Archive for October, 2018

Pope Benedict XIV


Canonization is a decree and definition by the Catholic Church that a certain individual has died heroically in a state of grace to be venerated by the faithful as a saint with a place on the liturgical calendar as a holy day.

The formula for canonization, which has been in use since the eleventh century, declares:
“In honor of . . . we decree and define that Blessed N. is a Saint, and we inscribe his name in the catalogue of saints, and order that his memory be devoutly and piously celebrated yearly on the . . . day of . . . his feast.”
Feast days or Holy Days are binding on the whole Church. It’s part of the sacred liturgy of the Church. The saint of a particular feast day is recognized by name in the liturgy making him part of the prayers of the sacred liturgy.
It’s not difficult to find reputed saints and theologians teaching that canonizations are infallible.
Sts. Thomas Aquinas, Antoninus, Bellarmine, and Alphonsus Liquori explained how and why canonizations are infallible. [1]
Cardinal Manning declared after the First Vatican Council how the council included in its definition canonization. [2]
NovusOrdoWatch cites Fr. Joachim Salaverri on how canonizations are infallible. [3]
In the 1700’s, Pope Benedict XIV taught as a cardinal, “If anyone dared to assert that the Pontiff had erred in this or that canonization, we shall say that he is, if not a heretic, at least temerarious, a giver of scandal to the whole Church, an insulter of the saints, a favorer of those heretics who deny the Church’s authority in canonizing saints, savoring of heresy by giving unbelievers an occasion to mock the faithful, the assertor of an erroneous opinion and liable to very grave penalties” [4]
Pope Benedict XIV quotes over 60 canonists and theologians on how and why canonizations are infallible. He notes that only a select few of ancient authors professed the contrary.
If canonizations are not infallible then Pope Pius XI couldn’t declare in 1925, Quas Primas, (22) : Not least among the blessings which have resulted from the public and legitimate honor paid to the Blessed Virgin and the saints is the perfect and perpetual immunity of the Church from error and heresy.
Pope Pius XII declared in 1956, Haurietis Aquas: It is clear that the faithful must seek from Scripture, tradition and the sacred liturgy as from a deep untainted source.
A liturgy that recognizes a canonized saint is untainted. Therefore, canonizations must be infallible for the possibility of error is absent.
In addition to the canonization of saints is the veneration of relics of the saints.
The Council of Trent decreed in Session XXV: “the holy bodies of holy martyrs and of others now living with Christ—which bodies were the living members of Christ and ‘the temple of the Holy Ghost’ (1 Corinthians 6:19) and which are by Him to be raised to eternal life and to be glorified are to be venerated by the faithful, for through these [bodies] many benefits are bestowed by God on men, so that they who affirm that veneration and honor are not due to the relics of the saints, or that these and other sacred monuments are uselessly honored by the faithful, and that the places dedicated to the memories of the saints are in vain visited with the view of obtaining their aid, are wholly to be condemned, as the Church has already long since condemned, and also now condemns them.”
Relics, particularly of martyrs, are placed in altar stones as part of the consecrated altar of churches named for the particular saint of whose relic is used. The churches themselves are named after canonized saints.
The decree by the Council of Trent implies that canonizations are infallible.
The same council also declared in Session XXII, Can. 7: If anyone says that the ceremonies, vestments, and outward signs, which the Catholic Church uses in the celebration of Masses, are incentives to impiety rather than the services of piety: let him be anathema [cf. n. 943]. (D. 954.)
None of the above teachings of popes and council make sense if canonizations are not infallible. Having infallible implications of fallible decrees is like the Protestant position of having a fallible canon of Scripture of infallible books. You can’t have your fallible decree with infallible conclusions.
If it’s not infallible that St. Ignatius of Loyola is a saint, then having churches built in his name, veneration of his relics, liturgical prayers that ask, “O God, Who, to spread abroad the greater glory of Thy name, didst, through blessed Ignatius, strengthen the Church militant with a new reinforcement, grant that we, who are fighting on earth by his help and after his example, may deserve to be crowned with him in heaven. Through our Lord”, and our profession of Faith that he’s in heaven is all based on a possible error. St. Ignatius is just one example. How many possible non-saints do we have with their churches, relics, and liturgical prayers all around the world? To suggest the possibility is insanity!
To say canonizations are not infallible is an outright attack on the Catholic Faith because the only reason why anyone today would make such a claim is because he doesn’t like the individual or individuals canonized.
Pseudo-traditionalists know how bad it is that John Paul II and Paul VI have been canonized, but they would rather take down all the Church holds sacred in the profession of faith concerning the communion of saints than to admit that sedevacantism is true.
[2] “In a word, the whole magisterium or doctrinal authority of the Pontiff as the supreme Doctor of all Christians, is included in this definition [at Vatican I] of his infallibility. And also all legislative or judicial acts, so far as they are inseparably connected with his doctrinal authority; as for instance, all judgments, sentences, and decisions, which contain the motives of such acts as derived from faith and morals. Under this will come the laws of discipline, canonization of the saints, approbation of Religious Orders, of devotions, and the like; all of which intrinsically contain the truths and principles of faith, morals and piety. The definition, then, does not limit the infallibility of the Pontiff to his supreme acts ex cathedra in faith and morals, but extends his infallibility to all acts in the fullest exercise of his supreme magisterium or doctrinal authority.” (Cardinal Manning, The Vatican Council and its Definitions, New York: D.J. Sadlier, 1887, pp. 95-96.)
[3] Jesuit theologian Fr. Joachim Salaverri explains the Church’s teaching on the infallibility of canonizations as follows:
…the end of the infallible Magisterium demands those things that are necessary in order to direct the faithful without error to salvation through the correct worship [=veneration] and imitation of the examples of Christian virtues. But for such a purpose infallibility concerning decrees on the Canonization of Saints is necessary.
[This] is certain, because by the solemn decrees of the Canonization of Saints the Church not only tolerates and permits, but also commends and instructs the whole flock of the faithful that certain definite Saints whom it canonizes are to be honored, and it proposes them as examples of virtue who are worthy of imitation. But the mere possibility of error in such a solemn declaration would take away all confidence from the faithful and fundamentally would destroy the whole cult of the Saints; because [then] it could happen that the Church would solemnly propose to all and mandate that condemned and evil men perpetually should be honored. Therefore, in order to direct the faithful without error to salvation through correct worship and imitation of the examples of Christian virtues, infallibility is necessary concerning the solemn decrees of the Canonization of Saints.
(Fr. Joachim Salaverri, Sacrae Theologiae Summa IB: On the Church of Christ, trans. by Fr. Kenneth Baker [original Latin published by BAC, 1955; English published by Keep the Faith, 2015], n. 724; underlining added; italics removed.)
This is the Catholic teaching, to deny which would be “temerarious, bringing scandal to the whole Church, … smacking of heresy … affirming an erroneous proposition”, in the words of Pope Benedict XIV (see Salaverri, n. 726; italics removed).
[4] Pope Benedict XIV: De Canonisatione Sanctorum L.1 c.43 n.3. quoted by Tanquerey, de Lugo, Salaverri, and others to defend the infallibility of canonizations.

