.

I thought I had posted this somewhere but maybe I didn't because
it doesn't turn up in any search.

This is a find.  Fr. Hewko spends a good 10 minutes on a
topic of great importance, that has nothing specifically to
do with the title of the sermon, Our Lady of Good Counsel.

That is, unless you misspell "counsel" as "council" and replace "good"
with "evil."  Then, yes, it could be thought of as:


"Our Lady of Good Counsel is no friend of the Evil Council."


Anyone who might be finding himself "on the fence" about the AFD
or its implications, or anyone who may think that this docuмent is
somehow merely an "invitation to dialogue" with Newrome about
the legitimacy of the promulgation of the Newmass, or whether the
Newmass is pleasing to God, ought to listen to this sermon.



Here is a partial transcript for those who may like to know what's in
this recording before investing the time it takes to listen to it, when
there are about 200 other videos to select from:







http://CathInfo.com/



Fr. Hewko, April 26, 2013, Miracle of Our Lady of Good Counsel

19:30
Put it simply: if you had before you the doctrinal preamble [sic] of April
15th, 2012 [the AFD, Doctrinal Declaration],
which says, "Vat.II is acceptable in the" so-called "light of tradition,"
that "Vat.II enlightens and deepens the understanding of tradition,"
-since when?!  It also admits the legitimacy of the Newmass.  If you
say the Newmass is legitimate and valid, that's one step from saying
it, and going to it.

And this Newmass cannot be officially, legally promulgated because
it's destructive to the Church!  It kills souls.  It ruins the Faith.  It's
a Modernist liturgy.  Even if the Newmass is said facing the altar,
in Latin, with Gregorian Chant and [proper Frankensense] incense, it
is still poisonous to the Faith.  It still attacks Jesus Christ's royalty;
it attacks His sacred priesthood;  it attacks the sacrificial nature of
the Mass.  It's through-and-through poison.  So we can never
concede to that!  

Archbishop Lefebvre NEVER called the Newmass "legitimate."

And then, on this docuмent, you have to sign that you accept the
New Code of Canon Law, which admits of giving Communion to
non-Catholics, inverts the end roles of Marriage, has a new
definition of the Church, and is permeated with the poison of false
religious liberty and false ecuмenism, and false democracy within
the Church.And Archbishop Lefebvre said many times that this new
code of canon law is unacceptable. Unacceptable!  Because he saw
that it's poison.


So, if you had the choice to sign that

docuмent, or martyrdom, what would you do?  


If you know that admitting Vat.II, which is full of
heresies, full of ambiguous language, an attack on the Faith, an
attack on Jesus Christ as King, an attack on Jesus Christ as the only
way to heaven because of its [false] ecuмenism which says all the
other religions can be vehicles of the Holy Ghost to save souls --
that's FALSE!  

What would you do?  Can you sign that docuмent, or would
you go to the wolves or go to the cliff to get thrown off,
or do you get your head chopped off, or do you get burned alive?

Let's be faith - let's be truthful.  Any Catholic signing that would
betray his faith, would betray Jesus Christ the King, would betray
all the popes of Tradition that condemned the errors of Vat.II,
condemned the errors of the New Code of Canon Law, condemned
the Newmass in the vernacular facing the people.  And it would be
a betrayal of the Faith to sign that docuмent.  If I signed that
knowingly, I would knowingly betray Our Lord.  And I would go
to hell.  And I would have to choose before God, martyrdom,
and choose the most cruel death, or whatever death they would
put on me.  I'd have to.

So how is it possible that such a docuмent was signed, sealed,
delivered - officially - this is not 'rumor', it's the official stand of
the Society of St. Pius X. It's FRIGHTENING how this has happened.
But it's happened. This is history, now.  This is reality.

And now, the [real] rumors are saying, "Well, now, it's a dead
docuмent, there's no agreement, so everything's okay." That's not
true!  The docuмent is ALIVE and KICKING, because the
punishments on priests are still going on:  there are 3 priests in
France as I speak, who are being silenced, punished, being almost
on a lock-down position;  and Menzingen is demanding a Letter of
Apology!

