcopal strength and see that the flock entrusted to you stands to the end firm and unmoved in the faith. For unless one preserves the faith entire and uninjured, he will without doubt perish forever. (Pope Pius IX, Qui Pluribus, November 9, 1846.)

So much for Raniero Cantalamessa, whose heresy is notorious and well-documented over the course of his wretched career (see, among many other articles, Say What,Father Cantalamessa?, No Ambiguity HereEver Endeavoring to Make Judas Seem AdmirableWhat’s Next? “Beatifying” Manel Pousa?) So much for the letting “the Holy Spirit” blow as He will, although the Third Person of the Most Blessed Trinity bends with the changes in the world to discard how He has directed Holy Mother Church in the past. Such a suggestion is apostasy and blasphemy of the highest order.

So much for Jorge Mario Bergoglio/Francis, who shows us very clearly by his words and actions that he does not believe in much of the Catholic Faith, starting with Papal Primacy itself. A simple wave of the act and “fiat” by the “Petrine Minister” just makes doctrine and rubrics disappear before our very eyes without having to resort to the philosophically absurd and dogmatic condemned “living tradition” of Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II and the “hermeneutic of continuity” of Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI.

This is why, as mentioned two days ago in This Is No Longer The Subject Of Parody, Jorge Mario Bergoglio felt free to offend even the tender sensibilities of “conservative” Catholics attached to the structures of his false church in the delusional belief that it is the Catholic Church by washing the feet of two women, including a Serbian Mohammedan, in the Roman Juvenile Detention Centre on Maundy Thursday, March 28, 2013, during the Protestant and Masonic Novus Ordo liturgical service’s “Mass of the Lord’s Supper.” Some of these “conservatives” believe themselves to be experts in the conciliar “code of canon law” that contradicts the Catholic Church in many instances, and they are struggling to explain what their beloved “pope” has done.

Indeed, the original posting of a New York Daily News article on the washing of the women’s feet contained a quote, since removed in a later posting, attributed to “Father” John Zuhlsdorf of the “What Does the Prayer Really Say” website exercise in conciliar propaganda and intellectual gymnastics, that had “‘Father’ Z” saying that it was important to try to “figure out” what Bergoglio/Francis is doing, that perhaps it is the case that he is doing all manner of “liberal” things now in order to get “liberals” on his “side” so that they cannot criticize him when he reaffirms Catholic doctrine on various points. No wonder “Father” Zuhlsdorf altered his confused thinking later by writing on his blog that alleged canon lawyers had to figure out when a “pope” can violated what is said to be canon law. This is inanity. Insanity.

Jorge Mario Bergoglio is doing as Petrine Minister Francis what he was doing in Buenos Aires, Argentina. He washed the feet of women on Maundy Thursday in Argentina. He did so in Rome three days ago. What’s the big deal? This is who the man is, a revolutionary who has no regard for liturgical norms, to which he will abide only in certain circumstances while feeling otherwise justified in discarding as the occasion necessitates.

Bergoglio probably  used “girl altar boys” as a layman presbyter long before they were approved officially in 1994 by Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II, an act that constituted my definitive break with the delusion that the “Polish Pope” was going to restore the Catholic Church. I had fought that battle to the point of tracking down the syncretist Mother Teresa in Hong Kong at the request of Father John A. Hardon, S.J., to convince her to telephone the “pope” to stop such permission from happening before it became an accomplished fact. Mother Teresa assured me that she would call the “pope,” saying, “This will be a disaster for the Church. They will be pushing for women priests next.” She agreed to call Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II, reaching his omnipotent secretary, the then Monsignor Stanislaw Dziwisz, now the conciliar “cardinal” archbishop of Krakow, Poland, being told that the decision had been made. I was told by Father Hardon that Mother Teresa was flabbergasted by the turnaround. So was I, which I is why I wrote a very strong “open letter” to Wojtyla/John Paul II in The Wanderer that closed with the following sentence, “Why have you rewarded the dissenters?”

I was an idiot, something, of course, that I remain in so many respects (there, beat you to the punch, all right?).