Read Full Post »


On Oct. 17, 2018, The Remnant Newspaper Blog posted John Salza’s, “Has Pope Francis Lost His Office for Heresy?” [1] If it looked familiar, it’s because it’s a rehash of Salza’s June 9, 2017 article, “Note to Sedevacantists: Heresy Does Not Automatically Sever One from the Church,” which I thoroughly refuted here.

Michael Matt asks in the comment section why sedevacantists attack John Salza if we all agree that Francis is the enemy. To answer Mr. Matt, a reply must be posted elsewhere, since the Remnant Newspaper will censor any sound argument against Salza.

There are two points concerning Matt’s question and Salza’s article, which is a consistent theme in their material concerning papal heresy/loss of office.

The first is how Salza blasphemes Christ and the Catholic Church.

He writes that a Catholic pope, “departs from his predecessors by attacking basic Catholic moral teaching (e.g., indissolubility of marriage; exclusion of adulterers from Holy Communion, etc.).” and “In light of Francis’ unprecedented attacks on Church doctrine and practice, some traditional Catholics, in seeking a solution to this papal crisis, are unfortunately being tempted to embrace the theology of the Sedevacantists.”

He concludes, “Indeed, how a true Pope could promote these evils.” Salza qualified those evils to be “clerical heresy and sodomy disfiguring the Church in an unthinkable way.” 

