This edition of CF NEWS No.2307 posted at 12.33 pm on Sunday, November 24th, 2019







Pope is subjecting Church to ‘powerful forces’ that want world government   read more >>>
Hell is real, Cardinal Sarah warns    read more >>>
Head of Vatican financial regulator leaves job after police raids
   read more >>>
Pope embraces Imam who wants Christian converts killed
   read more >>>
Ven. Fulton Sheen to be beatified in December
   read more >>>
BishopSchneider: Pachamama was worshiped at Vatican. It wasn’t harmless    VIDEO    read more >>>
Archbishop Viganò decries Pope-approved plan to build ‘Abrahamic’ religious site    read more >>> International arrest warrant for Bishop Zanchetta requested  read more >>>
'Fearless,' 'heroic': Young Catholics    VIDEO    read more >>>
Bishop describes struggle between John Paul II and Saint Gallen Group    read more >>>


How to defend Humanae Vitae    VIDEO    read more >>>


Advent and Christmas family traditions   VIDEO    read more >>>


Faithful bishop escapes Communist guards   read more >>>


'Sustainable Development' and the Church sold into slavery    read more >>>
UN's 'Sustainable Development goals' and Pachamama
   VIDEO    read more >>>
Trump pro-life diplomacy roils General Assembly debates  read more >>>


NETHERLANDS Bishop joins call for Pope to repent of Pachamama idolatry    read more >>>
UK Labour would totally decriminalise abortion, party spokeswoman confirms   read more >>>
UK Idol threats    read more >>>
UK Whites can be black if they wish, says lecturers' union
   read more >>>
UK Pro-life students fight student union adopting pro-abortion policy    read more >>>
USA Cardinal Cupich again downplays centrality of abortion as moral issue   read more >>>
USA Fr. Martin announces major pro-gay conference
   read more >>>
USA Parents struggle as 'trans' phenomenon explodes    read more >>>
INTERNATIONAL The World Over with Raymond Arroyo   VIDEO    read more >>>
INTERNATIONAL A few more headlines of the week
   read more >>>
INTERNATIONAL gloria.tv.news
   VIDEO    read more >>>
   VIDEO    read more >>>


Spring is come    VIDEO    read more >>>


Dr Taylor Marshall responds to critics of Infiltration    VIDEO    read more >>>
Mitre and Crook  read more >>>
Bishop Schneider's handbook for correcting errors    read more >>>
Encounters with demoniacs, real witches   VIDEO    read more >>>
Scalfari book exposes young Bergoglio's communist leanings    read more >>>


The Vatican, Gustavo Zanchetta & James Martin    VIDEO    read more >>>
World's Catholics resist Pope Francis    VIDEO    read more >>>
The Epistle of St. Jude: A letter for our present crisis    read more >>>
Abrahamic Family House: End Stage of “the Great Movement of Apostasy”?    read more >>>
The temporary suspense of the function of the Papal Magisterium    read more >>>
The Meaning of a Porkless Vatican   read more >>>
Boring oneself   read more >>>
Orthodoxy and liberalism within the hierarchy read more >>>


Site of the day    read more >>>
Connections, connections; Patrimony, Patrimony!!
   read more >>>
Stabat Mater
   VIDEO    read more >>>


St Gregory of Nyssa    read more >>>



By courtesy of Canon 212




Recent editions

For last edition of CF News click here

EWTN live television coverage

For UK / Ireland click here
For Asia / Pacific click here
For Africa / Asia click here
































Archbishop Vigano: Pope is subjecting Church to "powerful forces" that want world government  
ARCHBISHOP CARLO MARIA VIGANÒ writes ~ – For twenty centuries, the Catholic Church has professed faith in Jesus Christ, the only Savior, which has come down to us intact, as she received it from the Apostles and Fathers of the Church at the price of the blood of the Martyrs, and by the witness of the Confessors of the faith and of innumerable Saints of every people and language. This faith has been handed down by parents to their children, by priests and religious; it has been spread by zealous missionaries to every continent in the world, under the guidance of the successors of the Apostle Peter who have guaranteed the unity of Christ’s Bride by confirming the brethren in the faith.

For almost seven years now, the successor of the Prince of the Apostles, who was entrusted with the mandate Christ conferred on Peter after his profession of faith — “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God” (Mt 16:18) — has abdicated his ministry to confirm the brethren in the faith. Pope Francis has never confirmed anyone. We painfully acknowledge how divisive and destructive his ministry has been.

With the declaration he signed in Abu Dhabi, in which he states that “The pluralism and the diversity of religions, color, sex, race and language are willed by God in His wisdom,” and by his constant deviant condemnations of so-called “proselytism,” Francis has not only mortified every missionary impulse but has indeed rejected the mandate given by Christ to all the Apostles: “Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you” (Mt 28:18-20).

The strategy of the current pontiff is camouflaged by deceit and lies, and concealed by silence, when it is discovered in his deviant intentions what great confusion among the faithful, while they are astutely praised by the enemies of the Church.

The Synod on the Amazon is also part of a much larger and hidden design. It is nothing but an element, albeit a disruptive one, of a vast project, developed under the aegis of the United Nations and supported by the great financial and Masonic powers. How can we explain that the Pachamama idol is already present, through a UN initiative, in texts designed for the ideological indoctrination of children?

Everything stands and fits together: a false science founded on an alleged catastrophic warming of the earth which is chiefly caused by man; an integral ecology which places at the center of creation not man created in the image and likeness of God, and called to share divine life in a blessed eternity with his Creator, but the Mother Earth “divinity,” i.e. the Pachamama, from which man is drawn and to which he must return. From this standpoint, therefore, even idolatry is willed by God, and Pope Francis celebrates it before the world, profaning the most sacred place in Christian Rome — the basilica built on the tomb of the Apostle Peter.

During the recent Synod, a grave sacrilegious act was consummated through the inaugural celebration held in the Vatican Gardens and the appearance of the Pachamama in San Peter’s and Santa Maria in Traspontina. The worship of the living and true God, revealed and manifested in Jesus Christ, whom the Catholic Church adores and professes, has been contaminated by clearly idolatrous and syncretistic elements.

Idolatry, or its simulation, represents the most serious attack perpetrated against the Divine Majesty. The martyrs shed their blood and paid for their resistance of idolatry with the supreme gift of their lives. Those same martyrs who have drenched and consecrated the earth of ancient pagan Rome, have seen their glorious memory profaned by the celebrations of the Pachamama.

The Scriptures of the Old Testament teach us that idolatry is shamelessness and prostitution, it is the profanation of the nuptial covenant that God has entered into with his people.

St. Paul, for his part, warns the first Christians of Corinth: “What do I imply then … that an idol is anything? No, I imply that what pagans sacrifice they offer to demons and not to God. I do not want you to be partners with demons. You cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons. You cannot partake of the table of the Lord and the table of demons. Shall we provoke the Lord to jealousy? Are we stronger than he?” (1 Cor 10:19-22).

The Catholic Church, instead of being vigilant and denouncing the threats which menace her and darken the horizon of the entire human family, is lending itself to serve as a sounding board for a utopian and anti-Christic ideology, in a frightening subjection to the powerful forces that dominate the world scene and are actively promoting vast processes aimed at the establishment of a World Government.

Faced with such a scenario, in which the very survival of the Catholic Church is seriously threatened; in the face of so many reprehensible actions and statements by the Supreme Pontiff, one hundred scholars have drafted a Declaration asking “respectfully for Pope Francis to publicly and without ambiguity to repent and to repair these outrages.” I felt it was my duty to unite my own voice to theirs. In similar fashion, all bishops and cardinals of the Catholic Church should feel obliged to “address a fraternal correction to Pope Francis for these scandals.”

“O God, who in the grace of adoption has called us to become children of light, let us no longer be enveloped by the darkness of error but grant us to remain always in your truth, so as to illumine the night of the world” (From today’s Ambrosian liturgy).

Come, Lord Jesus! Manifest your sovereign royalty over your Church and the world! Reject not the plea of ??your Bride, and do not disappoint her expectation. And when you do not grant what we ask of you, let us wait for it with faithful perseverance and penitent love

[LSN] 2307.1a























Hell is real, Cardinal Sarah warns

PAUL MURANO reports for ChurchMilitant.com -- Cardinal Robert Sarah in a recent homily warned the faithful how easy it is to fall into the darkness and despair of hell.

Concelebrating with two fellow bishops, Sarah presided over the Nov. 15 morning Mass at the 30th National Forum of Catholic Schools, at Jasna Góra Monastery in Czstochowa, Poland.

Echoing St. Paul's exhortation in Romans 1:25, Sarah noted that worship of God is natural for man and has been universally practiced since the dawn of his existence, but that original sin distorts man's religious sense and leads him to worship created things rather than the Creator.

"The Holy Scriptures state that even before God's revelation to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, man inherently felt the need to adore his Creator," Sarah stated. Referring to the book of Wisdom, he continued, "This desire was deeply rooted in his heart. That is why he adored what in creation he considered works that delight him with power and splendor - fire, wind, starry sky, and rushing water. Captivated by their beauty, they took them for deities."

A consistent theme of the Old Testament was God weaning his chosen people off the idols of their contemporaries around them, into proper worship of the one true God. But even in the Christian era, Sarah noted, idol worship has remained a constant threat, perhaps never more than it is in society today.

"In our time, gods have different names, but the reality of idolatry is unfortunately still rooted in our soul marked by sin," the cardinal warned, adding:

Sure, we no longer adore fire, the starry sky, or other such elements found in nature, but rather idols that we have invented ourselves, scientific discoveries, technological, economic, industrial and industrial achievements. All the things that are good in themselves but prove fatal when you make them an idol - simply because we forget about Him who created them and who infinitely surpasses us.

"What is happening today?" asked the cardinal. "The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob is not only no longer confessed as the only Lord, the only Creator, but the God of Abraham disappears from the horizon of humanity," he said.

"The God of Jesus Christ, and Jesus Christ the only Saviour and Redeemer, is being eliminated; and some even claim, in the name of false secularity, that the God of religion is unnecessary," Cardinal Sarah cautioned.

"If we persist in an attitude of idolatry, concerned only with the accumulation of goods, if we are voluntarily stuck in the darkness of sin, which consists in adoring the idols of our time, then we will be thrown into the darkness of hell," he cautioned. "We are responsible for our eternity."

The cardinal's homily reflected the teachings of Scripture and tradition regarding damnation. Jesus warns against hell at least fifteen times in the gospels, as do New Testament writers St. James, St. Paul, St. John, and St. Peter.

It also echoed the warning of the Blessed Virgin Mary in her private revelation to the children in Fatima, which has been approved by the Church.

Shown a glimpse of hell, the children cried out in horror at the sight. "You have seen hell where the souls of poor sinners go," Mary said to them.

She went on to tell them of the devotion to her Immaculate Heart which, in union with the Sacred Heart of her Son, will help save souls from hell. She also taught them the "Oh My Jesus" prayer to pray at the end of each decade of the Rosary, and encouraged the children to continue praying the rosary every day for the conversion obstinate sinners to Christ. Saint Jacinta Marto, one of the seers, later added that "sins which cause most souls to go to hell are sins of the flesh."

In union with Jesus, Mary and the saints, the cardinal's homily on Friday warned against worshipping the "idols of our time." Most observers recognize, with Cardinal Sarah and St. Jacinta of Fatima, that money and sex are at the top of that list.

[CMTV] 2307.1






















Head of Vatican financial regulator leaves job weeks after police raids

PHILIP PULLELLA reports for Reuters -- The Vatican said on Monday the head of its financial regulator would leave, weeks after unprecedented police raids on his organisation and another key arm of the Catholic Church's bureaucracy.

Rene Bruelhart, a 47-year-old Swiss lawyer, told Reuters he had resigned from the top job at the Financial Information Authority (AIF), but did not go into further detail.

Vatican police entered the offices of the AIF and of the Secretariat of State - the administrative heart of the Catholic Church - on Oct. 1, as part of an investigation into an investment the Secretariat hade made in London real estate.

The officers, operating under a search warrant secured by the Vatican's own prosecutor, seized documents and computers.

The head of the Secretariat, Cardinal Pietro Parolin, last month acknowledged that the property deal had not been transparent and promised to shed light on it.

The AIF board, headed by Bruelhart, has said the regulator did nothing wrong when it looked over the property investment.

A Vatican statement said Bruelhart would leave at the end of his five-year term on Tuesday and a successor would be named after Pope Francis returns from a trip to Asia on Nov. 26.

"I resigned," Bruelhart told Reuters by phone shortly after the announcement was made.

Five Vatican employees were suspended immediately after the Oct. 1 raids, including AIF director Tommaso di Ruzza.

Two weeks later, Domenico Giani, the Vatican's longtime security chief and the pope's personal bodyguard, resigned over the leak of a document related to the investigation.

Vatican prosecutor Gian Piero Milano is looking into possible crimes such as embezzlement, abuse of office, fraud and money laundering connected to the purchase of the building by the Secretariat of State, according to people familiar with his search warrant.

The Secretariat of State spent about $200 million in 2014 for a minority stake in a complex plan to buy the building in London's Chelsea district and convert it into luxury apartments.

The personnel changes at the AIF come as the Vatican is preparing for a new evaluation by Moneyval, a monitoring body of the Council of Europe, which has given Vatican financial reforms mostly positive reviews in its most recent evaluations.

Moneyval executive secretary Matthias Kloth told Reuters last month after the police raids that the organisation was "following developments closely". He said Moneyval's onsite visit will go ahead as scheduled next spring ahead of a new evaluation in December.

Board member resigns

PHIL LAWLER reports for CatholicCulture.com ~ A member of the board of the Vatican's Financial Information Authority (AIF) has resigned, telling the Associated Press that there is "no point in staying on the board of an empty shell."

The resignation of Marc Odenhall, a Swiss banker and philanthropist, follows closely after the departure of Rene Bruelhart, the president of AIF and also a board member. In his remarks to AP, Odenhall left no doubt that the AIF has been fighting a losing battle to protect its autonomy.

Questions about the independence of the AIF came to the fore in October, when Vatican police raided the agency's offices, and the AIF's director, Tommaso Di Ruzza, was suspended. The Vatican has not provided an explanation for the raid or the suspension.

However, informed Vatican officials indicate that the AIF was caught up in a power struggle with other Vatican agencies, notably the Secretariat of State, which sought to curb the AIF's access to details of certain financial transfers.

The AIF was established by Pope Benedict XVI in 2010, and charged with responsibility for supervising financial transactions, in a bid to restore international confidence in the Vatican's financial affairs. The AIF has enjoyed some success in that task, bringing the Vatican into compliance with international banking standards. That progress could be jeopardized, however, by the latest developments.

Vatican prosecutors have still not given the AIF a listing of the documents that were confiscated during the October raid, sources disclose. And the removal of documents itself endangers the AIF's standing with international banking authorities, since the AIF is obligated to protect the confidentiality of materials shared by international banking regulators and law-enforcement officials.

The uncertain status of AIF comes at a time when Vatican financial affairs are under new critical scrutiny. "We cannot access information and we cannot share information," complained Odenhall in explaining his decision to resign.

Bruelhart's departure was almost certainly due to the same frustration. The departing president has told reporters that he resigned. Vatican officials offer a different story, saying that the president's term had expired. But there was no set term for his office.

[Reuters/LSN] 2307.2






















Pope embraces anti-semitic imam who wants Christian converts killed

JULES GOMES reports for ChurchMilitant.com ~ Hours before Pope Francis called for the abolition of capital punishment on Friday, he warmly embraced Grand Imam Al-Tayeb, who has expressed his desire that Muslims who convert to Christianity should be executed.

The world's best-known Muslim leader has also called homosexuality a disease, dismissed the idea of human rights as "ticking time-bombs" and has endorsed suicide attacks against Jewish men, women and children.

Earlier that day in the pontiff's address to the International Association of Penal Law, Pope Francis compared the rhetoric of conservative politicians who oppose the homosexual agenda to speeches made by Adolf Hitler.

In 2016, Al-Tayeb called for 'unrepentant apostates' from Islam to be killed.Tweet

"These are actions that are typical of Nazism, that with its persecution of Jews, gypsies, people with homosexual orientation, represent an excellent model of the throwaway culture and culture of hatred," he said.

When speaking to al-Tayeb, however, the Holy Father discussed the objectives in the document "Human Fraternity for World Peace and Living Together," which he co-signed with the Grand Imam in February.

The two religious leaders engaged in "cordial discussions," according to the Vatican, talking about the protection of minors in the digital world and goals achieved since Pope Francis' recent visit to the United Arab Emirates.

In 2016, Al-Tayeb called for "unrepentant apostates" from Islam to be killed. "The four schools of law all concur that apostasy is a crime, that an apostate should be asked to repent, and that if he does not, he should be killed," he said in an interview in Arabic on television, explaining:

There are two verses in the Quran that clearly mention apostasy, but they did not define a specific punishment. They left the punishment for the Hereafter, for Allah to punish them as He sees fit. But there are two hadiths [on apostasy]. According to the more reliable of the two, a Muslim can only be killed in one of three cases, one of which is abandoning his religion and leaving the community.

Sheikh Al-Tayeb continued: 'We must examine these two expressions: "Abandoning religion" is described as "leaving the community." All the early jurisprudents understood that this applies to someone who leaves his religion, regardless of whether he left and opposed his community or not. All the early jurisprudents said that such a person should be killed, regardless of whether it is a man or a woman - with the exception of the Hanafi School, which says that a female apostate should not be killed.

Asked about the exception for the female apostate, the Muslim theologian responded: "Because it is inconceivable that a woman would rebel against her community."