Let's turn the tables a little bit.  Where's the "Letter of Apology"
from Bishop Fellay and the Superiors?  Where's the retraction, and
the repudiation of these compromises against the Catholic Faith?
Where are they? Where are they?  We could maybe believe them
if we see their repudiation and rejection. And Bishop Williamson
exonorated and these priests who are falsely silenced and
condemned and expelled -- brought back!  Believe me: there's
nothing we want more than for the SSPX to regain its former role
and mission of defense of the Catholic Faith.  And I love the
Society of St. Pius X - that's why, that I love her, we must
speak out against this turn to a brick wall, to this turn off the
cliff, to this turn towards compromise, which is official.

So, if you had this docuмent before you, any lay Catholic, it
doesn't matter if you're a priest or a nun or a little boy, you
cannot sign that -- you would have to choose death -- over
signing the very same docuмent sent last year, April 15th.
And this shows you the gravity of the Crisis of this
period.  

So, the real Archbishop Lefebvre, who was he?  Well, just read
his writings!  -Especially after 1988!  After 1988 he's much at
peace, he's very clear;  no more talks about agreement with
Rome until Rome comes back to Tradition.  How do we know
when Rome comes back to Tradition?  -When Rome professes
all the encyclicals of the popes, the Anti-Modernist Oath, and
the social Kingship of Jesus Christ.  Then we [would] know.  
And then there wouldn't even have to be an 'agreement' because
then Rome would finally know what it's supposed to be doing -
the pope would finally be doing his duty.  But until then, no false
compromise!  

And the real Archbishop Lefebvre, yes, there times when he
was hopeful for some recognition from Rome, some canonical
normalization, but there were times, when he realized these
men are not honest!

They're working in a diametrically opposed direction. And he
himself said, even if they grant us the Latin Mass, even if they
grant us to have our seminaries to train traditionally, even if
they grant us the Indult, the Latin Mass of all time -- these are
all manouvers to get us back to the Council!! -To Vat.II.

So, the REAL Archbishop Lefebvre, he wrestled with the dragon
of Modernism, and after 1988, after consecrating the 4 bishops,
he continued to attack the Modernism of the Pope.  The
Protocol that he signed said, he'd no longer be polemical.  But
he even became MORE polemical by consecrating more bishops,
by attacking Assisi , attacking the Modernism of the Pope. So
he obviously disregarded completely the signature that he gave to
the Protocol.  It was totally rejected by his actions and his words.

So, the REAL Archbishop Lefebvre left to his sons, like his
last testament.  Here's your guidance;  here's what you're
supposed to do, in this confusing time:  Don't put yourselves
under Rome till Rome comes back to Tradition!  Very clear,
very simple.

And another proof is, the three bishops last April 7th, wrote
to Bishop Fellay:  Don't go this direction - it's going to
cause division, disunion, distrust of authority -- and it was
completely disregarded [by +F].  The response letter [from
+F] was manifest Modernism, and showed the new direction.

28:11
So, we have to stay with reality.  And I encourage
you: if you want to read something, very powerful, the
Spiritual Journeys of Archbishop Lefebvre.  In there he
says, beware, you priests!  If you want to stay priests, and keep
the Catholic Faith, stay far away from the Council and the conciliar
church! -Because the closer you come to it, you will lose your faith.
That's page 13, SpiritualJourneys. Read this, and then
read his Conferences of a year later and then two years
later.  

And he's very clear.  He says, this struggle goes way back to
the French Revolution, to the Protestant Revolution.  And we're
fighting the same fight, to keep the Faith of all time.




[The final minutes are regarding the danger of having any 'deal'
without Rome proving that Rome has first returned to the Faith
of all time.]




35:30
Just this week, the Good Shepherd Institute was put under the
local bishop and they will have to start saying the Newmass.



[In the last few minutes Fr. Hewko describes +F as doing the
very same things that Paul VI did in the wake of Vat.II.]

.


It seems to me that this question of whether one would sign this AFD or
not should be more widely examined.  

In my experience, those who favor taking sides with +F are prone to not
want to examine any of the propositions of the AFD, as though for them to
do so is to 'cross the line' where they have no right to go.  

But if it comes down to "DO YOU BELIEVE THIS?" -maybe that would wake
them up?