This is total heresy and blasphemy.  True popes don’t attack Church doctrine and practices and promote clerical heresy and sodomy. A true pope is the rock of truth as Christ and Vatican I declared. It’s upon this truth that sedevacantism (Catholicism) rests. The Gates of hell are not the popes as Salza most emphatically implies they are. See here and here. 

The second point is how Salza picks and chooses which popes of whose authority he will and won’t accept. He tells us how to interpret and accept Pope Pius XII’s Encyclical Mystici Corporis Christi. However, Salza doesn’t think the Vatican 2 papal teachings at Vatican 2 or their encyclicals, apostolic exhortations, canonizations, or general laws are to be accepted, at least, not all of them.

Salza quotes St. Robert Bellarmine, Revs. Laymann, Billuart, and Sylvester Berry as trusted authorities but utterly rejects as authoritative the teachings of his popes “St.” John XXIII, “St.” Paul VI, and “St.” John Paul II. 

Salza and the Remnant crew have no foundation of authority.

Lastly, Salza does get something right for a change. He writes that popes who openly leave the church would cease to be popes. What Salza gets wrong is what “openly leaves the church” means. He quotes St. Bellarmine on how Novation openly left the Church, but omits Bellarmine’s teaching on Nestorius openly leaving the Church. As I’ve repeated in past articles, St. Bellarmine writes in De Romano Pontifice:

And in a letter to the clergy of Constantinople, Pope St. Celestine I says: The authority of Our Apostolic See has determined that the bishop, cleric, or simple Christian who had been deposed or excommunicated by Nestorius or his followers, after the latter began to preach heresy shall not be considered deposed or excommunicated. For he who had defected from the faith with such preachings, cannot depose or remove anyone whatsoever.

Defecting from the faith is openly leaving the Church. It happens by preaching heresy! The canonists all say this specifically!

Salza quotes Rev. Sylvester Berry on how innocently professing heresy, while wanting to be united to the Catholic Church doesn’t make one a heretic. Salza then applies Berry’s teaching to Francis as if Francis really wants to be Catholic and united to the Catholic Church, therefore, he’s not truly a heretic. The problem is that Salza has already admitted several times that Francis is attacking the Catholic Faith. There’s no reason to believe that Francis wants to be united to the real Catholic Church. He wants his false heretical religion to be called the Catholic Church. The conciliar popes are heretics because they KNOW they are going against the Catholic Faith.

Salza’s argument runs contrary to St. Bellarmine and Pope St. Celestine I’s explanation of Nestorius, who they said “defected from the faith with such preachings [heresy].”

“Defection of Faith” is how anyone including the pope tacitly resigns his office which resignation is accepted in advance by operation of the law, and hence is effective without any declaration. Can. 188.4 

The canonists of the 1917 code have explicitly refuted Salza’s position with canon 188.4 which utterly demolishes his entire argument. That’s why the Remnant completely ignores Can. 188.4 in a serious discussion on the issue. See here for more on Can. 188.4



[1] https://remnantnewspaper.com/web/index.php/fetzen-fliegen/item/4145-has-pope-francis-lost-his-office-for-heresy


Read Full Post »

Giovanni Battista Enrico Antonio Maria Montini


Giovanni Battista Montini sealed the fate for the Church in Rome. He took the name of Paul VI. As his predecessor, he had a very suspicious election.

He, like his predecessor John XXIII, was a modernist. Modernism is the synthesis of all heresies (Pope St. Pius X), which would make him a modernist, the synthesis of all heretics.

-His mother was a convert from Judaism. Her funeral monument has Masonic symbols engraved all over it. They are so blatant, that a wall was built in front of it to hide them. The Montini family is listed in the Golden Book of Noble Italian Heritage (1962-1964, p. 994): “A branch of the… noble family from Brescia… wherefrom their noble blazon comes and which avows as its sure trunk and founder, a Bartholomew (Bartolino) de Benedictis, said Montini was of Hebrew origin.” (Fr. Joaquin Saenz Y Arriaga, The New Montinian Church, p. 391. Jesuit Father Joaquin Saenz Y Arriaga was a doctor of Theology, Church History, and Canon Law. He was one of the first sedevacantists recognizing it in the mid to late 1960’s, perhaps earlier.)

-There is no record of Baptism for Giovanni Montini (Paul VI).