The global leader of Sunni Islam, which constitutes the majority of the world's Muslim population, also dismissed the concept of human rights as "full of ticking time-bombs" and insisted that "the [Islamic and Western] civilizations are different."

"Our civilization is based on religion and moral values, whereas their [Western] civilization is based more on personal liberties and some moral values," he told his interviewer.

The Grand Imam's most severe condemnation was reserved for homosexuality: "My opinion was - and I said this [in the West] - that no Muslim society could ever consider sexual liberty, homosexuality and so on to be a personal right. Muslim societies consider these things to be diseases, which must be fought and treated."

At a meeting of the Muslim Council of Elders in Indonesia, Al-Tayeb castigated Christian leaders in the West who are tolerant of gay rights: "Unfortunately some heads of churches in the United States accept same-sex marriages. What will the heads of churches in the US that accept gay marriage say to Jesus? I wonder what is left of the Bible in those Churches. And what will they say in front of Jesus, peace be upon him."

The day before Pope Francis met Al-Tayeb, Church Militant reported on the pontiff welcoming notorious Anglican lesbian activist Jayne Ozanne, who has been campaigning to criminalize reparative therapy, which is counseling to eliminate unwanted same-sex desires.

Al-Tayeb blames Israel for terrorism in the Middle East, calling the Jewish state a "dagger plunged into the body of the Arab world," saying that were it not for "Zionist entity abuse ... the Middle East would have progressed."

"Francis kissed an anti-Semite and an Islamist of the worst kind," observed Italian journalist Giulio Meotti.

Al-Tayeb fanned the flames of terrorism during the Second Intifada by saying that "the Palestinians have the right to blow up everything they want - women, children, bars, buses, as long as the victims are Jewish Zionists."

"The solution to Israeli terror lies in the proliferation of suicide attacks that spread terror into the hearts of Allah's enemies," he said.

Al-Tayeb suspended all dialogue with the Vatican in 2011 after he took offense at comments made by Pope Benedict XVI on the persecution of Christians in Muslim countries. Benedict called for the protection of Christians after a New Year's bombing on a Coptic Christian church in Alexandria killed 21 people.

Islamic scholar Raymond Ibrahim has identified Al-Tayeb's "dialogue" with Pope Francis with the Islamic practice of taqiyya, or deception.

"While such open hypocrisy - also known as taqiyya - may go unnoticed in the West, in Egypt, human rights groups often call him out," writes Ibrahim.

He cites a statement from the Cairo Institute for Human Rights accusing Al-Azhar of having two faces: one directed at the West and which preaches freedom and tolerance, and one directed to Muslims and which sounds not unlike ISIS: "In March 2016 before the German parliament, Sheikh Al-Tayeb made unequivocally clear that religious freedom is guaranteed by the Koran, while in Cairo he makes the exact opposite claims."

Christians "should be aware that things are not always what they first seem on the surface" when dialoguing with Muslims, cautions Robert R. Reilly in The Prospects and Perils of Catholic-Muslim Dialogue. "A Muslim can see the same word and understand it differently."

At his meeting with Pope Francis, the Grand Imam was accompanied by the Deputy Prime Minister of the United Arab Emirates H.E. Saif bin Zayed Al Nahyan, and by the ambassador of the Republic of Egypt to the Holy See, H.E. Mahmoud Samy.

Also present were representatives of Al-Azhar University, Cardinal Miguel Angel Ayuso Guixot, president of the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue and Bishop Yoannis Lahzi Gaid, the pope's secretary.

[CMTV] 2307.3






















Venerable Fulton Sheen to be beatified in December

Ven. F SheenCATHOLIC NEWS AGENCY reports -- The Diocese of Peoria announced on Monday that Venerable Fulton Sheen will be beatified Dec. 21 at the city's Cathedral of Saint Mary of the Immaculate Conception.

Sheen had been ordained a priest of the diocese in that cathedral Sept. 20, 1919.

"It seems entirely fitting that the Beatification will take place at the end of this 100-year anniversary of his ordination to the priesthood," the Peoria diocese stated Nov. 18.

Sheen was born in Illinois in 1895, and was 24 when he was ordained a priest.

He was appointed auxiliary bishop of New York in 1951, and he remained there until his appointment as Bishop of Rochester in 1966. He retired in 1969 and moved back to New York City until his death in 1979.

Sheen was a beloved television catechist during the 1950s and '60s in the United States. His television show "Life is Worth Living" reached an audience of millions.

The Congregation for the Causes of Saints promulgated a decree July 6 recognizing a miracle attributed to Sheen's intercession, which allowed for his beatification.

The miracle involves the unexplained recovery of James Fulton Engstrom, a boy born apparently stillborn in September 2010 to Bonnie and Travis Engstrom of the Peoria-area town of Goodfield. He showed no signs of life as medical professionals tried to revive him. The child's mother and father prayed to Archbishop Sheen to heal their son.

The Peoria diocese opened the cause for Sheen's canonization in 2002, after Archdiocese of New York said it would not explore the case. In 2012, Benedict XVI recognized the heroic virtues of the archbishop.

The beatification follows legal battles in civil courts over the location of Sheen's body.

His corpse was transferred to the Peoria cathedral June 27 after a protracted series of suits.

Sheen's will had declared his wish to be buried in the Archdiocese of New York Calvary Cemetery. Soon after Sheen died, Cardinal Terence Cooke of New York asked Joan Sheen Cunningham, Sheen's niece and closest living relative, if his remains could be placed in the crypt of St. Patrick's Cathedral in New York City, and she consented.

In September 2014, Bishop Daniel Jenky of Peoria suspended Sheen's cause on the grounds that the Holy See expected Sheen's remains to be in the Peoria diocese.

Cunningham has since said that Sheen would have wanted to have been interred in Peoria if he knew that he would be considered for sainthood. In 2016, she filed a legal complaint seeking to have her uncle's remains moved to the Peoria cathedral.

[CH] 2307.4






















Bishop Athanasius Schneider: Pachamama was worshiped at Vatican and it wasn’t harmless

Vatican garden

BISHOP ATHANASIUS SCHNEIDER writes – On October 4, 2019, the feast of St. Francis of Assisi, in the presence of Pope Francis and other high ecclesiastical dignitaries, there was held a ceremony in the Vatican Gardens that was clearly religious in character, as stated in the Vatican press release of October 4, 2019: “During the prayer ceremony, concluding the ‘Season of Creation’ initiative promoted recently by Pope Francis, a tree from Assisi was planted as a symbol of integral ecology, to consecrate the Synod on Amazonia to Saint Francis, shortly before the fortieth anniversary of the papal proclamation of the Poverello of Assisi at the patron of ecologists. At the end of the celebration the Holy Father recited the Lord’s Prayer. The ceremony was attended by representatives of indigenous populations from Amazonia, Franciscan brothers and various members of the Church“

What this statement has concealed is the fact that during this prayer ceremony, religious rites from the pagan religions of the Native Americans took place. There were gestures and words that expressed a religious worship of mythological figures of the aboriginal religion, above all, acts of prostration were performed in front of two naked pregnant female figures, which should represent fertility. There was also a religious dance performed around these figures, in which a woman dressed as a shaman used rattles that symbolized pagan fertility gods. The use of the "maracas" or rattles by the shaman means in the indigenous cults of Amazonia the voice of the spirits and they are used to claim the help of the power of the animals and the spirits. The "Maracas" are one of the most powerful magic instruments for these peoples. The head of the "Maraca" is a pumpkin, with the head of the rattle with the shaft represents the fertilization union of the male world (shaft) with the female world (head). Exactly such "maracas" were used at the "Prayer Ceremony" on October 4th.

The statues depicting naked pregnant women were then placed briefly in the Basilica of St. Peter in front of the Petrine tomb, again in the presence of the Pope, and then during the entire time of the Amazon Synod in the church of Santa Maria Traspontina on the Via della Conciliazione and were in regular prayer ceremonies worshiped in a church with a tabernacle and the Eucharistic presence of Christ. Furthermore, the statue of the naked pregnant woman was even carried on October 19 in a Way of the Cross organized by participants of the Synod.

In the first days after these ceremonies, the Vatican avoided mentioning the exact meaning of the two naked pregnant female figures. Only after these figures were removed on October 21 from the church of Santa Maria in Traspontina and thrown into the Tiber, Pope Francis himself announced on October 25 the identity of these figures, which should symbolize the Pachamama, saying: "I would like to say a word about the statues of Pachamama that were removed from the church in the Traspontina and were there without idolatrous intentions and thrown into the Tiber. This was first done in Rome, and as bishop of the diocese, I apologize for the people who are offended by this gesture."

The Jesuit Father Fernando Lopez, one of the organizers of the veneration of the Pachamama statues in the Vatican, said that these statues were bought at a craft market in Manaus, a city in the Brazilian Amazon, adding that the Pachamama makes sense to all of us and that we should continue "the dance of life on Mother Earth".

To declare all these acts of worship of the Pachamama statues, which always took place during a prayer ceremony and in churches, as non-cultic and not religious, but merely as an expression of culture and folklore and thus declare them as something harmless and trivial, denies the evidence and flees from reality.

In the face of the grave fact of such dubious acts of religious worship, which are obviously at least close to superstition and idolatry, some cardinals, bishops, priests, and many lay people have publicly protested, and some of them have even called Pope Francis to repent and make amends. Unfortunately, these brave voices are criticized even by righteous Catholics, often on the grounds that it personally attacks Pope Francis. Such a reasoning is very reminiscent of the story of the Emperor's new clothes. Others regard the worship of Pachamama statues as harmless and compare this issue to the dispute over the so-called Chinese rites (called the "accommodation dispute") in the 17th and 18th centuries. Those who make such affirmations, lack both factual knowledge of what the Pachamama means to indigenous peoples and the worldwide propaganda of the new "Gaia or Mother Earth religion" today, as well as a more detailed knowledge of the historical problem of Chinese rites and their solution in the 20th century.

The fact that the phenomenon "Pachamama" has a clearly religious connotation already proves its definition in the generally accessible and most frequently consulted sources of information, such as, e.g., in Wikipedia, which states, "Pachamama is a goddess revered by the indigenous people of the Andes. She is also known as the earth/time mother. In Inca mythology, Pachamama is a fertility goddess who presides over planting and harvesting, embodies the mountains, and causes earthquakes. She is also an ever-present and independent deity who has her own self-sufficient and creative power to sustain life on this earth. Pachamama is usually translated as Mother Earth, but a more literal translation would be "World Mother" (in Aymara and Quechua). The Inca goddess can be referred to in multiple ways; the primary way being Pachamama. Other names for her are: Mama Pacha, La Pachamama, and Mother Earth. La Pachamama differs from Pachamama because the "La" signifies the interwoven connection that the goddess has with nature, whereas Pachamama – without the "La" – refers to only the goddess.“

Anyone who has dealt with the global environmental movement has undoubtedly heard the term Gaia. Gaia is a revival of paganism that rejects Christianity, views Christianity as its greatest enemy, and sees the Christian faith as the only obstacle to a global religion that focuses on the worship of Gaia and the unification of all forms of life concentrated around the goddess “Mother Earth“ or the “Pachamama”. A sophisticated mix of science, paganism, Eastern mysticism and feminism has made this pagan cult a growing threat to the Christian church. The worship of "Mother Earth", or "Gaia" or "Pachamama" is the focus of today's global environmental policy.

The 2009 UN General Assembly proclaimed April 22 as International “Mother Earth Day”. On that day, Bolivian President Evo Morales, a self-proclaimed Pachamama worshiper, made this telling statement to the United Nations General Assembly: "’Pachamama’ - Quechua's ‘Mother Earth’ - is a fundamental deity of the Native world view, with is based upon a total respect for nature. The earth does not belong to us, but we belong to the earth".

That the expression "Mother Earth" or "Pachamama" is not a harmless cultural name, but has religious traits, is proved, for example, also in a teacher's handbook published in 2002 by UNESCO with the significant title Pachamama Teacher's Guide. It states, inter alia: "Imagine, Mother Earth assumes a physical form and imagine what it would be like to meet with her. How would she look? What would you talk to her about? What would be your main concern and your questions? How would you answer them? Where could you meet her [Mother Earth]? Think of a place where you could meet them." Such a place, for example, where one could meet "Mother Earth" or "Pachamama" in the guise of nude pregnant women carved as wooden figures, was the prayer ceremony in the Vatican Gardens on the mentioned October 4, 2019, St. Peter's Basilica, the Stations of the Cross Prayer on October 19 and the church of Santa Maria in Traspontina in Rome.

Bishop José Luis Azcona, emeritus bishop of the Amazonian Prelature Marajó, convincingly referred to the absurdity and untenability of the belittling of the Vatican's Pachamama worship. He is a connoisseur of the religions and customs of the Amazon Indians, lived among them for more than 30 years and evangelized them. In an open letter of November 1, 2019, Bishop José Luis Azcona pointed out that it was especially the "little ones" in the Church, and then also converts among the Amazonian Indians who live intensely the Catholic faith, who were scandalized by the Pachamama worship in the Vatican. They were confused and deeply hurt in their Catholic sense of faith. The following statement by Bishop José Luis Azcona causes dismay: "But this gesture [of Pachamama worship] was a scandal (and not pharisaic) to millions of Catholics throughout the world. Especially the poor, the ‘little ones’, the ignorant, the ‘weak,’ who apparently possess the ‘sensus fidei’ (the sense of faith) and are defended by Pope Francis justly and permanently, were severely struck in their unarmed conscience, completely defenseless against such religious violence. At least the poor, the simple, the ‘weak’, the unprotected of Amazonia are the most affected deep in their heart by this idolatrous stroke, which is an attack against the Christian faith, against the ecclesiastical conviction that the only queen of Amazonia is Our Lady of Nazareth, the Mother of God the Creator and the Redeemer. No other mother, no Pachamama of the Andes or from anywhere else and no Yemanja [mother goddess of Afro-Brazilian cults]!".

Bishop José Luis Azcona also referred to the devastating impact that the public acts of Pachamama worship in the Vatican had on faithful Protestants: "For the Protestant and Pentecostal brothers, this scandal had a devastating effect. Horrified, they have witnessed scenes of true idolatry, and between amazement and astonishment they feel more and more confirmed in their erroneous view that the Catholic is a worshiper of idols, not of saints, of Joseph, Mary, but of true demons. In this way, the ecumenical-interreligious dialogue has been shaken with humanly irreparable consequences and grave ecumenical complications for those who want to understand the mystery of the Church as the "Universal Sacrament of Salvation" (Lumen Gentium). "

Bishop José Luis Azcona aptly stated that the idea and symbolism of Mother Earth, the "Gaia" and also the "Pachamama", which is widespread today, can not be detached mentally and religiously from the phenomenon of the many historical pagan mother deities: "Let us remember the countless Mother Earth deities who preceded and accompanied the Pachamama as goddesses of fertility in all biblical cultures and religions. In the Old Testament, Astarte (Asherà) is the goddess of fertility, of sensual love in her nude portrayal. In the New Testament, Acts 19: 23-40; 20, 1, it is the Artemis of Ephesus, "the Great," the goddess of fertility; she is depicted with half of her body full of breasts. She sums up what is meant by the statue of Mother Earth "Pachamama". It is impossible to place the image of Our Lady of Nazareth, the Mother of God and the Church, and the statue of Pachamama, the goddess of fertility, upon the same altar or the same church. "

The comparison of Pachamama worship in the Vatican with the historical dispute of Chinese rites is factually untenable. The Chinese rituals involved acts of worshiping the image of Confucius, a historical person who was revered as a great national hero and thinker of the Chinese culture. Furthermore, it was about the worship of the deceased ancestors. In both cases before the portraits of these historical persons acts of veneration such as bowing or lighting candles were performed. Because these rites in the 17th and 18th centuries were still associated with superstitious beliefs of Confucianism as a religion, the Church has rigorously forbidden such rites to avoid any appearance of superstition and idolatry. In the twentieth century, the acts of veneration of Confucius were purely civil in nature and took place in non-sacral and non-religious places. Furthermore, the effigies of the ancestors were worshiped by the Catholics without the usual inscription "seat of the soul" as it was usual among the Chinese pagans. Thus, after any appearance of of superstition and idolatry ceased, the Holy See allowed the Chinese rites in 1939 by an Instruction of the Propaganda Fide Congregation, however, under the following conditions: one is allowed to make only a head bowing before a Confucius' picture displayed in the civil places, and if it is to be feared a scandal, the right intention of the Catholics must be publicly explained. Further, the Instruction says that Catholics may only make honorific attestations that are purely civil in nature, and if necessary, explain their intent to correct a misinterpretation of these acts. The same applies to the act of veneration of the portraits of the ancestors. Further, the Catholic Church has permitted the use of only the unequivocal divine name, "Lord of Heaven," and forbade other ambiguous Chinese divine names, such as "Heaven" or "Supreme Deity" or "Supreme Emperor", and this prohibition was not repealed by the 1939 Instruction.

The essential difference between the rites of Pachamama worship and the so-called Chinese rites is the fact that the Pachamama is a construct of pagan mythologies, i. e. it is worshiped as either a pure myth or an inanimate and impersonal conglomeration of matter, such as the earth.

Anyone who claims that the worship of Pachamama was harmless and had no religious, but only a cultural aspect, is better taught by a prayer to Pachamama published in the context of the Amazon Synod by the "Fondazione Missio", an organ of the Italian Episcopal Conference, where it is said: "Pachamama, good mother, be propitious to us! Be propitious to! Let the seed taste good, that nothing bad happens, that frost should not disturb it, that it produces good food. We ask you: give us everything! Be propitious to us! Be propitious to us!".