Karol Wojtyla/John Paul defected from numerous points of the Catholic Faith. Why be concerned about “girl altar boys” when the man I believed to be “waiting for the right moment” to “restore” the Church and get rid of the “bad bishops” had said that the Old Covenant had never been abrogated and who engaged in various acts of “inter-religious prayer services,” egregious outdoor “liturgies” and praised one false religion after another, including “voodoo” (see Voodoo You Trust).

Similarly, the “conservatives” and “canon law” Perry Masons in the counterfeit church of conciliarism who are in a tizzy over Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s washing of the feet of women on Maundy Thursday, March 28, 2013, had their heads collectively in the sand with their mouths sealed shut by cement and their fingers bound together by super glue whenever their “champion,” Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict entered a place of false worship to be treated as a inferior and as he praised the ability of one false religion after another to “contribute” to the “betterment” of the world. These “conservatives” and “canon law” Perry Masons saw no evil and they spoke no evil. It is almost as though they wanted to say, “Direct violations of the First and Second Commandments are not covered any longer by canon law. Things do change after all.”

As has been demonstrated amply on this site and at Novus Ordo Watch amply in the past eighteen days, Bergoglio/Francis is no less a blasphemer than Ratzinger/Benedict. The “conservatives” and canon law Perry Masons have not said a word about Jorge Bergoglio’s being “blessed” by Protestant ministers–in front of Father Raniero Cantalamessa, by the way–in Argentina or lighting a menorah or by other acts showing the kind of “esteem” for false religions condemned by Saint Paul the Apostle, denounced by Pope Leo XIII in Custodi Di Quella Fede, December 8, 1892, and denounced by Pope Saint Pius X in Notre Charge Apostolique, August 15, 1910.

Such people must remain blind and deaf when a Vatican spin doctor named “Father” Thomas Rosica, whom we met before in Coming Soon: The Two-Headed “Pope” Monster, justifies Bergoglio/Francis’s liturgical “impropriety” on Maundy Thursday in a way that no doubt brought a tear the the eyes of Father Cantalamessa and Layman Bergoglio:

 

In response to the many questions and concerns raised over Pope Francis washing the feet of 12 young people at the Roman Juvenile Detention Centre

on Holy Thursday evening, especially that two were young women, Fr. Lombardi has sent me the following information to be shared with you.

One can easily understand that in a great celebration, men would be chosen for the foot washing because Jesus, himself washing the feet of the twelve apostles who were male.  However the ritual of the washing of the feet on Holy Thursday evening in the Juvenile Detention Centre in Rome took place in a particular, small community that included young women.  When Jesus washed the feet of those who were with him on the first Holy Thursday, he desired to teach all a lesson about the meaning of service, using a gesture that included all members of the community.

We are aware of the photos that show Cardinal Jorge Bergoglio, then-Archbishop of Buenos Aires, who in various pastoral settings washed the feet of young men and women.  To have excluded the young women from the ritual washing of feet on Holy Thursday night in this Roman prison, would have detracted our attention from the essence of the Holy Thursday Gospel, and the very beautiful and simple gesture of a father who desired to embrace those who were on the fringes of society; those who were not refined experts of liturgical rules.

That the Holy Father, Francis, washed the feet of young men and women on his first Holy Thursday as Pope, should call our minds and hearts to the simple and spontaneous gesture of love, affection, forgiveness and mercy of the Bishop of Rome, more than to legalistic, liturgical or canonical discussions. (Vatican Spokesman on Participation of 2 Women in Foot Washing Ceremony.)

Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, “Father” Rosica, did not just happen to have “any” member of “the community” present at the Last Supper on Maundy Thursday. He had the Apostles, whom He was ordaining to the fullness of the Holy Priesthood at that very moment. He was teaching them to serve others, most especially by removing the dirt on the souls of sinners in the Sacred Tribunal of Penance. It is really very, very simple.