-Was known in his seminary days as a notorious homosexual.

-In 1944, he worked with the Soviets through a childhood friend Togliatti, who was head of the communist Party in Italy. The Archbishop Primate of the Protestant Church in Sweden, who was state official, informed Pope Pius XII of the situation. It came as shock to Pius XII who exiled Montini to Milan without the traditional red hat. He was so angry that he refused the cardinal’s beretta from Pius XII. Investigations into Montini’s Soviet affair resulted in finding that his private secretary, the Jesuit Tondi, was a KGB agent who was once the Professor of Atheism at the University of Marxism-Leninism. Tondi gave the Soviets the names of all the clergy sent to Russia who were immediately caught and executed. Tondi was imprisoned and later married his mistress, the militant communist Carmen Zanti in a civil service. After Montini’s election to the papacy, Tondi returned to Rome to work in the Vatican’s Civil Service as a cover for his KGB activities. Paul VI was greeted on the balcony after his “election” with cries of “il Papa Montinovsky.”

-Paul VI was a communist sympathizer. The Pact of Metz held in 1962, guaranteed that the Vatican would not condemn communism at the Second Vatican Council. However, earlier, in 1942, talks already were in the works with communist Moscow. “It was in that year, that Vatican Monsignor Giovanni Battista Montini, who himself later succeeded to the Papacy as Paul VI, talked directly with Joseph Stalin’s representative. Those talks were aimed at dimming Pius XII’s constant fulminations against the Soviet dictator and Marxism. Stato himself had been privy to those talks. He had also been privy to the conversations between Montini and the Italian Communist Party leader, Palmiro Togliatti, in 1944… “Stato offered to supply reports from the Allied Office of Strategic Services about the matter, beginning, as he recalled, with OSS Report JR-1022 of August 28, 1944.” (Malachi Martin, The Jesuits – The Society of Jesus and the Betrayal of the Roman Catholic Church, New York: Simon & Schuster, 1987; pp. 91-92)

-Mark Winckler, interpreter working at the Vatican, tells of a meeting he had with Cardinal Pignedoli (then Msgr.) Pignedoli told him in 1944 that the failed Freemasonic plan to have Cardinal Rampolla elected pope in 1903 would be corrected when they elect Montini.  (The Destruction of the Christian Tradition, updated and revised, 2006, Rama P. Coomaraswamy  p. 145)

-Montini stated, “Our times, can they also not have an Epiphany which corresponds to its spirit, to its capacities? The marvelous scientific evolution of our days, can it not become this star, this sign that thrusts modern humanity towards a new quest for God, towards a new discovery of Christ?” (Milan, 1956, Le Pape de  l’Epiphanie)

-Montini stated, “Modern man, will he not gradually come to the point where he will discover, as a result of scientific progress, the laws and hidden realities behind the mute face of matter and give ear to the marvelous voice of the spirit that vibrates in it? Will this not be the religion of our day? Einstein himself glimpsed this vision of a universal religion produced spontaneously [i.e., without revelation]. Is this not perhaps today my own religion?” (Conference in Turin, Mar. 27, 1960)

-Montini stated, “We…Catholics…must…first of all, love the world…our times…our civilization…our technical achievements…and above all…love the world.” (Bodart’s La biologie et l’avenir de l’homme)

“At his coronation as Pope Paul VI, several American newspapers accused him of being a member of the Lodge B’nai B’rith – a photograph served as proof.” (The Hidden, But Victorious Way Of The Free-Masonry, Rev. Fr. Henri Mouraux)

-30 Days magazine reported the Chair of Peter for Paul VI was engineered by a large group of Masonic and Modernist cardinals meeting in the home of a leading freemason named Umberto Ortolani just prior to the conclave. (November 3, 1993)

– “The sense of universalism that is rampant in Rome these days is very close to our purpose for existence. Thus we are unable to ignore the Second Vatican Council and its consequences… With all our hearts we support the Revolution of John XXIII… This courageous concept of the Freedom of Thought that lies at the core of our Freemasonic lodges, has spread in a truly magnificent manner right under the Dome of St. Peter’s.” (L’oecumenisme vu par un Franc Macon de Tradition, Yves Marsaudon, 1964, Paris)