The Pachamama cult practiced in the Vatican during the Amazon Synod is either a form of idolatrous superstition because it contains gestures that in its original form imply the worship of the "mother earth" considered a deity, or it is a form of non-idolatrous superstition. For this Pachamama cult expresses the belief in the earth as a living and personal being, therefore, it is a syncretism that introduces deceptive elements into the Christian cult, which, after all, must always be directed towards the true God.

In an article on October 23, 2019, for Internetsite Infocatolica (www.infocatolica.com), Fr. Nelson Medina, OP, himself a Columbian Amazon missionary, unmasked the fraud of allegedly innocuous Pachamama worship with the following apt statement: "The image [the pachamama] brought to Rome is not representative of the Colombian Amazon, and I believe nowhere in the Amazon. The figure represents nothing of the ‘ancestors’ in the culture of the Amazon. And does our faith adore or worship cultically fertility, life or the woman as such? If they are not worshiped, why associate this worship with the altar, on which the unique and universal sacrifice of Christ is present? Is not this exactly a public, an scandalous public violation of the First Commandment of the Law of God? Bringing these statues to sacred places can only mean that they have a religious significance, as they would otherwise have been exhibited in an art gallery or museum of ethnic or Amazonian history.”

Vatican representatives also used St. John Henry Newman to legitimize the Pachamama worship with his help. However, this comparison is far-fetched and factually inaccurate, as Fr. Nelson Medina has convincingly put it, by showing that John Henry Newman was referring to some actions or objects that are relatively neutral in themselves, and then transformed in their meaning in order to be used in the church. The images designed for the Amazon Synod have nothing of this neutrality: celebrating "life" without worshiping God, the only Creator, is simple paganism. And among the pagan idols, be it the golden calf or the money of the merchants in the Temple of Jerusalem, decisive and clear measures are needed ... which can reach even as far as the Tiber.

At all times, and also through the instruction of 1939 on the Chinese rites, the Catholic Church, in faithful imitation of the Apostles' behavior, was as it were scrupulously engaged in its words and actions, to avoid even any shadow both of idolatry (idolatria) and of superstition (superstitio) and not to give it the least appearance (see also St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa theol., IIa IIae, q 93, a.1).

With Gianfranco Amato, an Italian lawyer and life-lawyer, the following can be summarized as regards the Pachamama worship in the Vatican (see his essay in "La Verità" of November 14, 2019):

"To portray Pachamama as an icon of the indigenous culture of the Amazon not only means distorting reality, but denying and humiliating the diversity of true Amazonian cultures in order to impose an indigenous theological vision for enforcing purely ideological and political purposes.

The Mexican President Lopéz Obrador has held a ritual in honor of the deity Pachamama to apply for permission to build the Mayan railway in southeastern Mexico. Hugo Chávez, Nicolas Maduro, Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner, Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador, Evo Morales and Daniel Ortega are just a few heads of state who have officially participated in worship services in honor of Mother Earth. So, not only is it a purely Peruvian religious fact, but we are facing a real political fact that is inserted in a precise political agenda that promotes pantheistic thinking. It excludes the Christian idea of a transcendent God in relation to creation and places the dignity of the earth above the dignity of the human person. A Copernican Cultural Revolution is being attempted: to overcome the anthropocentrism of modernity with an ecological "geocentrism". The earth and not the human being should now be at the center of the cosmos, to the point that we already hear speeches in which the limitation of human rights in favor of the "rights" of the earth is theorized.

The Pachamama is a theological deceit for Christians. As we have seen, it is a pagan Inka-deity. The images that reproduce it from a theological point of view are simply idols. The fact that a theologian, a priest, a bishop, a cardinal, a pope, or a simple believer can not recognize this apparently indisputable fact seems truly disturbing and completely incomprehensible. We could say that we are facing a new eclipse of conscience, this time not in the sphere of the law of life, but in the sphere of the first and most important commandment: in the rights of God. To this comes the aggravating circumstance that not only the conscience of a people, but the conscience of the Church itself is obscured by this cult of Pachamama. In the light of the divine revelation contained in the Word of God, in the Tradition of the Church and in the Magisterium, the question is very simple: to make idols for worship is a very grave sin. To prostrate themselves before idols is idolatry. Offering them gifts and sacrifices, carrying them in triumph, setting them on a throne, crowning them and burning them incense is a manifest idolatry that is utterly immoral. To put them on altars or in consecrated churches in order to worship them, is a true and plain desecration.

The Pachamama worship is a deception in terms of understanding tolerance. The sensitivity of the faithful seems rightly hurt when they experience the bleak spectacle of idols worshiped in Catholic churches. It is a deeply unpleasant fact that requires a strict condemnation. This is not a lack of respect or tolerance for people who profess a different religion. We respect everyone's religious beliefs, but this is about imposing tolerance for idolatry in Catholic churches and places desecrated by the presence of idols. That is not acceptable. To tolerate all this means to be accomplices of the desecration. For this reason, the gesture of "idoloclasmus" (destruction of idols), courageously carried out in the Roman church of Santa Maria in Transpontina, is the expression of the noblest faith. It is not the subject of slander but deserves praise.

The Pachamama worship is a deception of inculturation. The principle of inculturation is the proclamation of the Gospel, which can be welcomed by all peoples of all cultures. The dynamism of evangelization leads to a gradual process of transformation of the culture that welcomes the Word of God, and penetrates into the heart of the same culture through the maintenance of the good, the cleansing of the evil that is contained in it, and brings about a dynamic evolution of the faith that is always able to renew everything. Without consideration of the criterion of contrast, we can not speak of inculturation. It is clear that evangelization is a necessary contrast to the grave immoral aspects of the cultures that it seeks to achieve, and obviously demands the renunciation of idolatry."

The story of Pachamama is an accurate x-ray of the state of the Church at this dramatic moment in history, reminiscent of the truly prophetic words of Professor Joseph Ratzinger in his essay "The New Pagans and the Church," first published in the magazine "Hochland" (October/1958). The following shocking words of Joseph Ratzinger can certainly be read as a kind of topical commentary on the acts of Pachamama worship that took place in the Vatican and were even justified by Pope Francis: "Paganism today sits in the church itself, and that is what characterizes the Church of our day, as well as the new Paganism, that it is a paganism in the Church and a Church in whose heart paganism lives."

The following flaming words from the heart of Bishop José Luís Azcona, an Amazon missionary and a worthy successor to the apostles, remain glowing in history: "One of the most shameful aspects of this idolatrous gesture [in the Vatican] was the crushing of the conscience of the ‘little ones’ through this scandal".

In view of the undeniable fact of the objective gravity of the acts of Pachamama worship in the Vatican, with its clear pseudo-religious entanglements and its sentimentalization for the propaganda of the globalist world religion of "Mother Earth", can one still speak of harmlessness or take refuge to the alibi of the "Chinese rites" That would mean defending the indefensible.

At the time of the great ecclesial doctrinal and pastoral confusion during the Arian crisis in the 4th century, St. Hilary of Poitiers, the Athanasius of the West, had the conviction that such a state must not be accepted with silence or belittling of the situation. These words, quoted in the following, are of the utmost timely and quite applicable to the Vatican's scandal of the Pachamama worship: "From now on, silence would no longer be called restraint but inertia" (Contra Const. 1).

To all those in the Church of our day, who have neither belittled nor silently accepted the acts of Pachamama worship in the Vatican, but raised their admonishing voice, should be given gratitude and appreciation, first and foremost to the laity, who were moved by their supernatural sense of faith and through these acts expressed their true love and respect for the Pope and their mother, the Holy Catholic Church.

November 18, 2019

+ Athanasius Schneider,

Auxiliary Bishop of the Archdiocese of Saint Mary in Astana 

[LifeSiteNews Editor's note: This was originally published on Kath.net here. This translation was authorized by Bishop Schneider].


Video of Vatican cardinal at Pachamama, ‘Father Sun’ ceremony

A VIDEOof a leading prelate has emerged, showing the cardinal participating in a ceremony honoring two pagan gods.

Cardinal Gianfranco Ravasi of the Pontifical Council for Culture was filmed walking around a blanket as part of a noisy procession honoring Pachamama, a fertility goddess, and Tata Inti, Father Sun, in the so-called “hippy town” of San Marcos Sierras in the Cordoba province of Argentina. During the ceremony, a shaman describes what is on the blanket.

“Here is our spirituality. Here are our symbols, sacred symbols. There are the clay jars. There is the ear of maize. There is the earth. There is the water. Elements that have always accompanied us. That have accompanied us and are the cause of our life,” the man shouts in Spanish.
“We have asked permission from Mother Earth. We have asked permission from Father Sun, Tata Inti. And, surely, each of my brothers and sisters, while they were walking, were in an interior dialogue with what they believe. Therefore, we have now begun this celebration because we understand the importance and worth of this encounter.”

A spokesman for Cardinal Ravasi told LifeSiteNews via email that the video shows an event sponsored by a Vatican department responsible for interfaith dialogue.




[LSN] 2307.4a






















Archbishop Viganò decries Pope-approved plan to build "Abrahamic" religious site with Muslims, Jews

DIANE MONTAGNA reports for LifeSiteNews — Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò is sounding the alarm over plans approved by Pope Francis to erect a monument to “Human Fraternity” uniting Islam, Judaism and Catholicism, calling it “a Babylonic enterprise, designed by the enemies of God.”

The “House of the Abrahamic Family” (pictured below) will house a mosque, a synagogue, and a church symbolically united on one foundation.

Abrahamic house

In a new article published on November 15 by Italian journalist Aldo Maria Valli on Duc in Altum, Archbishop Viganò writes: “In the garden of Abu-Dhabi the Temple of the World Syncretic Neo-Religion is about to arise with its anti-Christic dogmas. Not even the most hopeful of the Freemasons would have imagined so much!"

The “House of Abraham” project was presented to Pope Francis at the Vatican on November 15, during an audience with the Grand Imam Ahmed Al-Tayeb, Sheik of Al-Azhar, members of the Abu Dhabi goverment, and representatives of the Higher Committee for achieving the goals contained in the Document on Human Fraternity for World Peace and Living Together, signed last August.


Here below is an English translation of the article by Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò with the kind permission of Aldo Maria Valli.

“To our Venerable Brethren … in peace and communion with the Apostolic See, Health and Apostolic Benediction. Never perhaps in the past have we seen, as we see in these our own times, the minds of men so occupied by the desire both of strengthening and of extending to the common welfare of human society that fraternal relationship which binds and unites us together… it is easily understood … why many desire that the various nations, inspired by this universal brotherhood.”

This is how the Supreme Pontiff Pius XI expressed himself in the opening of his 1928 encyclical Mortalium animos, signed on the day of the Epiphany, when the Church remembers three wise Magi from the East, leading an endless processional caravan guided by a shining star that appeared in the firmament, when on earth the Son of God came in the flesh, the Only Savior, the center of the cosmos and of history.

Ninety-one years later, on Friday 15 November 2019 — as reported by Vatican News — Pope Francis received in audience the Grand Imam Ahmed Al-Tayeb, accompanied by various personalities and representatives of the University of Al-Azhar and the Higher Committee, all inspired by the desire to give form and concreteness to the contents of the Document on the Human Fraternity for World Peace and Living Together, sealed last August in the wake of the historic Emirate Declaration, and signed by the Pontiff and the Imam during the Year of Fraternity.

With regard to the aforementioned Document, His Excellency Mohamed Khalifa Al Mubarak, as representative of the United Arab Emirates, had previously declared (Vatican News, 21 September 2019) that “in a world in which there are so many things that divide, the Emirates are committed to unite. Like a beacon of light, they wish to bring light into a dark world, bringing to light this document, the most important one signed in recent times”; as if to say that “the Light of the East” that has dawned upon us from on high like the Sun (Lk 1:78) is now eclipsed by a new “Luminous Lighthouse.”

The talks of the Vatican meeting were cordial, with words and expressive gestures of an already well-established friendship: let us remember that this is the sixth meeting between the Pontiff and the Great Imam. The Latin American warmth has thus prevailed over the long and rigid “frost” between the Apostolic See and that of the highest body of Sunni Islam. The meeting also offered the opportunity to present to the Pontiff a unique project whose concept has been presented through plans and 3D reconstructions.

Sir David Adjaye Obe is the creator of this architectural project, which will rise in the opulent and extravagant Abu Dhabi. It is the House of the Abrahamic Family, a sort of New Tent of Universal Brotherhood that evokes that other Tent of Reception in which the Old Testament Patriarch hosted three mysterious Angels (cf. Gen 18), the prefiguration of the Trinitarian God who was fully revealed to the legitimate Abrahamic posterity through faith in Jesus Christ.

Abrahamic Family House is therefore the name of this structure that will house a synagogue, a mosque and a church, naturally dedicated to the Poverello [St. Francis of Assisi].

Sir David’s project envisages the three different places of worship united by unique foundations and placed inside a garden, evoking a New Eden, a Gnostic and Masonic re-edition of the paradise of the First Creation.

As explained to Pope Bergoglio, this “structure ... will serve as a place of individual worship, but also for dialogue and interreligious exchange.” In fact, a fourth building is also planned, the headquarters of the Centre for Studies and Research on the Human Fraternity, whose objective, which is inferred from the Abu Dhabi document, will be to “make the three religions known.” The ceremonies for the presentation of the Human Fraternity Award will also take place here.

The building of the House of the Abrahamic Family seems like a Babylonic enterprise, designed by the enemies of God, of the Catholic Church and of the only true religion capable of saving man and the whole created from destruction, both present and eternal and definitive. The foundations of this “House,” destined to give way and crumble, precisely where, at the hands of the same builders, the Only Corner Stone is incredibly about to be removed: Jesus Christ, Savior and Lord, on whom stands the House of God. “Therefore,” warns the Apostle Paul, “let each one take care how he builds upon it. For no other foundation can anyone lay than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ. (1 Cor 3:10)

In the garden of Abu-Dhabi, the Temple of the World Syncretic Neo-Religion is about to arise with its anti-Christic dogmas. Not even the most hopeful of the Freemasons would have imagined so much!

Pope Bergoglio is thus proceeding to a further implementation of the apostasy of Abu Dhabi, the fruit of the pantheistic and agnostic neo-modernism that tyrannizes the Roman Church, germinated from the Council document Nostra aetate. We are forced to recognize it: the poisonous fruits of the “springtime of the Council” are before the eyes of anyone who no longer lets himself be blinded by the prevailing Lie.

Pius XI had warned us and cautioned us. But the teachings that preceded Vatican II were thrown to the winds as intolerant and obsolete. The confrontation between the pre-conciliar Magisterium and the new teachings of Nostra aetate and Dignitatis humanae — to cite only those — show a terrible discontinuity, which we must note, and which urgently needs to be amended as soon as possible. Adjuvant deo...

Let us listen to the words of the Supreme Pontiff Pius XI, when the Popes used to speak the language of Truth, chiseled with fire in diamond:

“For which reason conventions, meetings and addresses are frequently arranged by these persons, at which a large number of listeners are present, and at which all without distinction are invited to join in the discussion, both infidels of every kind, and Christians, even those who have unhappily fallen away from Christ or who with obstinacy and pertinacity deny His divine nature and mission. Certainly such attempts can nowise be approved by Catholics, founded as they are on that false opinion which considers all religions to be more or less good and praiseworthy, since they all in different ways manifest and signify that sense which is inborn in us all, and by which we are led to God and to the obedient acknowledgment of His rule. Not only are those who hold this opinion in error and deceived, but also in distorting the idea of true religion they reject it, and little by little. turn aside to naturalism and atheism, as it is called; from which it clearly follows that one who supports those who hold these theories and attempt to realize them, is altogether abandoning the divinely revealed religion …

'During the lapse of centuries, the mystical Spouse of Christ has never been contaminated, nor can she ever in the future be contaminated, as Cyprian bears witness: "The Bride of Christ cannot be made false to her Spouse: she is incorrupt and modest. She knows but one dwelling, she guards the sanctity of the nuptial chamber chastely and modestly” (Mortalium animos).

“Today more than ever … the Church needs strong and coherent doctrines. Amid the dissolution… the compromises become more and more sterile, and each of them takes away a shred of truth… Show yourself then… who you are in the end, convinced Catholics…! There is a grace tied to the full and integral confession of faith. This confession, the Apostle tells us, is the salvation of those who make it, and experience shows that it is also the salvation of those who understand it.” (Dom Prosper-Louis-Pascal Guéranger, The Christian Meaning of History).

Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI recently broke his silence by making public his sorrowful plea for the Church in this troubled hour of its history: “Even today our faith is threatened by reductive changes to which worldly fashions would like to subject it, in order to take away its greatness. Lord, help us in this our time to be and to remain true Catholics — to live and die in the greatness of Your truth and in Your divinity. Give us always courageous bishops who may guide us to unity in faith and with the saints of all times, and who show us how fittingly to act in the service of reconciliation, to which our episcopate is called in a special way. Lord Jesus Christ, have mercy on us!”

Carlo Maria Viganò

Archbishop Vigano and the King of East Anglia

~ Comes the hour, comes the man: Archbishop Vigano has published a fine piece on the Abrahamic House; a projected building in Abu Dhabi which is to be the great exemplar and universal shrine of Syncretism. This site will embrace places of worship of post-Jamnian Judaism, of Islam, and of the True Faith. I think there should also be a statue there of the great English promotor of Syncretism, King Anna of East Anglia, who, S Bede tells us, maintained a sacral enclosure in which a Christian Altar shared space with the altars of the devils. Clearly, a man with vision, possibly even double vision.