Modernists must seek to rationalize their actions as they are rationalists, which is why Bergoglio’s fellow Jesuit and Thomas Rosica’s superior in the Press Office of the Holy Week, got into the act himself:

 

The Vatican’s chief spokesman, the Rev. Federico Lombardi, said the pope’s decision was “absolutely licit” for a rite that is not a church sacrament. Francis also took into account “the real situation, the community where one celebrates,” Lombardi added.

The Casal del Marmo prison where Francis celebrated houses both young men and women, “and it would have been strange if girls had been excluded,” Lombardi said.

“This community understands simple and essential things; they were not liturgy scholars,” Lombardi said. “Washing feet was important to present the Lord’s spirit of service and love.”

A document issued by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops says that the inclusion of women in the foot-washing rite is an “understandable way of accentuating the evangelical command of the Lord,’who came to serve and not to be served,’ that all members of the church must serve one another in love.”

The bishops’ document continues, “It has become customary in many places to invite both men and women to be participants in this rite in recognition of the service that should be given by all the faithful to the church and to the world.” (Vatican defends Pope Francis’ washing of women’s fee.)

When in doubt, of course, rationalize. It’s just a matter of not “hurting anyone’s feelings,” right?

Wrong.

Everything about the Catholic Faith is “up for grabs” in the counterfeit church of conciliarism.

Kneel for the reception of the sacramentally invalid rite of confirmation in the conciliar church?

Not in front of “Pope” Francis last night at the Novus Ordo version of the “Easter Vigil Mass.” The poor, unsuspecting confirmandi stood before the false “pontiff,” who gave them a kiss rather than a slap on the cheek.

Women sponsoring men at last night’s alleged “confirmation” ceremony in the Basilica of Saint Peter.

Not a problem. Come right on up. Meet Jorge. Have a photograph taken. Get a chance to buy the photograph at the store of the Vatican’s official photographer for a nice tidy sum of Euros. Nothing going on here, certainly not a true administration of the Sacrament of Confirmation.

Men such as Raniero Cantalamessa and Jorge Mario Bergoglio are very predictable. So are their “conservative” defenders in the conciliar structures, men who will not believe that the Antichrist is among them unless he can show them his credentials.

The conciliar revolutionaries, including each of the six conciliar “popes” and their appointees and subordinates, keep showing us that they are figures of the Antichrist. They have established their credentials. How can anyone deny this? For what reason? Fear of admitting that these men are not Catholics and cannot be true and legitimate Successors of Saint Peter, that the horrible species of persons known as “sedevacantists” are correct?

The apostasy is in our faces.

The blasphemy cries out to Heaven for vengeance.

Even though it is the time of Easter rejoicing, we still have much for which to make reparation, especially by means of praying as many Rosaries each day as our state-in-life permits and by enduring whatever suffering that must come our way for our refusal to have any association at all with men who are figures of Antichrist and thus enemies of Christ the King and of the souls He redeemed by shedding every single drop of His Most Precious Blood on the wood of the Holy Cross on Good Friday.

The Mystical Body of Christ here on earth will know its resurrection one day. For the moment, though, she is in the tomb. We must keep close to Our Lady as it will be the Triumph of her Immaculate Heart that will make possible this resurrection and thus the vanquishing of conciliarism and its offenses once and for all.

Isn’t it time to pray a Rosary now?

Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary, pray for us now and at the hour of our death.

Viva Cristo Rey! Vivat Christus Rex!

Our Lady of the Rosary, pray for us.

Saint Joseph, pray for us.

Saints Peter and Paul, pray for us.

Saint John the Baptist, pray for us.

Saint John the Evangelist, pray for us.

Saint Michael the Archangel, pray for us.

Saint Gabriel the Archangel, pray for us.

Saint Raphael the Archangel, pray for us.

Saints Joachim and Anne, pray for us.

Saints Caspar, Melchior and Balthasar, pray for us.

http://www.christorchaos.com/OneHereticSpeaksAnotherListens.htm

No comments yet.

Leave a Reply

Intronizacja
Optimization WordPress Plugins & Solutions by W3 EDGE