-Yves Marsaudon wrote, “Born in our Masonic Lodges, freedom of expression has now spread beautifully over the Dome of St. Peter’s… This is the Revolution of Paul VI. It is clear that Paul VI, not content merely to follow the policy of his predecessor, does in fact intend to go much further…” (Freemasonry and Vatican Two, Y.L. Dupont, Britons: London, 1968)

-Carlos Vazquez Rangel, Grand Commander of the Supreme Council of the Masons of Mexico, in a 1993 interview with the political weekly Processo stated: “On the same day, in Paris the profane Angelo Roncalli and the profane Giovanni Montini were initiated into the august mysteries of the Brotherhood. Thus it was that much that was achieved at the Council was based on Masonic principles.”

-Paul VI promised to pray for the success of Mrs. Hollister and her “Temple of Understanding” (which Cardinal Bagnozzi told him was “an occult enterprise of the Illuminati whose aim is the founding of ‘the World Religion of Human Brotherhood’).

-The Masonic plans were, of course, to infiltrate the Church until one of their own became pope, knowing full well that obedience will be given to him. Thus, the Masonic doctrines will be held as Catholic Orthodoxy. Paul VI stated, “All men must obey him [the pope] in whatever he orders if they wish to be associated with the new economy of the Gospel.” (Allocution, June 29, 1970)

-Paul VI, Message, Sept. 8, 1977: “Stress is legitimately laid nowadays on the necessity of constructing a new world order…” (L’Osservatore Romano, Sept. 22, 1977, p. 11)

-Following Vatican II, Paul VI changed all seven of the sacraments.

-Paul VI approved the help of six Protestants to concoct the ‘novus ordo missae’ (the new mass).

Exorcist Fr. Malachi Martin reported that on June 29, 1963, the night before Paul VI’s coronation, a black mass was celebrated and Satan was enthroned in the Vatican! (Windswept House) Fr. Malachi has confirmed several times in interviews that this is a fact from his book, and has believed the Vatican has been possessed by Satan ever since.

-Paul VI, Address, July 9, 1969: “She [the Church] has also affirmed, during Her long history, at the cost of oppression and persecution, freedom for everyone to profess his own religion. No one, She says, is to be restrained from acting, no one is to be forced to act in a manner contrary to his own beliefs… As we said, the Council demanded a true and public religious freedom…” (L’Osservatore Romano, July 17, 1969, p. 1)

-Paul VI, Letter, July 25, 1975: “…the Holy See rejoices to see specifically emphasized the right of religious liberty.” (L’Osservatore Romano, Aug. 14, 1975, p. 3)

These statements stem from Dignitatis Humanae (Declaration of religious freedom) of Vatican 2. However, the Council of Vienne declared by implication that man does not have the right of religious freedom expressed publicly.

-Paul VI, Telegram after the election of a new Patriarch of Constantinople, July, 1972: “At the moment when you assume a heavy charge in the service of the Church of Christ…” (L’Osservatore Romano, July 27, 1972, p. 12)

Notice that Paul VI is recognizing a schismatic patriarch and church as part of the Church of Christ.

-Paul VI, Joint Declaration with the [schismatic/heretic] Shenouda III, May 10, 1973: “Paul VI, Bishop of Rome and Pope of the Catholic Church, and Shenouda III, Pope of Alexandria and Patriarch of the See of St. Mark… In the name of this charity, we reject all forms of proselytism… Let it cease, where it may exist…” (L’Osservatore Romano, May 24, 1973, p. 6)

-Paul VI, Address, April 28, 1977: “…relations between the Catholic Church and the Anglican Communion… these words of hope, ‘The Anglican Communion united not absorbed,’ are no longer a mere dream.” (L’Osservatore Romano, May 5, 1977, p. 1)

All these statements stem from the Dogmatic Constitution Lumen Gentium of Vatican 2 that implies that the Church of Christ exists outside the Catholic Church, as Paul VI actually states about the Church of Constantinople.