It is interesting that this should be happening in the year of S John Henry Newman's canonisation, which is also Pachamama year. Never was a document more timely now than Newman's biglietto speech, in which he revealed that, since the time of his ordination to the priesthood in the Church of England, he had consistently fought against Liberalism ... that is to say, Relativism. He regarded this error as nothing less than a meretricious trick of the Devil. Yet, in this same year, Vatican connivance apparently surrounds a scandalous project which Newman would have denounced even more fiercely than he denounced the Jerusalem bishopric.

Within this 'Abrahamic' umbrella, the 'Christian Church' will, apparently (news to me) be dedicated to S Francis. Since that Saint is not on the Calendars of the separated Byzantine and non-Chalcedonian Churches, it is interesting to note that this initiative is not designed to treat with respect the diversity within the Christian 'house' itself. Of course, you don't need to be a rocket scientist to suspect that the naming is a gesture towards the current occupant of the Roman See, whose name for the moment eludes me.

Back to Newman ... he referred to the Great Presence of God Himself in the Blessed Sacrament as the Thing 'which makes a Catholic Church unlike any other building on Earth'. I wonder if the Abu Dhabi edifice will include a Tabernacle. If not, it will be a building which the Poverello himself would not have recognised.

Will it include an unambiguous affirmation of the Divinity of the Second Person of the Holy and Undivided Trinity? The Athanasian Creed which Newman so loved, perhaps, carved in massive letters?

In conclusion, I will make a serious and theological point.

People constantly ask me whether ... how ... God could or would prevent the formal and unambiguous imposition ex cathedra of heresy by a Roman Pontiff.

Saint John Henry, who fought against Bergoglianism with vigour and erudition throughout his life, has just been canonised by a pope who ... detests Newman's Faith!

In other words, God has (because he can do this) worked through even this pope to proclaim Newman's Faith.



[And see Christopher A. Ferrara, below]

[LSN] 2307.4b






















International arrest warrant for Francis protégé Bishop Zanchetta requested

THE ARGENTINEAN PROSECUTOR María Soledad Filtrín Cuezzo has requested international help to arrest Bishop Gustavo Zanchetta, who is accused of "homosexually abusing two seminarians", reports en.news

According to AciPrensa.com, the request was made because Zanchetta has not responded to repeated telephone calls or emails. It is assumed that he is hiding in the Vatican.

Earlier this month, police raided offices in his former diocese Orán.

Zanchetta is a Francis' protégé and the first Argentinean bishop named by Francis. The first accusations against him were made in 2015 and involved nude selfies on Zanchetta's phone.

He retired in August 2017 as Orán bishop for "health reasons." Shortly after, Francis created for him a position in the Vatican.

[e.news] 2307.4c






















"Fearless, heroic": Young Catholics support Alexander Tschugguel, love the Latin Mass

[LSN] 2307.4d






















Swiss bishop describes struggle between John Paul II and Saint Gallen Group
MAIKE HICKSON reports for LifeSiteNews ~ Ivo Fürer, the retired bishop of Sankt Gallen – who, from 1996 until 2006, hosted the “Sankt Gallen Group” for their yearly meetings in the Swiss town Sankt Gallen – has now written an extensive history of the Council of the European Bishops' Conferences (CCEE), whose key organizers were also closely connected with the Sankt Gallen Group.

Fürer had been the CCEE's general secretary for twenty years, from 1975 until 1995, when he then became the bishop of Sankt Gallen. (Pope John Paul II famously once stated that Fürer's problem was that he came from Sankt Gallen.) The Sankt Gallen Group effectively headed up the CCEE for 24 years, from 1979 until 1993, because two of its members, first Cardinal Basil Hume and then Cardinal Carlo Maria Martini, were the presidents of the CCEE from 1979 until 1993. The Sankt Gallen Group also had, however, prelates as their members who had not played a pivotal role in the CCEE, such as Cardinal Walter Kasper.

In addition to Fürer's extensive book detailing the history of the CCEE – which is called The Development of Europe is Challenging the Churches (2018) – this Swiss bishop also published his own autobiography, Church in Changing Times (2018), which LifeSite has reviewed already.

As this Swiss prelate shows, the CCEE was founded in 1971, not long after the Second Vatican Council, and it aimed at fostering a new decentralization. This spirit of decentralization went so far among these founding bishops that they did not even ask Rome at the time to approve of their statutes when they founded the CCEE under the reign of Pope Paul VI.

But, more importantly, Dr. Fürer describes the later internal battles between some leading figures of the CCEE – especially Cardinal Carlo Martini, the later head of the Sankt Gallen Group – and Pope John Paul II. This conflict led finally to the Pope's changing the rules of the CCEE in 1993 so that only a president of one of the European bishops' conferences could become the president of the CCEE, thus making it impossible to enable the re-election of Cardinal Martini, who was still at the time (1993) its longstanding president. This decision seems to have reduced the dominant influence of Martini's reform faction within the CCEE, which was in turn one of the main reasons for the founding of the Sankt Gallen Group three years later, in 1996, after also Ivo Fürer had been removed from his position as the general secretary of the CCEE by being appointed bishop of Sankt Gallen in 1995.

Additionally, Pope John Paul II, already in 1991, had effectively excluded the members of the CCEE from participating in the organization of the Special Synod of Bishops on Europe in Rome which was organized in light of the changes in Europe after the decline of Communism in 1990. With regard to this papal decision, Dr. Fürer even quotes voices who called this 1991 synod in Rome an “anti-Martini synod.”

After Cardinal Martini's removal from the CCEE in 1993, he became the leader of the Sankt Gallen Group which was composed of many of the bishops who had earlier been active in the CCEE, but who had lost influence after the Pope's intervention.

Let us recapitulate this history a little bit more in detail.

After the founding of the CCEE in 1971, this group of bishops from Europe had strong progressivist leanings. For example, in 1974 they were already openly discussing the possibility of admitting remarried divorcees to Holy Communion. They also wished to work for a decentralizing “continentalization” of the Universal Church, a goal that we see further promoted by Pope Francis today.

As it is also the case today, this continentalization essentially meant a disrespecting of the central Roman authority. As Professor Paul Zulehner states in his Foreword to Fürer's history of the CCEE about the founding of the CCEE: “A Roman approbation was not requested.” In the course of the following two decades, there took place a “tug of war” between Rome and the CCEE concerning the question of “who is representing the Catholic Church in Europe,” explains the Austrian theologian and priest. The CCEE wanted to get away from a specifically critical view upon Europe's ongoing secularization and, instead, was inclined to look more to the “life experiences” of the people of today.

As Cardinal Martini put it in 1989: “Evangelization means that the Church learns and teaches.” Explains Zulehner: “A catechetical procedure is being turned into a dialogical process in the midst of the life experiences of our contemporaries.” Here may already be seen the dismissive view upon the teaching of the catechism and, instead, the promotion of the idea that one has to learn from the people, an attitude we can also see today more fully developed under Pope Francis.

However, John Paul II was not pleased with the leanings of the CCEE and their presidents (first Cardinal Basil Hume – who always stressed that he did not care much about what Rome said – and then Cardinal Martini). When the Pope, in 1990, started to organize the 1991 Special Synod of Bishops on Europe, he did not even inform Cardinal Martini about these plans. As Zulehner explains it in his Foreword, the Catholic bishops from the former Communist countries in East Europe mistrusted the liberal West and even the “post-conciliar theology and pastoral” approach with which they had not been familiarized due to their having been largely cut off from the West. These bishops “had no true trust in the leadership of the CCEE and Martini whom they accused of having too much understanding for the modern culture.” As Zulehner says it: “some people disliked Martini's concept of evangelization.” For, they rather preferred “a traditional instruction,” according to Father Zulehner.

Among the influential bishops within the CCEE over the years were Cardinal Godfried Danneels, Cardinal George Basil Hume, Cardinal Roger Etchergaray, Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O'Connor, Cardinal Karl Lehmann, Cardinal Josef-Léon Suenens, Archbishop Alois Sustair, Bishop Josef Homeyer, Bishop Egon Kapellari, and, of course Martini. Father Zulehner as well as Father Hans Langendörfer, S.J. – who now is the general secretary of the German Bishops' Conference – were also active in the CCEE. Cardinal Silvestrini of the Roman Curia was a close and sympathetic collaborator of the CCEE in Rome. (He was later to be part of the Sankt Gallen Group, as well.) When Ivo Fürer became the general secretary of the CCEE in 1977, the seat of the CCEE was moved from Chur to Sankt Gallen. Fürer became the bishop of Sankt Gallen in 1995, but had been the general vicar in that diocese for more than two decades.

After Communism had apparently fallen, Pope John Paul II had optimistically hoped that the bishops from Eastern European countries, with their experience of martyrdom and of a life under dictatorships, would help revive the Catholic Faith in the West. For example, the Pope told Martini in 1993 that he wished “a stronger influence of the countries of the East in the CCEE,” according to Fürer.

As Zulehner writes in his Foreword, there existed plans in Rome to take better control over the Catholic Church in Europe, to weaken the CCEE by giving the Pope the power to appoint the secretary of the CCEE and by moving the seat of the CCEE to Rome. However, many of these plans were never implemented. But, as Zulehner explains, Rome succeeded in “avoiding that important cardinals of Europe (such as the German Cardinal Lehmann) were elected as president. The new presidents were rather pale.” Rome also made sure to send delegates to the assemblies and conferences of the CCEE, and they even insisted upon receiving ahead of time the final speech of the standing president of the CCEE. Zulehner calls these measures a “strange method of control,” but they show that Rome mistrusted the inordinately progressive CCEE.

Therefore when, in 1990, Pope John Paul II established a preparatory commission for the 1991 Special Roman Synod on Europe, “the president of the CCEE, Cardinal Carlo Martini, did not know anything of this group. The CCEE was not represented in it. One obviously did not want to incorporate into the preparations of the synod the twenty-year-old experience” of the CCEE, as Fürer explains. “Or did some fear the influence of personalities like Cardinal George Basil Hume and Cardinal Carlo Maria Martini?” Fürer asks. He adds that there could also have been “the concern that the secularized spirit of the West could enter into the former Communist states.” According to Ivo Fürer, then-Archbishop Jan Schotte played a leading role in excluding the CCEE from the new synod preparations.

In their submission to the preparatory council in July of 1991, the CCEE proposed an “inculturation of the faith in Europe” and rejected a “moralizing attitude” of the Church. The CCEE also wished to have an empowerment of local churches.

During the Synod on Europe itself, which took place from November 28 until December 14, 1991, the CCEE had fairly little formative influence. As Fürer now notes, some of the leadership of the synod “showed an attitude which wanted to weaken the influence of the CCEE. One noticed an enmity against the strong personality of the president of the CCEE, Cardinal Carlo Maria Martini. Some spoke of an 'anti-Martini synod.'”

After Martini met with Pope John Paul II in a private audience in January of 1993 – where the Pope insisted upon having a stronger influence of the bishops of the former Communist countries – the Pope shortly later decided, in February of 1993, that the statutes of the CCEE were to be changed and that the new president of the CCEE must be a president of a national bishops' conference in Europe. This was the final decision to remove Martini from his influential role in Europe. This decision was made in spite of Hume's attempts at convincing the Pope to allow any bishop from Europe to become the president of the CCEE. In April of 1993, the Czech Archbishop Miloslav Vlk became the new president of the CCEE.

In light of these developments and also in light of the fact that the leading figures of the Sankt Gallen Group – Lehmann, Danneels, Hume, Kasper, Martini – bear a grave responsibility for the slackness and loss of faith in Europe, it still remains a mystery why Pope John Paul II, after he effectively weakened their influence within the CCEE from 1993 on, still made several of them cardinals in 2001. Some members of the Sankt Gallen Group were then made a cardinal: Cormac Murphy-O'Connor, Audris Backis, Walter Kasper, and Karl Lehmann.

And it still also remains a mystery that these figures, in spite of their being removed from the CCEE still had enough organizational power so as to have possibly some decisive influence with regard to the election of Pope Francis in 2013. The Diocese of Sankt Gallen issued in 2015 a statement about the Sankt Gallen Group and stated that Bishop Ivo Fürer “never hid his joy about the election of the Argentine.”


[LSN] 2307.4e

























How to defend Humanae Vitae

Dr. Janet Smith




[PatrickCoffin.media] 2307.5
























Advent and Christmas family traditions 

[taylormarshall.com] 2307.5a
























O.L. of China


Faithful bishop escapes Communist guards

WILLIAM MAHONEY, Ph.D. reports for ChurchMilitant.com ~ A faithful bishop of the underground Catholic Church in China is hiding from police who tried to coerce him into joining Communist China's state-sanctioned Church. This follows the increased persecution and confusion after the September 2018 secretive Vatican-China agreement.

Bishop Vincent Guo Xijin of Mindong, in China's eastern Fujian province, fled from police custody in Ningde on Nov. 13 and returned to his hometown of Luojiang.

Asia News reported that two police officers had been monitoring Bishop Guo since Nov. 9 as part of the increasing pressure, blackmail and threats Fujian authorities have been visiting on clergy to force them to join the Chinese Patriotic Catholic Association (CPCA) ? a control arm of the Communist Party of China (CCP) overseen by the United Front Work Department.

The CCP was trying to coerce Bishop Guo to travel to Xiamen in Fujian province to attend a meeting for government-sanctioned clerics, in an ongoing attempt to weaken the underground Church that still dominates in the region.

Refusing to go to Xiamen, the police brought Bishop Guo to Ningde on Nov. 12 and to Bishop Zhan Silu's residence that evening with the hope that Zhan, a Communist appointee, would convince him to sign the government form for joining CPCA.

The next day, Bishop Guo fled to Luojiang, where his followers think CCP authorities will eventually find him and take him back into custody.

Zhan was one of the bishops who had been excommunicated as a CCP appointment, but Pope Francis lifted his and six other bishops' excommunication on Sept. 22, 2018, when the Vatican-China agreement was signed. The Pope requested that Bishop Guo be reduced to an assistant bishop at the time.

Bishop Guo has encountered difficulties with CCP authorities before for refusing to join the CPCA. On April 7, 2017, he was called into the local religious affairs bureau in Fu'an when the bureau informed the diocese it wanted him to attend a 20-day learning class.

Cardinal Joseph Zen tweeted an Asia News story on the Guo situation on Nov. 14 and received some strong responses.

"The provisional agreement between Pope Francis and the Chinese government has caused tremendous harm to the underground Church," tweeted Fr. Francis Liu in response. "It is unknown how long this type of injury will take to heal. Pray to the Lord."

Father Liu's assessment reflects what Cardinal Zen told Church Militant in July regarding the intensification of persecution of the underground Church since the Vatican-China agreement of September 2018:

It is really a terrible thing; the most worrisome element is that the agreement was a secret one, so we do not know what is in the agreement.

So, when the government comes to say, "Do this" and "Do that" to our people here, they ask, "Why?" They ask, "Did the Pope already agree?" Then the people say, "We don't know; we don't know what the Pope promised to you ? what he agreed on."

The situation is pretty much worse. Before there was an agreement, there was a kind of compromise on many points; for example, the underground Church could have their church buildings and the underground priests, even in the cities, could say Masses for the faithful, even though the law is against that. But the authorities, for a long time, never enforced those laws. Now, they enforce those laws. So, it is a much harsher persecution after the agreement; it is terrible.

A report on Bishop Guo's current situation drew many critical comments regarding the CCP, Pope Francis and a lack of Christian outrage in the West.

Why 'good Christian' are you not speaking out against the actions of the Red Chinese?Tweet
"Guo is part of a group of bishops that many religious and human rights experts feared would be persecuted after the Vatican inked a deal with Beijing last year on the ordaining [of] bishops," reads one comment. "Thanks to this Pope he threw the real bishops in China under the bus."

Another comment reads:

'Where is the Christian outrage? Come on, Franklin Graham, why are you not speaking out in defense of these Christians in Red China? Why are all of these good Christian Republicans in Congress not speaking out? Why is the "Second Coming of God" not speaking out against the persecution of Christians in Red China? And finally, why "good Christian" are you not speaking out against the actions of the Red Chinese? Think About It!

In September, Cardinal Zen told La Vie that "Rome no longer dares to criticize the Chinese government, to which it has sold off the Chinese Church." To date, the Vatican has remained silent regarding the increased persecution of underground Chinese Catholics.

A faithful Catholic told Asia News that Bishop Guo is "very tired" and expressed hope that all believers throughout the world pray for him.

[CMTV] 2307.CS1
























UN logo


"Sustainable Development" and the Church sold into slavery

RAYMOND KOWALSKI writes for OnePeterFive ~ The time has come to rescue our brethren, and by brethren I mean those American Catholics who have remained in the Church, and who worship God devoutly and in the only manner most of them have ever known. They may attend Mass every week and on every holy day of obligation or they may attend Mass infrequently. They may believe that Jesus Christ is truly present in the Holy Eucharist, or they may think the Holy Eucharist is a communal meal. They probably have no inkling that they are in any need of rescuing, and they will likely resist our efforts, but we must attempt to rescue them nonetheless.

Unless they belong to a parish where the truth of the gospel is preached (and not just read during Mass), their souls are in peril. We - and by we I mean those of us who believe in the Incarnation, the passion and death of Jesus Christ, the Resurrection, and the life everlasting - were once as our brethren are now. We can see what they cannot yet see.

The flock, the entire flock, which in the United States numbers some 51 million and worldwide some 1.2 billion, has been betrayed by the shepherds. Those of us with eyes to see and ears to hear must save ourselves and do our best to save our brethren.

Our brethren have grown up in the Catholic Church. To them, the "Novus Ordo," or "New Order," ushered in 50 years ago by the Second Vatican Council, and manifested particularly in the liturgy, is just a modern way of being Catholic.

But in the pontificate of Pope Francis, the Novus Ordo has become something more than just a "liturgical preference." Pope Francis has said and done many startling things that have been chronicled here at OnePeterFive. The upshot is that the fifty-year acclimation period is over. It is time to complete the work of the Second Vatican Council. Pope Francis is now wielding the immense power of his office, both spiritual and temporal, to remake the Catholic faith, while attempting to continue to bind its adherents and bend them to his will.

The velvet gloves came off in 2019. In February, the pope traveled to Abu Dhabi, where he joined a Muslim imam in signing a "Document on Human Fraternity for World Peace and Living Together." The document drew much attention because it proclaimed that God wills the pluralism and diversity of religions. On the return flight, the pope defended the contents of the document: "This I emphasize clearly. From the Catholic point of view, the document does not pull away one millimeter from Vatican II, which is even cited a few times. The document was made in the spirit of Vatican II."

The document said other things as well, the significance of which were overshadowed by the outrageous repudiation of Christ's great commission to the apostles to baptize all nations. The document called upon the leaders of the world and the architects of international policy to intervene to stop wars, conflicts, and environmental decay.

On September 10, while returning from his journey to Southern Africa, the pope asserted that the duty of humanity is to obey the United Nations, certainly a genuflection to "the architects of international policy."

Immediately after the conclusion of the Synod on the Amazon in Rome, the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, on October 28, at the academy's Vatican headquarters, signed a declaration to support "sustainable development" in Amazonia and to find ways of achieving the 17 formal "Sustainable Development Goals" of the United Nations. The declaration stated that the world's "climate and humanitarian crisis" demands "rapid, integrated and urgent action."

Every organization needs a mission, a reason for its existence. With no mission to baptize all nations, what is the new mission of the Catholic Church? The pope has already told us: combat environmental decay, practice sustainable development, and promote obedience to the United Nations.

In this papacy, doctrine is used as a distraction, a smokescreen. It has never been about the existence of Hell, the divinity of Christ, or the resurrection of Christ's physical body. In this papacy, nouvelle théologie is in full flower - which is to say that this papacy teaches that, because everyone at the moment of conception is oriented to God, there is no need of a Redeemer, no need for His immaculately conceived Mother, and no need for belonging to, or converting to, the Catholic Church. All worship by humans gives glory to God, regardless of the form or object of that worship. No human act, no matter how vile or immoral, can defeat this orientation to God.

And so the New Order has become the New World Order. The institutional Catholic Church has become the Catholic Party. Illogically, the purpose of the Catholic Party is to save the planet from God's misguided creation - that is, from humanity.

The faithful have been sold into slavery. Catholics in China were first. Now the rest of us have been handed over. The doctrines and strictures of the Church will be used to keep us in line, but not for the purpose of saving our souls - rather, for the purpose of obedience to our human masters. Some of us see and understand what has happened, but many, perhaps most, of our brethren do not.

Some percentage of them attended Mass on Sunday. Nothing seemed different from any other Sunday Mass. Soon, however, they will hear phrases like "everything is connected" and "our common home." They may even hear about Pachamama. The new mission of the Catholic Church will not seem discordant to them. Eventually, however, their liturgy will cease to be valid. Their priests will no longer have valid orders. The Novus Ordo will be sterile and no longer efficacious for their salvation.

To rescue someone is to save him from a dangerous situation and to bring him to some place that is safe. Where, exactly, might that be? Where are we feeling safe, safe enough to bring our brethren? The answer is the liturgy of the ages, the usus antiquior, the traditional Latin Mass, which has returned from obscurity during this papacy.

How, too, do we remain in the one true Church, founded by Jesus Christ and protected by the indwelling of the Holy Ghost, but not of the institutional Church, that has been taken over by apostates? We have been given what we need in the form of a Declaration of Truths, dated May 31, 2019, and signed by two cardinals, two archbishops, and a bishop. The Declaration of Truths contains 40 numbered paragraphs as a brief restatement of the true Catholic Faith and a repudiation of the errors of Pope Francis. It is the antidote for the Nouvelle théologie.

Bishop Athanasius Schneider, one of the signers of the Declaration of Truths, has published a new book, Christus Vincit, which is both inspirational in its message and chilling in its vision of the predictable course of world events. He concludes the book with an appendix, a handy copy of the Declaration of Truths in print form. A digital copy is available here.

The traditional Latin Mass and the immutable truths of the Catholic faith are the tools we must use to save our own souls and those of our brethren. The true faith is not lost. The true Church is not undone beyond repair. When the Israelites were fleeing Pharaoh, they came up against the Red Sea, and all seemed lost. Yet a path opened for them. We must have confidence that a path will open for faithful Catholics as well, and we must bring to safety as many of our brethren as possible.

[1P5] 2307.6






















UN's "Sustainable Development goals" and Pachamama

LIZ YORE writes for ChurchMilitant.com ~ "Believe in climate change as though it's a religion," intoned U.S. Sen. Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii) at the Congressional DACA prayer breakfast last week.

Oops, Mazie - you let the cat out of the recycle bag! What happened to the United Nations and its global elites lecturing the plebeians that climate change is all about scientific facts? What happened to the Amazon Synod and Laudato Sí drumbeat that "science is settled" and that overpopulation causes climate change?

Is this another tectonic paradigm shift from the eco-fanatics? Are they again moving the linguistic goalposts for the umpteenth time? Remember, when the environmentalists called the crisis "global cooling" in the 70s? Then the lingo changed when those nasty facts got in the way, and it became "global warming," only to morph into "climate change," then into "extreme weather events" and now, (drum roll, please), it's a religion!

Now that the environmental lobby has secured its religious and moral leader in the Vatican, it's time to embed climate change as dogma, worthy of its own sins and papal exhortations. It's a "religion" - you must obey.



The globalists schemed for decades to cloak the tyrannical eco-hoax in a religious cloud cover but were thwarted by the two previous popes, who recognized the pernicious U.N. population control advocates were driving the environmental agenda - first under the U.N. 2015 Millennium Development Goals and now with the upgraded 2030 Sustainable Development Goals (SDG). The global elites have snagged their "Green Pope" in the person of Jorge Bergoglio, who, like the tyrannical globalist that he is, recently chided Catholics that they "must obey the United Nations."

It is now evident that the Argentine pontiff is the long sought-after religious and moral voice of the environmental movement whose ultimate goal is to elevate this leftist political hoax to a religion. Every religion needs a concrete and iconic symbol. At the Amazon Synod, the Vatican unveiled the new symbol of the environmental religion, the pagan idol of mother earth: Pachamama.

We now learn that the Pachamama, the Amazon Synod pagan idol, was promoted to the Vatican by recently deposed Bolivian marxist tyrant, President Evo Morales, who infamously gifted Pope Francis with the pernicious hammer and sickle crucifix.

Morales, who spoke on climate change and socialism at the Vatican Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences, along with America's own socialist Bernie Sanders, famously identified himself as a Catholic only in order "to go to weddings." When asked whether he believed in God, he replied, "I believe in the land, in my father and my mother, and in cuchi-cuchi (sexual activity)." Seems like the "climate" is overheating in the Francis papacy.

Therein lies the poisonous amalgam between the radical marxist left and the eco-rantings of the Francis papacy, as this pontiff replaces dogma with deforestation, elevates carbon over Catholicism, diminishes commandments in favor of the U.N. SDG goals and substitutes Christian symbols with pagan ones.

Time to get down on your knees and beg the sustainable development gods and Pachamama for mercy from environmental catastrophes. For your penance in reparation for eco-sins, you must plant a tree.

The people of Bolivia roundly protested President Evo Morales, who recently resigned, fled the country and is on the run. A new interim president was sworn in with a big Catholic Bible, and she told her country: "The Bible has returned to the government palace."

If only a similar fate would beset the Pachamama Pope.

[CMTV] 2307.7






















Trump pro-life diplomacy roils General Assembly debates

STEFANO GENNARINI, J.D., reports for the Friday Fax ~ Abortion is as controversial today at UN headquarters as it was before Barack Obama took office in the White House, thanks to pro-life diplomacy from the Trump administration.

In a dramatic reversal of position, the Philippines and Indonesia removed all mentions of “sexual and reproductive health” from the annual violence against women resolution they co-sponsors every year in the General Assembly. The delegate of the Philippines who presented the draft for adoption emphasized, “we cannot accept any text that alludes to abortion as lawful.”

European and Nordic Countries, and their supporters in Latin America, harshly criticized the Trump administration for reviving the abortion issue at the UN, a debate they thought they had won in 2009.

When the U.S. tried to amend other resolutions—to change language about “sexuality education” and “sexual and reproductive health” that UN agencies use to promote abortion and homosexuality—the Europeans and the Nordics used the occasion to berate the U.S. delegation.

“It is essential that we do not go back on our shared commitments. We cannot undermine the normative framework that underpins our work,” said a delegate of Argentina on behalf of a coalition of countries mostly from Europe and Latin America.

The pro-life amendments predictably failed by a margin of seventy votes, but were supported by up to thirty countries.

The statements from critics of U.S. pro-life policy were uncommonly harsh and were delivered with visible anger and frustration. Some delegates accused the U.S. of “nullifying” protections for the health of children and youth and of bad faith.

The Trump administration responded with the words of President Trump to the General Assembly in September: “Americans will never tire of defending innocent life.”

“The United States believes in legal protections for the unborn, and rejects any interpretation of international human rights (such as General Comment 36 on the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights) to require any State Party to provide safe, legal, and effective access to abortion,” the statement specified.

“Each nation has the sovereign right to implement related programs and activities consistent with their laws and policies. There is no international right to abortion, nor is there any duty on the part of States to finance or facilitate abortion,” the statement added.

Despite the uncommonly strong pro-life statement, the Trump administration actually held back and promoted only a few minor pro-life amendments in UN resolutions about children and youth. No amendments were proposed in several resolutions about women that include the same controversial terms.

This inconsistency, combined with the limited number of U.S. diplomats committed to the pro-life cause, probably left countries who might be more sympathetic to the U.S. vulnerable to EU pressure. The EU, unlike the U.S., has a systemic consistent approach to “sexual and reproductive health” across all resolutions. The EU also backs its UN diplomacy with pressure and financial aid incentives to foreign capitals. In spite of this imbalance in diplomatic firepower, the U.S. had support from thirty countries.

[C-FAM] 2307.7a

























NETHERLANDS Dutch bishop joins statement calling for Pope to repent of Pachamama idolatry at Amazon Synod

JEANNE SMITS reports for LifeSiteNews - Bishop Robert Mutsaerts, auxiliary bishop of 's-Hertogenbosch in the Netherlands, has joined the signatories of the "Protest against Pope Francis' sacrilegious acts" whose statement protesting the pagan worship in the Vatican went online on November 12

He is the second bishop to have signed the statement since Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò joined the original signatories hours after it was published.

Bishop Mutsaerts is an outspoken prelate who has not hesitated to express criticism of the present "paradigm shift," also calling the Amazon Synod "the most politically correct meeting of all time."

Mutsaerts, 61, chose the words "Veritas vos liberabit" ("The truth shall set you free") as his episcopal motto.

He has been vocal on the Internet about many subjects, including the recent Youth Synod in Rome which he decided not to join as a representative of the Dutch Bishops' conference, because, he told LifeSite at the time, "the whole thing" would "lack credibility" at a time when accusations of clerical sex abuse and coverups showed that the Church could not even offer youth "security."

More recently, he published two articles on his blog "Paarse Pepers" (purple peppers) on the Catholic platform VitamineXP, in which he accused the Amazon Synod of pushing a "hidden agenda" that "ignores Christ."

He wrote: "If you read the working document of the so-called Amazon Synod, it really seems that the intention is for the synod to wind up in a new religion. A kind of eco-socialism, an amalgam of ecology; climate change; ecumenism; viri probati; consecration of women; and, as an afterthought, sometimes a mention of Jesus, but then not as the Son of God and Redeemer: Jesus the philosopher, revolutionary, and hippie."

In a later post, he added: "If sacraments, sin, justification, and hell are no longer relevant, why should you be having a synod at all?"

Both articles were translated by LifeSiteNews and can be read here.

On November 5, Bishop Mutsaerts also republished an article by Fr. Cor Mennen - a priest who has also signed the "Protest against Pope Francis' sacrilegious acts" - against the "Pachamama" venerations in Rome when Father Mennen was slammed by his Bishop Gerard de Korte for having suggested that the Pope was a heretic. He had also called the ceremony in the Vatican gardens around the Pachamama-Mother Earth statuettes "idolatrous," the "summit of deviation from the will of God."

Bishop Mutsaerts is clearly not prepared to revise his position and has fully approved the statement which has been joined by dozens of new signatories since it went online.

In the statement released last Tuesday, the 100 initial signatories from many countries called upon the Pope to "repent publicly and unambiguously of these objectively grave sins" that had taken place and asked bishops around the world to "offer fraternal correction to Pope Francis for these scandals."

In a recent post on "Paarse Pepers," on November 11, Bishop Mutsaerts reflected on a text by Sören Kierkegaard noting that since Luther, the idea of married priests in particular has gained ground.

Below is LifeSite's full translation of Mutsaerts' blogpost:

In the Middle Ages people wandered astray with their opinion that it is sacrilege when a priest marries. Then Luther came… and he married. Now we have come to the point where it is considered sacrilege when a priest does not marry. "One cannot be a good priest if one is not married. People won't really accept someone as a carer of the soul, etcetera, if he isn't married." Apparently they say this in the same sentence as they say about a doctor that "the family" prefers to have a married man as a doctor. They are afraid that a bachelor is a debauched man.

In the Middle Ages, being unmarried corresponded to holiness. Now being unmarried is a reason to be considered a debauched person, as someone with whom one's wife and daughter are not safe.

In the Middle Ages the most trusted person was an unmarried one. People thought they found a guarantee in their unmarried state. This is a reasoning of the mind. Nowadays one has most confidence in a married person. That is a reasoning of the flesh.

No, the above is not a text by me, but by Sören Kierkegaard (X, 1 A 440). He too lived in a time (1833-1855) when everything was rethought. Again, there appears to be little new under the sun. The final document of the Amazon Synod calls for viri probati - married men - to be admitted to the priesthood. It also calls for the admission of women as deacons. Come and have a look in the Netherlands, where this kind of thing has been practiced for a long time. I live in a country where married men appear at the altar, allow themselves to be called "pastors" and lead "celebrations" where the average churchgoer can't tell the difference with a Mass. Of course they haven"t received any ordination, of course they don't have a mission to "lead the way" on Sundays, but in the meantime they wear liturgical robes that can barely be distinguished themselves from priests' and deacons' robes. I live in a country in which women appear at the altar, have themselves called "pastors," wear liturgical garments which suggest a consecration and take charge of the proclamation, and who react indignantly when they are counted as lay people. I live in a country in which carnival masses are celebrated, in which polonaises are held, hymns are sung, and all the people of the Church, who have no idea of what the sacrament is, claim Holy Communion. I live in a country where it is believed that the Church now also recognizes same-sex marriage, because such "wedding celebrations" simply take place without any real action being taken against it. I live in a country where there is an uprising you tell parents that in preparing their children for First Holy Communion you will also introduce them to the sacrament of confession. I live in a country that considers itself as a guide for the world. I live in a country where Vatican II was not seen as an attempt to find new ways to evangelize the world, but to secularize the Church. It worked well. The result? The Church in the Netherlands is dying. The Netherlands is now the most secularized country in the world. What on earth has possessed the Synod fathers to follow this example?

I would like to let Kierkegaard speak again.

"The New Testament as a guideline for the Christian has become a kind of historical peculiarity, something like a travel guide for a certain country where in the meantime everything has completely changed. Such a book can no longer be of any use to travellers in that country. While sitting in a cosy café and smoking a cigar, one reads in the travel guide: 'Here are gangs of robbers attacking travellers and abusing them in their refuge.' But there is no longer a gang of robbers, but a cosy café. However, the New Testament is still, to an unalterable extent, the handbook for Christians who will still experience in this world what is written in the New Testament. One should not be disturbed by people who have different experiences with that same world, people who act as villains in this world with its villainous acts. What happens in this world to a great extent, namely chatter, misery, mediocrity, etc., etc., is actually not mentioned in the New Testament. It radically ignores chatter, pettiness and mediocrity."

[LSN] 2307.8






















UNITED KINGDOM Labour would totally decriminalise abortion, party spokeswoman confirms

DAN HITCHINS reports for The Catholic Herald ~The Labour Party would decriminalise abortion in Britain, making it legal to have an abortion for any reason up to the birth of a child, a party spokeswoman has confirmed.

The party’s manifesto, launched today ahead of the December 12 general election, says: “We will uphold women’s reproductive rights and decriminalise abortions.”

A Labour spokeswoman confirmed to the Catholic Herald that this would mean the repeal of the relevant sections of the 1861 Offences Against the Person Act, which currently bans abortion.

The 1967 Abortion Act, which sets out the broad exceptions to the previous Act, would therefore become redundant.

Pro-lifers described the proposal as “extreme” and lacking in public support. Catherine Robinson, from the campaign group Right to Life, said in a statement: “Polling shows that this extreme proposal is not supported by women, with only 1 per cent of women wanting the abortion time limit to be increased right through to birth.