-Paul VI invited Anglicans to use Catholic altars in the Vatican for their services (a sacrilegious act), and place his papal ring on the Anglican “archbishop” and invited him to bless the faithful in St. Peter’s Square.  (The Destruction of the Christian Tradition, updated and revised, 2006, Rama P. Coomaraswamy  p. 152)

-For the sake of ecumenism he did not hesitate to even desecrate the Sacred Body of Our Lord, as for example when he personally authorized giving communion to Barbara Olson, a Presbyterian, at her Nuptial Mass (Sept. 21, 1966) without her abjuring her Presbyterian views or her going to Confession.. Not an isolated act by any means, for he also gave Communion under the same circumstances to the Lutherans (Forts dans la foi, No. 47). As the Abbe of Nantes said, “No one in the world, bishop or cardinal, Angel or even the Pope himself, has any right whatever to give the Sacrament of the Living to those who are spiritually dead.” (Liber Accusationis) quoted in (The Destruction of the Christian Tradition, updated and revised, 2006, Rama P. Coomaraswamy  p. 152)

-He joined Cardinal Willebrands in “the common prayer of the World Council of Churches” (Doc. Cath. Jan 17, 1971)

-Paul VI, Message to United Nations, May 24, 1978: “…we are aware that the path which must lead to the coming of a new international order… cannot in any case be as short as we would like it to be… Disarmament, a new world order and development are three obligations that are inseparably bound together…” (L’Osservatore Romano, June 15, 1978, p. 3)

-On November 13, 1964, Paul VI gave away the triple-crowned papal tiara. Paul VI had the tiara auctioned at the New York World’s Fair. (Fr. Joaquin Saenz Y Arriaga, The New Montinian Church, pp. 394-395)

The Papal Tiara is a sign of a true Pope’s authority – the three crowns representing the dogmatic, liturgical and disciplinary authority of a pope. In giving it away, Paul VI was symbolically giving away the authority of the Papacy. “Cardinal” Ottaviani is by the side of Paul VI as he does this atrocious deed.

-Paul VI gave his Shepherd’s Crook and Fisherman’s Ring to U Thant, head of the UN, who sold them to a Jewish businessman in the Midwest. (The Voice, Dec. 9, 1972 and documented in Hubert Monteilhet, Papa Paul VI – L’Amen-Dada)

-Paul VI abolished the oath against Modernism, at a time when Modernism was everywhere, and why not, for the new religion of Rome, it’s heretical to be against modernism.

-On Nov. 21, 1970, Paul VI also excluded all cardinals over 80 years of age from participating in papal elections. (L’Osservatore Romano, Dec. 3, 1970, p. 10)

This fixes the next conclave.

-Paul VI gave all the bishops a new gold ring in place of the traditional ones as a sign of the new church. He asked the bishops not to use their shepherd’s crooks.

-Paul VI abolished the rite of Tonsure, all four Minor Orders, and the rank of Subdiaconate. (The Reign of Mary, Vol. XXVI, No. 81, p. 17)

– “Paul VI gave back to the Muslims the Standard of Lepanto. The history of the flag was venerable. It was taken from a Turkish admiral during a great naval battle in 1571. While Pope St. Pius V fasted and prayed the Rosary, an out-numbered Christian fleet defeated a much larger Moslem navy, thus saving Christendom from the infidel. In honor of the miraculous victory, Pius V instituted the Feast of Our Lady of the Most Holy Rosary to commemorate her intercession. In one dramatic act, Paul VI renounced not only a remarkable Christian victory, but the prayers and sacrifices of a great pope and saint.” (Mark Fellows, Fatima in Twilight, Niagara Falls, NY: Marmion Publications, 2003, p. 193)

-Under Paul VI, the Holy Office was reformed: its primary function now was research, not defending the Catholic Faith. (Mark Fellows, Fatima in Twilight, p. 193)

-According to those who watched film of Paul VI’s visit to Fatima, he did not pray one Hail Mary.  (Mark Fellows, Fatima in Twilight, p. 206)

-In 1969, Paul VI removed forty saints from the official liturgical calendar. (Nino Lo Bello, The Incredible Book of Vatican Facts and Papal Curiosities, Ligouri, MO: Liguori Pub., 1998, p. 195)

-Paul VI removed solemn exorcisms from the baptismal rite. In the place of the solemn exorcisms, he substituted an optional prayer that makes only a passing reference to fighting the Devil. (The Reign of Mary, Vol. XXVIII, No. 90, p. 8)

-Paul VI granted more than 32,000 requests from priests to return to lay status. (Malachi Martin)