“We would be left with the most extreme abortion law in the world. The change would further position England and Wales drastically away from most countries in the European Union, where the most common abortion time limit among EU countries is 12 weeks.”

Backbench Labour MPs have led efforts to decriminalise abortion. One, Diana Johnson, introduced a bill last year to repeal the 1861 Act. But the bill did not receive government support and ran out of time.

Labour is currently well behind in the polls. However, Robinson said that whether or not the party forms the next government, the manifesto pledge “confirms that the abortion lobby will be back in full force in the next parliament, pushing to introduce new extreme legislation.”

[CH] 2307.8a Zanc
























The following letter was published in the Daily Telegraph on November 18th

SIR - As one of the drafters and signatories of the open letter about idolatry at the Vatican, I must take exception to our all being lumped together in your report (November 13) as "conservatives" and "traditionalists": that is, extremists who object to moderate Pope Francis's "inclusive attitude towards indigenous people".

It is not the inclusive attitude that we condemn, but the worship of idols - especially in churches or on church property and under the very eye of the Pope.

All of us would, I hope, be happy to encourage acculturation in the Church's missionary work in the Amazon region. Acculturation has been Catholic practice for hundreds of years.

Idol-worship, however, has been condemned by the Church since the time of St Paul; indeed, it is a basic duty of Christians to obey the First Commandment against "false gods": precisely what we urged the bishops to require of the faithful and the Pope to accede to.

There was no mention in the letter (a deliberate decision this) of married clergy, nor of other matters unconnected with idolatry. Nor was our decision to act aimed at securing any particular result at the next conclave, as asserted in the quotation from Austen Ivereigh (espouser of the sort of creeping infallibilism relied on by Pope Francis).

On many issues the signatories have differing views. I, for example, do not attend Tridentine Masses, nor am I opposed to the ordination of ("permanent") women deacons.

Professor John M Rist


[DT] 2307.9






















UNITED KINGDOM Whites can be black if they wish, says lecturers' union

BREITBART LONDON reports -- The University and College Union (UCU) has declared that anyone can "self-identify" as "black, disabled, LGBT+ or women".

"UCU has a long history (from predecessor unions) of enabling members to self-identify whether that is being black, disabled, LGBT+ or women [sic]," a six-page position statement from the union, which "represents over 120,000 academics, lecturers, trainers, instructors, researchers, managers, administrators, computer staff, librarians and postgraduates in universities, colleges, prisons, adult education and training organisations across the UK."

"UCU supports the right of all women (including trans women) to safe spaces… UCU also supports a social, rather than a medical, model of gender recognition that will help challenge repressive gender stereotypes in the workplace and in society," the statement added. The document focused primarily on gender like this, but that reference to "enabling members to self-identify whether that is being black, disabled, LGBT+ or women" was repeated three times.

On the topic of gender identity more particularly, the UCU conceded that "There has been argument that debating gender identity is a matter of academic freedom", and claimed that the UCU is itself a defender and promoter of academic freedom - but that "academic freedom is bound up with other civil liberties and human rights so therefore does not give the right to discriminate. "

The UCU repeatedly stressed their self-proclaimed status as "champions of equality" and "commitment to intersectionality".

"UCU is committed to an intersectional approach within all its work," the position paper declared.

"This is UCU's positon [sic]. The strength of the Union is to bring members together and to build bridges rooted in equality. UCU believes that for true solidarity we need to be speaking to and working with each other and acknowledging and celebrating our intersectional differences."

The paper also referred to previous UCU commitments to campaign for gender-neutral toilets, the "promotion of non heteronormative and non binary identities", and ending "the requirement and practice of gender assignment at birth".

Research from 2017 suggests some 80 per cent of British academics are leftists.

[Breitbart] 2307.10






















UNITED KINGDOM Pro-life students at University of Cardiff fight student union adopting pro-abortion policy

PAUL SMEATON writes for LifeSiteNews — Pro-life students at the University of Cardiff, Wales, are attempting to stop the university’s student union from adopting an officially pro-abortion position that would have the effect of censoring their pro-life views.

A motion will be brought forward November 21 at the Students’ Union AGM meeting that, if passed, will censor pro-life students and groups on campus by restricting their speech, expression, and activities. A similar motion at the university was defeated in 2014.

Cardiff Students for Life, the student pro-life group at the university, have expressed concerns that the resolution will be used to censor pro-life views. Earlier today they issued a statement on Facebook, saying:

It is important for all our members to show up for the event because a motion for the university to become pro-choice is being brought forward. This does NOT represent all of the University’s students. Also, it gives the VP of Societies the sole authority to ensure that societies do not spread 'misinformation', a completely undemocratic solution. Make sure that you come and vote tomorrow evening for our freedom of speech and conscience.

The first resolution of the motion states:

Cardiff University Students’ Union will publicly announce their stance as pro-choice and clearly state on the CUSU “Pregnancy Support” webpage and any other applicable webpages such as in the “Policy” webpage.

In the notes that precede the resolutions it is asserted that “[t]here has been misinformation about the medical procedure of abortion spread by Students’ Union affiliated societies as well as in the general media.”

Later in the notes to the motion, it states: “Any misinformation spread about reproductive health or any activities conducted against the Students’ Union’s policies by Students’ Union affiliated societies should be investigated and steps taken so this does not occur again.”

The pro-life students have received public support from both the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children (SPUC), the U.K.’s largest pro-life lobbying organisation, and from the university’s Catholic chaplain, Fr. Sebastian Jones.

Fr. Jones, who has been the Catholic chaplain of the university for the past ten years, issued an open letter that states that should the motion pass the university’s Catholic society will resign its membership from the university’s official Guild of Societies and will instead function independently. Fr. Jones stated that the motion would place any Catholic who remained a member of the student union at the risk of excommunication from the Catholic Church.

He writes:

The motion if adopted would violate Cardiff University’s principle of inclusivity and diversity which to date has extended to all people of faith. Faith is a protected characteristic [under the UK Equality Act, 2010]. Cardiff University's Catholic students and staff would be directly discriminated against with the passing of this motion by the Students Union. No Catholic could remain a member of an organisation that upholds as a constitutive policy the promotion of, and material support, for the procurement of abortions. For a Catholic to participate in such an organisation would risk them incurring excommunication from the Catholic Church. This is a wholly unreasonable burden for Cardiff University to permit its own Catholic community to be confronted with. Such a burden as the exclusion from one's own faith community would not be proposed to other faith communities and rightly so.

SPUC has condemned the motion, describing it as an “undemocratic and a shameful attack on young students.”

SPUC deputy CEO John Deighan said:

Universities should and need to be the very places where individuals can share their ideas, express their views and debate them freely and openly. The bullying approach adopted by the Students’ Union is part of the continuous onslaught to stifle freedom of speech and stamp out any semblance of a pro-life voice on campus. Not only does Cardiff Students' Union wish to censor those they disagree with, but they also want to prevent others from hearing reasoned opinions that challenge pro-abortion views.


[LSN] 2307.10a






















UNITED STATES Cardinal Cupich again presses moral equivalency of abortion to other issues

Chicago Cardinal Blase Cupich has once again downplayed the centrality of abortion as moral and political issue, insisting it must be seen as just one element of “a consistent ethic of life.”

Cdl. CupichTHOMAS D. WILLIAMS Ph.D., reports for Breitbart ~In an op-ed on Wednesday in Chicago Catholic, the newspaper of the Archdiocese of Chicago, Cardinal Cupich repeated arguments against prioritizing the abortion issue when considering “how our faith should inform our politics and our voting decisions.”

Recently, the cardinal faced off against leaders of the U.S. bishops conference who insisted that the faithful must understand that abortion is the “preeminent priority” when decided on whom to vote for. Having lost that battle, the cardinal wrote his own op-ed to keep pushing the idea that abortion is no worse than any other social issue.

On average, over 2,700 unborn children are executed in the womb every day in the United States. One can only wonder what Cardinal Cupich would say if 2,700 migrants were rounded up and dismembered on a daily basis. Would this become a preeminent issue, or would he insist that it must be contextualized and balanced against other social issues?

To back up his argument, Cardinal Cupich cited a former archbishop of Chicago, the late Cardinal Joseph Bernardin, who is credited with creating the “seamless garment” moral theory, which approached all social evils as part of a unitary whole rather than addressing them individually.

A consistent ethic of life “joins the humanity of the unborn infant and the humanity of the hungry; it calls for positive legal action to prevent the killing of the unborn or the aged and positive societal action to provide shelter for the homeless and education for the illiterate,” Bernardin wrote in 1984.

Bernardin argued that his approach “will not erode our crucial public opposition to the direction of the arms race; neither will it smother our persistent and necessary public opposition to abortion,” but in point of fact, that is exactly what happened.

By introducing a series of elements that could not garner unanimous support, purveyors of this approach debilitated the Catholic pro-life effort in the United States by splintering the movement into factions. Those who had been united in their monolithic opposition to the evil of abortion found themselves divided on other issues such as capital punishment, healthcare, welfare, gun control, national defense and the minimum wage.

Although couched in moral terms, Cardinal Bernardin’s theory was essentially political. He was a Democrat at a time when his party had moved to embrace abortion on demand, while then-President Ronald Reagan had adopted an uncompromising pro-life stance in defense of the unborn. Only by extending the definition of what it meant to be “pro-life” could Bernardin defend the Democratic platform as a viable moral option for serious Catholics.

The new standard-bearer for the seamless garment approach to life is Bernardin’s successor as archbishop of Chicago, Cardinal Cupich, another toady for the Democratic Party.

In a signed 2015 op-ed in the Chicago Tribune, Archbishop Cupich listed a series of social ills that people should find just as loathsome as ripping apart unborn children and selling their organs.

As appalling as it is “to speak freely of crushing a child’s skull to preserve valuable body parts,” Cupich wrote, we should be “no less appalled by the indifference toward the thousands of people who die daily for lack of decent medical care; who are denied rights by a broken immigration system and by racism; who suffer in hunger, joblessness and want; who pay the price of violence in gun-saturated neighborhoods; or who are executed by the state in the name of justice.”

By insisting on the moral equivalency of many different societal problems, Cupich reduced the heinous offense of slaughtering the unborn and trading in their body parts to just another social ill, no worse than unemployment or a broken immigration system.

The archbishop of Philadelphia, Charles J. Chaput, was quick to offer fraternal correction to his misguided brother bishop, penning his own essay titled “There Is No Equivalence.”

Attempts to equate the intentional taking of human life through abortion with other social justice issues – such as poverty, racism, and unemployment – are wrongheaded and deceptive, he said.

“The deliberate killing of innocent life is a uniquely wicked act,” Chaput wrote. “No amount of contextualizing or deflecting our attention to other issues can obscure that.”

Nearly all Catholic dioceses in the United States – including his own – spend far more time and talent on providing social services to the poor rather than on opposing abortion, Chaput noted, yet the fact remains that “children need to survive the womb before they can have needs like food, shelter, immigration counseling and good health care.”

“Humanity’s priority right – the one that undergirds all other rights – is the right to life,” Chaput argued, and being “right” on other matters of social justice “can never excuse a wrong choice regarding direct attacks on innocent human life.”

As Archbishop Joseph Naumann, chairman of the U.S. Bishops’ Committee on Pro-Life Activities, stated in 2017, abortion is the great “moral crisis of our time,” overshadowing immigration, health care, and capital punishment.

While many other moral issues merit attention from the bishops, Naumann said, it would be a mistake to treat them as if they had the same weight, noting that the “vast majority of bishops” understand that abortion is the preeminent moral crisis of our time.

[Breitbart] 2307.10b






















UNITED STATES Fr. James Martin announces major pro-gay conference

Fr MartinLIANNE LAURENCE reports for LifeSiteNews - Pro-homosexual activist Fr. James Martin has announced a 2020 "LGBTQ Catholic ministry gathering" at the Jesuit Fordham University that has a speakers' roster so packed with dissidents that one critic called it a "direct challenge" to New York's Cardinal Timothy Dolan.

Martin billed the June 18-20 "Outreach 2020" on Twitter as an event for Catholics "engaged in ministry with LGBT Catholics - in parishes, schools and other Catholic institutions."

According to Martin, keynote speakers include Bishop John Stowe, OFM of Lexington, Kentucky; Sr. Jeannine Gramick, S.L. of New Ways Ministry; Father Bryan Massingale of Fordham; Siva Subburaman of Georgetown University; and Timothy Radcliffe, O.P., former master general of the Dominican Order.

Other speakers are Bishop Christopher Coyne of South Burlington; James Alison; Father Greg Greiten; Shelly Fitzgerald; Fr. William Hart McNichols; M. Shawn Copeland; Lisa Fullam; Gerard McGlone, S.J.; Sister Edith Prendergast, RSC; and "other ministers, theologians, writers and LGBT Catholics," according to Martin.

Musician David Haas - who infamously wrote a hymn for "Pride" Month this year - "will provide the music for our liturgies."

"The conference is being planned in conjunction with Fordham University's Center for Religion and Culture, with America Magazine as its media sponsor," noted Martin, who is an editor at large for America, and consultor to the Vatican's Dicastery for Communication.

Given those attending, Patrick Reilly, president of the Cardinal Newman Society, swiftly condemned the conference as "dissident activism, not ministry" and a "direct challenge" to New York's Cardinal Timothy Dolan.

"Don't get me wrong. I'm all for authentic Catholic ministry, with loving compassion and genuine dialogue that honestly seeks and embraces truth... listening attentively without denying our faith and magisterial teaching. That's clearly NOT what this is. Not with these speakers," Reilly tweeted.

LifeSiteNews contacted the Archdiocese of New York for a response from Cardinal Dolan, currently in Rome on his ad limina visit, but had received no response by deadline.

As for the "Outreach 2020" speakers, Gramick, of New Ways Ministry, whose open dissent dates back to the '80s, was rebuked in 1997 by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith for "doctrinally unacceptable" positions on homosexuality and "has been ordered to not speak on behalf of the Catholic Church in the United States due to the grave error of her teaching," Ohio archbishop Dennis Schnurr warned his archdiocese in 2018.

New Ways Ministry is well known to be a dissident pro-LGBT group that has been formally condemned by both the Vatican and the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops for opposing Church teaching, with its speakers repeatedly banned from speaking in Catholic dioceses.

Alison is an ex-Dominican priest who was expelled from the religious order because of his clear rejection of Church teaching on homosexuality, as Philip Lawler pointed out in October.

Stowe's homosexual advocacy includes, among other things, speaking at the dissident New Ways Ministry conference and issuing a "prayer" card in 2019 to commemorate the "celebration of Pride" that features on the front a San Damiano Cross with rainbow colors coming from it. On the back is a brief letter issued to those who celebrate "Pride," which celebrates the homosexual lifestyle.

Massingale openly challenged Milwaukee's Archbishop Jerome Listecki by holding a NWM retreat for "gay" priests September 2018, despite the archbishop's statement that the event "is not in line with Catholic Church teaching and is in no way connected to or endorsed by the archdiocese" and that NWM "is not a Catholic organization."

English priest and author Radcliffe, whom Pope Francis appointed as consultor for the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace in 2015, was master of the Dominican Order from 1992 to 2001 and an outspoken proponent of homosexuality. He mused in 2013 that "gay sexuality" can be "expressive of Christ's self-gift."

Regarding Outreach 2020, Martin tweeted, "Tentative panel topics include: Best Practices in Parishes; Best Practices in Schools; Employment in Catholic Institutions; Family Issues; Spirituality for LGBT Catholics; Theological Insights for LGBT Catholics; Race, Ethnicity and Intersectionality….Media Training for LGBT Ministry; and Transgender Issues; and LGBT Issues and Mental Health."

It does not appear that representatives of Courage, the Church-approved apostolate that helps same-sex attracted Catholic live chastely, will be speaking at "Outreach 2020."

[LSN] 2307.11






















UNITED STATES Parents struggle as "trans" phenomenon explodes

PAUL MURANO reports for ChurchMilitant.com ~ The "transgender" craze is permeating society, and the plague is exploding among children — many of whom grow up to regret their decision.

First, let us define the verbal constructs that have been created to support this phenomenon. What used to be called "transsexual" when George Jorgensen turned into Christine in the 1950s and tennis player Richard Raskind "transitioned" to Renee Richards in 1975, is now "transgender."

The newer terminology supports the radical separation between (biological) sex and (social) gender. "Cisgender" applies to those who continue to accept the sex they are. "Non-binary" seeks to rid us of the truth that only two sexes exist and introduces the idea of many genders.

Some now claim there are over 200 genders with various pronouns that correspond to them. All of this is built upon the foundation of a mind-body dualism that erroneously holds the person on the inside (psyche, emotions, desires) can be different, even contrary, to his or her bodily self.

This phenomenon grew significantly after the Obama administration made an issue of supporting "bathroom bills" that allow men who "identify" as women to use women's public bathrooms, and vice-versa.

Further, in order to remove "disorder" from its diagnostic terminology, the DSM-5 of the American Psychological Association changed "Gender Identity Disorder" to the more ambiguous "Gender Dysphoria" in 2013; similar to how the association changed homosexual orientation from a mental disorder in 1987. A PC explosion followed, and what used to be known as a disorder is now sold as an identity.

Like any new "progressive" movement foisted upon society, children are usually its biggest victims. Children as young as three or four are now "realizing" they are the opposite sex, and are often supported by parents and therapists.

One woman who recently wrote to Parents Magazine told the story of her four-year-old daughter Isabel's desire to be reincarnated as a boy, and to be named Shane. By age six, with the affirmation of her therapist and mother, "Shane" was outwardly living and identifying as a boy.

This past summer California parents announced their two "transgender" children were transitioning into the opposite sex. Their firstborn daughter decided by age 8 that she was a boy, had her hair cut short, and began wearing boys' clothes and using male pronouns. Now, 11-year-old "James" has begun taking hormone blockers to prevent her from menstruating and developing breasts. Testosterone injections are to come.

Her four-year-old brother came out as "trans" at age four. Now at age seven, known as "Olivia" and wearing dresses and long hair, he claims: "Being trans means you were born in the gender that you don't feel like in your heart. Anyone can be whoever they want to be." The children's parents support their decisions. "We are going about this because we are listening to our children," said their father, Ben.

Sometimes there is a disagreement between parents on how to deal with this "transgender" phenomenon. Seven-year-old James Younger is stuck between his mother who wants to raise him as a girl and his father who doesn't.

Anne Georgulas and Jeffrey Younger are divorced Texans who share custody of their fraternal twins James and Jude. Georgulas claims that James communicated a desire to be a girl at a young age by showing preference for female pronouns and Disney princesses.

Younger insists that James's "transgender" status is contrived, and that he possesses a video of James at age three saying that "Mommy" told him he was a girl. Each parent seeks legal control over their son's medical and psychological care.

When "trans" children reach adulthood, many grow to regret their decision.

Nathaniel "transitioned" when he was a minor. "This whole thing was a bad idea," he exclaimed. "I am 19 years old, and I feel as though I have ruined my life."

Nathaniel says he was bullied in elementary school because he was sensitive and preferred playing "girl games." When he was a bit older, he discovered internet pornography, heard about transgenderism, and, as he says, "convinced myself that's what I was."

With support from others, he sank into a deep depression. "I surrounded myself in an echo chamber that supported and validated my poor decisions, because the others were also, unfortunately, stuck in that pit, too," he said.

After surgeries to his genitals and face, Nathaniel lamented:

'Now that I'm all healed from the surgeries, I regret them. The result of the [sex reassignment] surgery looks like a Frankenstein hack job at best, and that got me thinking critically about myself. I had turned myself into a plastic-surgery facsimile of a woman, but I knew I still wasn't one. I became (and to an extent, still feel) deeply depressed.

The combination of bullying, pornography, and the confused adults in his life (including his mother and therapist) steered him into this very dark place.

One Dutch study suggests puberty blocker hormones may contribute to an ongoing gender-dysphoric condition.

James Cantor, a Canadian psychologist with decades of clinical and research experience in treating transsexuals, says that "all the studies have come to a remarkably similar conclusion: Only very few trans-kids still want to transition by the time they are adults."

From these studies it consistently appears that 80 percent of gender-confused children psychologically realign with their biological sex by young adulthood or sooner, when supported with non-invasive therapies like watchful waiting.

Despite the evolving "progressive" terminology, all objective indicators tell us sex is not fluid: Every cell in the human body remains either male or female despite hormone treatments and surgeries. There are genuine intersex cases where genitalia is ambiguous due to a chromosomal or hormonal disorder, but these are rare. Most people who suffer from gender dysphoria can gradually be helped by love and grace to accept themselves as the body-soul composite they are, created by God and imaging Him as either male or female (Genesis 1:27).

[CMTV] 2307.11a






















INTERNATIONAL The World Over with Raymond Arroyo



[EWTN] 2307.12






















INTERNATIONAL A few more headlines of the week

Europe: Up to 4,800,000 illegal migrants in 2017; advocates of border control still vilified as 'racist'

France: 15 mosques linked to jihad terror are shut down

International: ISIL supporters are hacking into dormant Twitter accounts to hijack them and promote jihad

Italy: Nursery school calls off its Christmas play for fear of offending Muslims

Nigeria: Muslims hack 87-yr-old Christian to death by machete, another by gunshots

Turkey: ISIS members with access to "huge" amounts of money plotting comeback, says spy chief

Turkey: Erdogan: "Our God commands us to be violent towards the kuffar" (infidels)

USA: ISIS urges Muslims to masquerade as journalists to get bombs near to world leaders

USA: Gang leader accused of aiding ISIS, says if anyone insults Muhammad 'his head gotta go'

USA: Convert to Islam, studies bomb-making, promises jihad massacre "once I get my gun and explosive belt"

USA: NYC Muslim murders 8, screaming "Allahu akbar. . . I'm following orders of Allah"

[CF News] 2307.13






















INTERNATIONAL gloria.tv.news


[gloria.tv] 2307.14























Vade, propheta ad populum meum '. . flicking his whip at the Bishops, cutting them in tender places, throwing stones at Sacred Congregations, and discharging pea shooters at Cardinals' (Newman).




[CMTV] 2307.15

























Spring is come



[Diocese of Shrewsbury] 2307.16

























Dr Taylor Marshall responds to critics of Infiltration



[taylormarshall,com] 2307.17






















A moving tale

Mitre and Crook by Bryan Houghton, Catholic Traditionalist Classics, Amazon, £25.50

Mitre & CrookPETER KWASNIEWSKI writes for Rorate Caeli ~ It is with great joy that I share an important development in the world of publishing: the launch of a new series by Angelico Press, Catholic Traditionalist Classics, that will bring back into print — for the benefit especially of younger readers born after the apocalypse — many fine works from the early years of the traditional movement that have become difficult or impossible to acquire. The series is inaugurated, appropriately enough, with a towering classic: Fr. Bryan Houghton’s deliciously witty novel Mitre and Crook of 1979.

When the publisher asked me for an endorsement, I wrote (without any back-cover hyperbole) that I had read Mitre and Crook on a lark years ago and instantly fell in love. Bryan Houghton was the Robert Hugh Benson of the postconciliar crisis. He brilliantly portrays a bishop, Edmund Forester, who with equal parts cleverness and courage orchestrates a complete restoration of Catholic tradition in his backwater diocese. The novel is written in the form of letters from Bishop Forester to his presbyterate and to various allies and enemies, local and abroad; the epistolary narration is suspenseful and gripping. Along the way we are treated to a scorching portrait of the souls of reformists, unbelievably narrow in mind and oblivious to spiritual realities.

Although Houghton’s book appeared exactly 40 years ago, his characters read as if we met them yesterday, or will meet them tomorrow, now that the Church has entered into a second winter under a second Paul VI, with who knows who or what will follow next. Indeed, at one point Bishop Forester writes:

'You ask me what I think will be the future of the Church. My dear Father, I have not a clue. I am not a defeatist because I believe in God. On the other hand I am a great believer in failure because it gives Divine Providence a chance. It is because in this year of grace the Church has the appearance and odour of a dung-heap that God will use it to manure the most exquisite flowers, fragrant with the odour of sanctity'.

If you have not read this exceptionally creative and insightful work, I encourage you to do so. You will find it a moving tale, exhilarating in its denouement, and breathtakingly relevant. It will take you to a new level in your appreciation of Catholic tradition — as a classic is supposed to do.

This book would make an outstanding Christmas gift, especially for priests, whether already fully on board or moving in the right direction, and — dare one say? — for bishops, too. It’s about time that one of them, in flesh and blood, took this novel’s protagonist as a template.

Some quotations to whet the appetite . . .

The very volume of changes in the Church since Vatican II is sufficient to guarantee that most of them are for the worse. It is inconceivable that over the past two thousand years the Church has manifested and expressed the Faith so badly that any and every change must be for the better. If that were so, she would lose all credibility. What is conceivable, on the other band, is that some of the changes may have been for the better and some not. But this possibility is one which we are not allowed even to discuss. To do so is disloyal, divisive and conducive to schism. Every change is for the better; there has not been the least error, the slightest slip.

Now, in the revolution through which the Church is passing there is a victim which has suffered even more than the Mass. It is Confession, the Sacrament of Penance. The revolution claims to be a “renewal.” From the dawn of history there have been renewals and revivals. All have had the same message in a thousand forms: “Repent and do penance! God may yet relent and forgive.” The present renewal is unique: instead of repentance, permissiveness is preached, the Sacrament of Penance is neglected, and the confessionals abandoned.

How can anyone dare stamp on other people’s sentiments? Who has given them permission? “The hankering after the Old Mass is pure sentimentality.” Of course it is, and that is precisely why it is sacrosanct.

More harm is done by charity at the expense of others than by direct injustice. Even in civil life, a miscarriage of justice is less harmful to society than charity to hardened criminals.

I might be prepared to look at a new Mass form if it magnified God still more and exalted Him still higher; if it lowered man still further in the imagination of his heart; if the mysteries appeared more wondrous and the doctrines more luminous; if the language was more noble and the images grander. But look what we have been given: the exaltation of man and the humiliation of God; the evacuation of mystery, and ambiguity in doctrine; the flattest of images in pidgin vernacular.

It is clear enough that one of the reasons for the sharp rise in the number of communicants is the abolition of the Eucharistic fast. There is now no barrier other than sin to receiving Our Lord. Hence there is automatic social pressure in favour of receiving. The person who does not either lacks piety or is in a state of sin. No such presumption was possible when there was the barrier of fasting: those who did not receive had merely broken their fast and those who received had prepared themselves by keeping it. In fact the abolition of the Eucharistic fast, especially for children and youths, can be the cause of exerting unbearable pressure in favor of sacrilegious Communions.

You wish to exonerate the Pope and put the blame partly on his entourage but principally on the bishops. This position seemed perfectly tenable during and immediately after the Council; let us say, for the first five years of his reign, until 1968. But it is quite untenable now. No Pope in history has gone to such lengths to ensure an entourage and episcopate of his own choosing as Paul VI. The Cardinals lose the power to vote at the age of eighty so that only those of his own making will be able to vote for his successor. Bishops are made to retire at seventy-five so that the overwhelming majority of the episcopate is of his own appointment. Everything is his own, from the Mass he says to the bishops who say it. Incidentally, never the history of the Church has the appointment of bishops been so absolutely dependent upon Rome. Of old, Concordats or custom allowed some interference from the State so that the Vatican was not always to blame. Today, it is only in Communist countries that interference is permitted. The result has been the appointment of eminently worthy bureaucrats unsuited to command. Hence the lack of independence among the bishops. There is not the personnel to offer opposition. Actually, my dear Father, if in the administration you try to divide the head from the members, it is the members which you will exonerate. I am more charitable to Paul VI than you.

The New religion is living off the capital of the Old. It has not had to provide churches, schools or institutions of any sort—and practically no priests. All was found. Even the cost of destroying the Old has been paid for out of the capital it had accumulated. Once this capital is spent, and it has not far to go, the institutional Church in this country will be bankrupt.

Therein lies the tragedy of the New Ordo. Although its theology is ambiguous and its liturgical theory abysmal, those are not what I hold principally against it. The real trouble is that the New Ordo is unprayable. For seven long years I have both celebrated and attended it. It presents itself as a human action, an event, requiring participation; instead of a divine action, The Event of the Sacrifice of God Incarnate, requiring adherence. On the one side you have self-effacement, recollection and adherence, on the other self-expression, self-commitment and participation; these are irreconcilable. And the New Ordo does not merely call for its specific attitudes, it enforces them. You cannot be recollected with a microphone blaring at you in your native tongue which you cannot help but understand. You cannot be self-effacing if you have got to stand up and answer up. You cannot adhere to God if you are busy shaking hands all round.

One can judge the competence of any government by the number of laws it makes. A good one will administer the laws at its disposal with the minimum of fuss and change. A bad one will constantly be legislating and throwing the administration out of gear. This is as true of civil as of ecclesiastica1 government. England is in chaos because of the mass production of laws. Our monetary inflation is the financial expression of our legislative inflation. It is exactly the same with the Church.

How strange! What you hurl at me as an insult I receive as a compliment: “you are a traditionalist at heart.”…. It is absolutely untrue to say that I am a bundle of sensations. In the first place I am a bundle of traditions. It is by my traditions that I judge the sensations of experience. Without them no sensation would have significance. The traditions form the warp and experience the woof of that wonderful tapestry we call the human person.




Praise for Mitre and Crook

“Fr. Bryan Houghton’s book is both hugely informative about the crisis in the Church that followed the Second Vatican Council and a deeply moving psychological study of the central character, Bishop Forester, in his struggle to respond to it.” — JOSEPH SHAW, President, Latin Mass Society of England & Wales

“Published in 1979 by an English convert priest of ‘gentry’ family, Mitre and Crook has the sort of elegance people associate with a Waugh or a Knox, the deft humor of the satirist, and at times the helpless mirth of slapstick.” FR. JOHN HUNWICKE

'An imaginative, boldly original novel about the crisis in the Church. Unlike so many explorations on this theme, Fr. Houghton’s is a work of style and verve, more than a touch of wit, and deep feeling.”NEIL MCCAFFREY, founder of Conservative Book Club and Arlington House Publishers

“All the erudition, wisdom, experience, and understated British humor of Fr. Bryan Houghton finds full expression in Mitre and Crook. Ingenious and absorbing, it proved invaluable to an earlier generation reeling from postconciliar chaos. Kudos to Angelico Press for making this inspirational testimony available to a new audience.” — ROD PEAD, Editor of Christian Order

“This book meant the world to me as a seminarian. We need this book in 2019 as much as we did in 1979.” — FR. JAMES JACKSON, FSSP, author of Nothing Superfluous

[RC] 2307.17a























Bishop Schneider's handbook for correcting errors in life of Church today

Bp.SchneiderMAIKE HICKMAN writes for LifeSiteNews - Bishop Athanasius Schneider, the auxiliary bishop of Astana, Kazakhstan, has just published a new book titled Christus Vincit: Christ's Triumph Over the Darkness of the Age. In this wide-ranging book-long interview with Diane Montagna, this prelate covers first his own biography and spiritual formation and then discusses in separate parts some problems of our time in the Church and in the world. In a sense, he presents in his book a sort of handbook for the necessary correction of mistakes in the life of the Church in the recent decades.

Since this book is so fertile in spiritual guidance and inspiration, this book review desires to concentrate mostly on certain aspects of Schneider's presentation, namely his thoughtful, calm, differentiated, faithful, but truthful critique of some statements of the Second Vatican Council and its application in theory and practice in the past decades of the life of the Church, to include Religious Liberty, the 1986 Day of Interreligious Prayer at Assisi, interreligious meetings and instances of "false ecumenism," the radical reform of the rite of the Mass (Novus Ordo), Communion in the hand, as well as ambiguities regarding the terminology and the use of natural family planning and the ends of marriage.

While Bishop Schneider shows himself a loyal son of the Church and of the Pope, he at the same time shows us that we must first and foremost be loyal to the deposit of faith, unchangeably transmitted to us by the Church, and, in this light, we need to raise our voice, in those instances, where by statements or by practical norms the integrity of the doctrine of the faith and the Apostolic tradition is obfuscated within the life of the Church; and we should do this precisely out of love for the truth and for the Church herself. Bishop Schneider does so carefully, without rejecting the documents or the teaching of the Second Vatican Council as a whole. Instead, he proposes to correct only some ambiguities and errors that have crept into the life of the Church after the Council.

First, Bishop Schneider presents us with a principle: "God is more important, and eternity is more important, than the creature and the temporal realities, just as the soul is in itself more important than the body, for the soul is immortal."

Out of this principle flows the conviction that the Church should always have the supernatural at the center of her activities. Yet, Bishop Schneider sees that Modernism - which is a "denial or the weakening of the supernatural" and the inordinate stressing of history and reason - has entered the life of the Catholic Church: "Since the Second Vatican Council," he states, "the Church in her life has yielded in large measure to the influence of secularism and naturalism." In this sense, he adds, there has currently taken place "an eclipse" of the "primacy of God, of eternity, of the primacy of grace, of prayer, of sacredness, and of adoration."

Before going into more detail concerning his concerns about some affirmations of the Second Vatican Council, Bishop Schneider explains that as a teenager, he instinctively rejected the idea of standing and receiving Holy Communion in the hand when in 1973 he came out of the underground Church in the Soviet Union and started to live in Germany. When he was 15 years of age, he started to read some texts written by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, the founder of the Society of St. Pius X, but he "experienced a dilemma." His own veneration for the reigning pope was in conflict with the insights of Lefebvre that he found "substantially right." Since he at the time did not read the texts of the 1962-1965 Council directly, but, rather, commentaries by conservative authors presenting them, he had at first "no concern or suspicion that there might be problems with the texts of the Council." At the time, he practiced a "total 'infallibilization' of the Council."

Now Bishop Schneider sees that this conclusion was wrong. He says: "Nowadays, I realize that I 'turned off' my reason. However, such an attitude is not healthy and contradicts the tradition of the Church, as we observe in the Fathers, the Doctors, and the great theologians of the Church over the course of two thousand years."

Such an attitude to "turn off" reason the bishop now calls "extreme ultramontanism" as well as a "blind defense of everything that was said by the Council, which seemed sometimes to require mental acrobatics and a 'squaring of the circle.'"

Here, Bishop Schneider tells us that we should cautiously drop such an attitude: "But criticism has always been present and allowed within Church tradition, since it is the truth and faithfulness to divine revelation and tradition that we should seek, which in itself implies the use of reason and rationality and avoiding erroneous acrobatics. Some explanations of certain obviously ambiguous and erroneous expressions contained in the Council's texts now seem to me to be artificial and unconvincing, especially when I reflect upon them in a more balanced and intellectually honest manner."