-Paul VI’s disastrous influence was visible immediately. For example, in Holland not a single candidate applied for admission to the priesthood in 1970, and within 12 months every seminary there was closed.  (Piers Compton, The Broken Cross, Cranbrook, Western Australia: Veritas Pub. Co. Ptd Ltd, 1984, p. 138)

-Paul VI, Speech to Lombard Seminary, Dec. 7, 1968: “The Church finds herself in an hour of disquiet, of self-criticism, one might say even of self-destruction… The Church is wounding herself.” (L’Osservatore Romano, Dec. 19, 1968, p. 3)

-Paul VI, General Audience, Oct. 1, 1969: “On the other hand, She [the Church] is also trying to adapt herself and assimilate herself to the world’s ways; She is taking off her distinctive sacral garment, for She wants to feel more human and earthly. “She is tending to let herself be absorbed by the social and temporal milieu. She has almost been seized by human respect at the thought that She is different in some way and obliged to have a style of thought and life which is not that of the world. She is undergoing the world’s changes and degradations with conformist, almost avantegarde zeal.” (L’Osservatore Romano, Oct. 9, 1969, p. 1)

-Paul VI, Homily, June 29, 1972: “Satan’s smoke has made its way into the Temple of God through some crack…” (L’Osservatore Romano, July. 13, 1972, p. 6)

Pretty clever statements to keep the faithful aloof, as Paul VI was one opening up the crack created by John XXIII, to let the smoke of Satan in. Apocalypse 9:1-3: “And there was given to him the key of the bottomless pit. And he opened the bottomless pit: and the smoke of the pit arose, as the smoke of a great furnace…”

-Jean Guitton, an intimate friend of Paul VI, related what Paul VI said at the final session of Vatican II: “It was the final session of the Council,” Guitton wrote, “the most essential, in which Paul VI was to bestow on all humanity the teachings of the Council. He announced this to me on that day with these words, ‘I am about to blow the seven trumpets of the Apocalypse.’” (Jean Guitton, “Nel segno dei Dodici,” interview by Maurizio Blondet, Avvenire, Oct. 11, 1992)

-Paul VI said, “All honour to Man, king of the earth and now prince of the heavens!” (Documentation Catholique’ no.1580)

“Paul went so far once as to state that a pope – to be truly pope – must be acknowledged by the whole human race. One century before this, a French philosopher named Lamennais had been condemned as a heretic for saying just that. And every one of Paul’s predecessors, including Roncalli, would have unhesitatingly condemned Paul VI for saying so…Paul’s new view meant recognizing the autonomy of the individual person and therefore accommodating all possible views. It meant that anyone had a right to be wrong. It meant the Catholic Church was no longer “the one true church of Christ.” It meant embracing the concept of religious pluralism, and abstention from all “missionary activity.” It meant that the people would decide for themselves what to believe and how to behave. Meanwhile, the church was there to minister to their social and physical needs…Paul consented, further, to abandon the age-old Catholic belief that the Mass was a sacrifice. It was, he propounded in an official document, a sacred memorial meal presided over by a “priest”; and only threats by the powerful cardinals Ottaviani and Bacci, saved Paul from proclaiming what would have been this formal heresy. …He gave moral support to terrorists in Spain and left-wing parties in Latin America. He allowed himself and his office to be used by the Communist government of North Vietnam in order to make the Tet offensive of 1968 possible. He favored Castro’s Cuba, and gave free rein to Marxist bishops and priests and nuns in his church of the Americas and Europe and Africa. But Paul never uttered one syllable to protest the crucifixion of Lithuanian Catholics by the Soviets, the persecution of all believers in Hungary, Romania, Czechoslovakia, the tortured prisoners of Castro’s Cuba; no more than he did about the planned destruction of the faith he was elected to protect and spread.” (Malachi Martin, The Decline and Fall of the Catholic Church, Putnam: N.Y. 1981, p. 275) Fr Malachi said in interviews that Paul VI was not an intellectual, and was a weak man.

Interestingly, Humanae Vitae of Paul VI is the most noted document of his papacy. In it, he rejects artificial birth control, yet Pope Pius XI already solemnly condemned it in Casti Cannubi as did Pope Pius XII. Never do we hear how two popes had already solemnly condemned artificial birth control. Rather, all we hear is how Humanae Vitae proves Paul VI’s great orthodoxy as pope.

Read Full Post »

Read Full Post »