That is to say, we are called to approach with a true sense of the Church (sensus ecclesiae) those potentially ambiguous and erroneous expressions of the Council, and to do so with an "intellectually honest manner." When he himself became a bishop, that is to say a teacher of the Catholic faith, Bishop Schneider started looking at these Council texts more in detail, also based on his knowledge of the Church Fathers. He also was called by the Holy See to visit different houses of the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) four years ago, in 2015, which helped him study the problems of the Council more in detail. Bishop Schneider also noticed that the Vatican, in dealing with the SSPX, did not take their arguments "seriously." But he himself earnestly realized that "we need to take the objections offered by Archbishop Lefebvre more seriously."

In dealing with the Vatican and the SSPX, Bishop Schneider then realized that the Vatican used "a kind of argument from authority, but not rooted in a deeper theological reasoning, and without going into the substance of the arguments." The Vatican said, according to Schneider: "You are wrong, our position is the only correct one and it represents the continuity with the previous tradition of the Church."

Further developments strengthened Bishop Schneider's conviction that we need to listen more carefully to the arguments of the SSPX: "With the growing crisis in the Church, and especially given the situation created after the two Synods on the Family, the publication of Amoris Laetitia, Pope Francis's approval of the pastoral guidelines of the bishops of the Buenos Aires region (which foresee, among other things, the admittance to Holy Communion of unrepentant adulterers), and the declaration on diversity of religions he signed in Abu Dhabi, I realized that we need to take the arguments of the SSPX more seriously."

As he states later in the book: "This pontificate is a logical consequence of the so-called "spirit of the Council" and of the ambiguous elements in some of the Council texts."

Bishop Schneider now realizes that "some expressions of the Council could not so easily be reconciled with the constant doctrinal tradition of the Church. I noticed that some teachings-let us say, on the topics of religious freedom, collegiality, the attitude towards non-Christian religions, and the attitude towards the world-were not in an organic continuum with previous tradition."

Schneider adds that the resistance against any such a debate about these matters exists perhaps also because "there is an unconscious fear that if one were to accept that some of the non-definitive teachings of the Council are ruptures with the constant previous tradition of the Church, then the era of a blind ultra-montanism-as-a-substitute-for-orthodoxy will collapse."

For Bishop Schneider it is now clear that there does exist a certain form of discontinuity and rupture: "An honest examination shows that in some expressions of the Council texts there is a rupture with the previous constant tradition of the Magisterium." And here he stresses that the Second Vatican Council "was pastoral in character, and that the Council did not intend to propose its own definitive teachings."

While the prelate now thinks that the majority of the Council texts are no rupture, certain elements very well might have to be corrected or amended by a "future pope or a council." When asked as to whether the Council was a mistake or not, Bishop Schneider especially answers that "history will tell us this from a distance."

However, "from the point of view of the facts, of the evidence, from a global point of view," Bishop Schneider goes on to say, "Vatican II did not bring real spiritual progress in the life of the Church. After the Council, a disaster occurred at almost every level of the Church's life. The plan and intentions of the Council were primarily pastoral, yet, despite its pastoral aim, there followed disastrous consequences that we still see today."

At the same time, the prelate insists that the "Council had many beautiful and valuable texts. But the negative consequences and the abuses committed in the name of the Council were so strong that they overshadowed the positive elements which are there."

The positive elements of this Council are in his eyes its "universal call to holiness"; the teaching on Our Lady; "the teaching on the family as a domestic church"; and the importance of the laity. Schneider says, for example: "It was the first time that an ecumenical council spoke so extensively and deeply about the role of Our Lady in the Church and in the history of salvation." And about the laity, the bishop says that this time is "the hour of Catholic families, large families" and he adds that "a very positive contribution of the Council was the beautiful doctrine of the family as a domestic church."

In studying some problematic affirmations of the Council, the Kazakh bishop rejects the thematic principle of the "hermeneutic of continuity," which "cannot be used blindly in order to eliminate unquestioningly any evidently existing problems." He further comments on this principle and its application, saying that it "would transmit artificially and unconvincingly the message that every word of the Second Vatican Council is infallible and in perfect doctrinal continuity with the previous Magisterium."

Such a method, Schneider explains, would "violate reason, evidence, and honesty, and would not do honor to the Church, for sooner or later (maybe after a hundred years) the truth will be stated as it really is."

This conclusion is, I believe, a very important aspect of Bishop Schneider's overall reasoning. Any major mistakes committed by the Shepherds of the Church in the last six decades will one day be openly known to us - and they are already known to God - and the Church in our days does best in honoring truth about herself, especially in light of her duty to lead souls to heaven. Any distortion of truth may well have a devastating effect on souls and their yearned-for eternal life. Let us together face the truth and thus help to purify the life of the Church from errors so that the Catholic faith might be revived in its beauty and integrity.

Bishop Schneider recommends several books for our further study of the Second Vatican Council, among them Roberto de Mattei's The Second Vatican Council - An Unwritten Story (2012) and Romano Amerio, Iota Unum: A Study of Changes in the Catholic Church in the Twentieth Century (1996).

Moreover, the Kazakh prelate points out that the Council itself had stated that "the Magisterium is not above the Word of God, but serves it." Yet, at the same time, the Council itself showed an "ecclesiocentrism" (which is a "hidden anthropocentrism") that had come into the life of the Church since the Second Vatican Council, whereas before that time there was the phenomenon of an "insane ultramontanism."

When asked as to whether this principle also applies to Pope Paul VI's "abusing papal power in his implementation of Vatican II," especially by changing the liturgy "in a way that had never occurred before," Bishop Schneider agrees. "Human and administrative elements were put at the center of the life of the Church and above the constant tradition of the Church." An example can be seen in the "liturgical reform of Paul VI," who in certain ways "put himself above Tradition," the "great liturgical Tradition, which is inseparably linked to doctrine."

With the Council, the bishop sees that the Church started to "flirt with the world" and to "beg for sympathy and recognition of the world." One could say that this spirit affects not only some documents of the Second Vatican Council, but also many documents of Pope Francis like Laudato Si or Amoris Laetitia.

However, Bishop Schneider insists about these documents that "I will not reject the entire document but receive from it what is good." He points to historical examples where later popes corrected errors in other councils (such as the Council of Florence in its decree for the Armenians), but also to St. Thomas Aquinas who "accepted many philosophical insights from Aristotle in spite of the fact that not all things in Aristotle are perfect."

Unfortunately, the spirit of Modernism, Bishop Schneider explains, has been infiltrating into the Church for quite some time before the Second Vatican Council - even though Pope Pius X had tried to fight it at the beginning of the 20th century - so much so that Pope Pius XII, in 1950, had to intervene by condemning (without naming them by name) "well-known theologians of the so-called 'nouvelle théologie' (Chenu, Congar, de Lubac, etc.) and by publishing the encyclical Humani Generis." Bishop Schneider also praises Pope Pius X's encyclical Pascendi, saying that it is still "relevant" and that clearly states that "Modernism is the most dangerous phenomenon in the entire history of the Church."

For Bishop Schneider, God allows to happen this darkening of the life of the Church today in order to bring out of it a greater good. He is convinced that the Church will shine brighter after this period of crisis. He also sees that "even in midst of so many clerical Judases inside the Church today, we have to maintain always a supernatural vision of the victory of Christ, who will triumph through the suffering of His Bride, who will triumph through the suffering of the pure and little ones in all ranks of the members of the Church: children, youth, families, religious, priests, bishops, and cardinals. When they remain faithful to Christ, when they keep unblemished the Catholic faith, when they live in chastity and humility, they are the pure and little ones in the Church."

And he does now already see many "snowdrops" growing in the Church, announcing a new and true springtime. These "snowdrops" are the "little ones" of the Church: "We can see many little spiritual snowdrops: these are the little ones in the Church, those who do not belong to the administrative and power structure of ecclesiastical 'nomenklatura.' These spiritual snowdrops are little children, innocent boys and girls, young chaste men and virgins, true Catholic spouses, fathers and mothers of families, single persons, widows, monks, cloistered nuns, who are the spiritual 'gems' of the Church-and also simple priests who, because of their fidelity to the faith, are oftentimes marginalized and humiliated. There are also lay people and members of the clergy who courageously defend Christ the Truth in the middle of the battlefield at the cost of personal and temporal advantage. I would call them the spiritual 'salmon' of our day, since they are swimming against the tide and jumping over obstacles towards the pure waters of their origin."

Therefore, Bishop Schneider insists that Christ is winning. He reminds us that "on the obelisk in St. Peter's Square are inscribed the words Christus vincit, and the tip of that obelisk contains a relic of the true Cross. The Roman Church, the Apostolic See of St. Peter, is crowned, so to speak, with these luminous words Christus vincit, and with the power of the Holy Cross of Christ. Even if during the present crisis and spiritual obfuscation one might have the impression that the enemies of Christ and His Cross have to a certain extent occupied the Holy See, Christ will defeat them. Christus vincit!"

The healing path in the life of the Church will be, according to Bishop Schneider, a path "which puts Christ-the Incarnate Word, Incarnate Truth, the Incarnate Son of God-unmistakably in the center of the doctrinal teaching, the celebration of the liturgy, the moral life, and especially at the center of the missionary zeal and activity of the entire Church." Here, the "path to victory for the Catholic Church has to begin with a thorough renewal of the Eucharistic liturgy and the Eucharistic life of the Church," since "the sacrament of the Eucharist is the heart of the Church, from which her entire life is built up and vitally sustained."

We have to center our lives on Christ. And "Christ will overcome the current crisis of His Church in and through the Eucharist."

At the end of this book, Bishop Schneider places a longer quote from St. Peter Julian Eymard on this very topic. This saint insists that the Eucharist is the center of the Church, for example when he says: "In our own day He still goes out to uncivilized nations; and wherever the Eucharist is brought, the people are converted to Christianity. That is the secret of the triumph of our Catholic missionaries and of the failure of the Protestant preachers. For them, man is battling alone; for us, Jesus is battling, and He is sure to triumph."

Excerpts from Bishop Schneider's book

Religious Liberty:

"The root of the current religious indifferentism, or the theory of the alleged divinely-willed character of other religions, is to be found in some ambiguous phrases of the documents of the Second Vatican Council-especially in its Declaration on the Church's Relation to Non-Christian Religions, Nostra Aetate. Describing Buddhism, for example, the Council states uncritically that 'it teaches a way by which men, in a devout and confident spirit, may be able either to acquire the state of perfect liberation, or to attain, by their own efforts or through higher help, supreme illumination' (n. 2). Pope Benedict XVI himself pointed out the weakness of this conciliar document, saying: 'It speaks of religion solely in a positive way, and it disregards the sick and distorted forms of religion.' Also ambiguous is the already-mentioned statement from Lumen Gentium n. 16, which says that we Catholics and the Muslims together adore the one God ('nobiscum Deum adorant').

The other root, which we also mentioned, is to be found in the affirmation of Dignitatis Humanae that the choice even of a false religion-including the worship of the "supreme divinity" (Dignitatis Humanae, n. 4)-is a natural right of the human person ("in ipsa eius natura": Dignitatis Humanae, n. 2). However, the natural right of the free will of the human person consists only in the choice of what is morally and intellectual good, i.e., the choice of virtue and of the one true religion, not just of the "supreme divinity." The abuse itself of free will, however, in choosing evil (sin) and error (false religion), is never positively willed by God. Hence the choice of a sin or of an error, such as a false religion, can never be the expression of a natural right ("in ipsa eius natura"). Otherwise one has to say that committing adultery, homosexual acts, murder, lying, idolatry, blasphemy would be a natural right of the human person. There is no natural right to insult and blaspheme Jesus Christ, as is done, for example, in certain "signs and rites" of non-Christian and even Monotheist religions."


"Before the Second Vatican Council, the Church had always taught the tolerance of other religions to some degree. However, with the Council's Declaration on Religious Freedom Dignitatis Humanae, there was in my opinion a drastic change regarding the previous and universal Magisterium of the Church, which had always said that error does not have the same right as truth to be propagated. Error has no rights by nature, just as we have no right by nature to sin. God has not given man liberty in order to carry out a moral evil (sin) or an intellectual evil (error). The more we live in accord with God's will, with the truth, the freer we are-and the more our freedom grows. Dignitatis Humanae made a change that is difficult to reconcile with the perennial Magisterium of the Church. One might easily deduce from this document that truth and error have the same rights by nature, by contending that the choice of error, the choice of a false religion, is a natural right of the human person. There are some people who say, 'My conscience dictates that I have to create a Satanic church to worship Satan. This is permitted by the freedom of my conscience and the freedom of religion.'"

[Question:] Where would you locate the problem with the document? What is the "change"?

"The text of Dignitatis Humanae says that the freedom to choose one's religion is a right which is founded in the very nature of the human person (n. 2: "in ipsa eius natura fundatur"), with just limitations when there is a danger to public order in society. However, man does not have the right by nature to commit a sin or to embrace error. There is no natural right to offend and to outrage God, since a religion of idolatry and any false religion is an outrage committed against God. We can tolerate sin and error, but they do not have a natural right; this would be a perversion of God's created order, since God created all human beings for the unique end of knowing and worshiping explicitly God the Most Holy Trinity. Creation, and natural right, are ordered to divine revelation. Therefore, there cannot be even a natural right to worship merely a 'Supreme Being,' as stated in Dignitatis Humanae, n. 4. In divine revelation, God positively commanded every human being to worship only the true God; namely, God the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

Furthermore, the concept of 'Supreme Being' is in itself unclear and is understood by non-Christian religions, even by Muslims, in diverging ways, and oftentimes in a disfigured manner. Besides, the original text in Dignitatis Humanae n. 4 does not say 'ens supremum' (Supreme Being), but instead 'numen supremum,' which usually means 'supreme divinity.' Other official translations of this expression are more accurate, e.g., 'la divinité suprême' (French), 'suprema divinità' (Italian), 'la Divinidad' (Spanish). These expressions are highly ambiguous, because in idolatrous religions there is also a 'supreme divinity' amidst a pantheon of so-called 'divinities.' It is surely against revealed truth to say that God positively wills the worship merely of a 'Supreme Being,' and that the human person should have a natural right to it ('in ipsa eius natura fundatur'). The only right given by God to the human person consists in knowing and worshipping the one true God, the Most Holy Trinity."

[Question] Was there a legitimate concern on the part of those who drafted Dignitatis Humanae that prompted their formulations?

"The question of religious freedom has been changed by the concrete historical situation. We now live in a completely secularized and non-Christian society, with de facto atheistic governments in Europe. We are in a new situation, comparable to that of Christians living under pagan, Roman society. We are now entering a kind of new persecution. But we cannot change the principles. One principle is that only the truth has rights; another is that every human society, and even governments, ought to recognize Christ and worship Him. These truths are unchangeable; they are revealed truths, as Pius XI states in Quas Primas. The state, of course, should not interfere in Church affairs. However, as representatives of the people, they must publicly worship Christ, the true God, and practice the true religion, which is only the Catholic religion. This is the constant Catholic truth, which no ecclesiastical authority can change into its contrary. The concrete, practical application of this truth in a changed historical situation is another question."


"A traditional interpretation of the Second Vatican Council's document on religious freedom could say that we Catholics can claim our religious liberty on the basis of being citizens-as citizens, we have the same rights as those of other religions. However, I hope that in the future the affirmation of the Council document about a natural right to choose a false religion will be changed, because the claim that 'religious freedom is a natural right' is, in its present formulation, theologically incorrect and misleading. The Council says that the right to religious freedom, which ultimately also includes the choice of a false religion (which is, however, expressly prohibited by God), has its foundation 'in the very nature' of the human person (Dignitatis Humanae, n. 2). Unfortunately, this statement relativizes the correct affirmation in the same document that says that man has the 'moral obligation to seek the truth' (ibid.). Only the choice of the true religion, that is, the Catholic religion, is a natural right positively willed by God. God is the Creator of natural rights, hence He cannot positively will the diversity of religions or the worship of merely a 'Supreme Being.'

I have a natural right to do good and to know the truth, and the truth is the Catholic religion. I have a right to the true religion. Not every religion can be the object of this right by nature. We have no right by nature to adore idols. Some religions also venerate a 'Supreme Being,' and since they have no divine revelation, even their concept of the 'Supreme Being' can be wrong and idolatrous and hence offensive to God. Idolaters can only have a civil right as citizens. So, as citizens-whether Catholic or Muslim and so on-we have the same right to life, to a just salary, and such things. Juridical matters have to be the same in the sense that these religious communities are simply civil associations, and civil associations have the same rights. We already live in a new pagan society, but we cannot change the constant traditional theological principles."


"This is somehow already present in the texts of the Second Vatican Council-in the declaration Nostra Aetate and also Dignitatis Humanae on religious freedom. Relativism is already implicitly there along with a false ecumenism, when, for example, the Second Vatican Council praises Hinduism as a religion, saying that "in Hinduism, men contemplate the divine mystery. . . . They seek freedom through a flight to God with love and trust" (n. 2). How can you praise a religion which mainly worships idols? The affirmation of Dignitatis Humanae n. 4, that every person has a natural right, a right from his nature, to choose his own religion according to his conscience, and to worship the 'numen supremum,' i.e., 'supreme divinity'-this affirmation is wrong. We do not have the natural right to commit sin and to commit error. All religions outside the Catholic faith represent as a whole a system of errors, and are thereby objectively offensive to God, the Supreme Truth. They contain some truth, of course, but this truth is due to the light of natural reason and not to the religion as such, which is against the will of God and constitutes thereby an offense to God. Subjectively we don't know about the eternal destiny of such persons, because only God knows their intentions and their heart. However, persons who adhere to false religions are in objective danger of not attaining eternal salvation. In such a decisive theological matter as the truth that God wills only the religion born of the faith in Jesus Christ, God and