FALSE BISHOPS AND TRUE BISHOPS
by
H.E. Bishop Adolphus Zamora H.
God made bishops to govern the Catholic Church, in the first place the Pope, when he is a legitimate successor to Peter, not when he is illegitimate.
But since the call of the Second Vatican Concillium, so called Pastoral, not Dogmatic, spiritual shepperds became "wolves with a lamb skin" inside the herd (the Catholic Church, which was changed at the same time) and which they started to dwindle spiritually.
The great majority of bishops seconded out of obedience sedicent Pope Paul and signed the Acts of such "Concillium", except for a few among whom were Archbishops Lefèbvre and Thuc, faithful Concilliar Fathers, called since then "conservative or traditionalists" for faithfully defending catholic teachings, secularly traditional.
Monsignor Lefèbvre upon witnessing the aposthasy of so many clergymen, seriously protested and wrote a book called "I ACCUSE THE CONCILLIUM", a book that earned him the title of "the Rebel Bishop", "the Antipope", etc. He went on forming priests whom he ordained lithurgically and traditionally, since his first seminary at Ecône, or later on, until in April 1979, although he did not subject himself fully to John Paul II, as his immediate antecesors Usurping Antipope of the Apostholic Site, he requested the False Pope to accept the admission of his new clergy as a collaborator of the bishops, but continuing to be "traditionalists." Of course, J.P. II rejected such an outrageous request that meant infiltration inside the New Postconcilliar Church; although it seemed at that time that the lefèbvrist priests were to be under the jurisdiction of postconciliar bishops.
One of Bishop Lefèbvre's motives to take such a decision, by the way, inconsequential, despite his avowed purpose of taking care of souls was that ten years had elapsed without a legitimate Pope, the Church would cease to exist without its visible head, without Pope, a good reason - for him - to accept J.P.II, despite his being heretical, cismatic and an aposthate; at least - he said - the Catholic Church without a Pope would lose its Visibility...
Old Monsignor Lefèbvre seemed to have forgotten that there were Antipopes in the past, one of them Clement III during 20 long years. On the other hand, doubtless he knew how could he ignore it? the prophecies regarding these times when we are seeing "wolves-shepperds with sheepskin" and "false prophets", etc.
The death of Paul VI nearing, Monsignor Lefèbvre promised that, once Paul VI were dead, he would consecrate bishops; but meanwhile, he did not want to, despite the insistence of concientious catholics regarding the lack of True Bishops in the Catholic Church. By then, Monsignor Lefèbvre seemed to be an honest catholic; but he ceased to be one, as has already been told, on April 1979.
Monsignor Thuc was left solitary, banished in Europe, where he was unable to return to his Archdioceses at Hue, South Vietnam, after the so called Second Vatican Concillium, and from where Paul VI removed him, though illegally; it is obvious that already an octogenarian and somewhat discouraged for having been betrayed by the bishops that he had consecrated at El Palmar de Troya, Spain, the same that after being consecrated, did not want to obey him and were separated to the Schism, that still exists since then, the 70's.
Since Monsignor Lefèbvre did not fulfill his promise of consecrating bishops and Monsignor Thuc wished to leave catholic bishops to the True Church, before due to his advanced age he were unable by his mental faculties to do it, he decided to consecrate them, starting with the dominican priest and Laureate Doctor, born in France, Gerard des Lauriers, on May 1981 and on October that same year,, two Mexicans, priests of the Resistance against Heresy, Moisés Carmona R, of the expiatory temple in Acapulco, Guerrero and the mercedary clergyman Adolfo Zamora Hernández. They, in their turn, at the request of Monsignor Thuc, consecrated in Acapulco, Guerrero, Mr. Priest, a Texan, George J. Nussey on April 1, 1982 and June 18 of the same year, the very meritorious priests Roberto Martínez Gutiérrez, of Zamora, Michoacán, and Benigno Bravo Valadez, of the Lord of Forgiveness Sanctuary at Iguala, Guerrero, being Monsignor Carmona R the consecrant.
Monsignor Mussey, on August 24, 1982, at the franciscan temple in Buffalo, New York, U.S.A., consecrated the no less meritorious franciscan brother Fray Louis Vezelis, Dean of the Rochester Catholic Seminary, being Monsignor Carmona and Monsignor Zamora H. the consecrants.
This is the list of true bishops who are honest catholics:
4 in Mexico: Carmona, Zamora, Martinez and Bravo;
2 in the United States, Mussey and Vezelis;
1 in France, Des Lauriers,
the first, that added to Monsignor Thuc, make up 8.
With them the Apostholic Succession of the Catholic Church is assured and saved. Aside from this - the wellinformed know this - there are other cismatic bishops, not only those from El Palmar de Troya, but also the Greek ones, now already depending on the Russian Patriarch, that assume their "apostholic origin" but in reality are heretical at the same time. The Mexican cismatic are already united to the others.
Jєωιѕн ATTACK ON CATHOLIC BISHOPS
Three months after Monsignor Thuc consecrated his first three legitimate successors, Father Barbará, of Jєωιѕн-French origin, started to disprestige Monsignor Thuc and his bishops calling them "cismatic" who should be thoroughly rejected. The attack was made public from his monthly magazine, where Le Monde of Paris took notice and news agencies (in Jєωιѕн hands, as other information media) made the news fly, certainly sensational, but false. That is now they were taken for its pages by the Mexico City dailt newspapers, such as La Prensa, El Universal and Excélsior, where many read not only lies but also other similar addenda.
The worst consequence was not that the progressive clergy had believed to the letter the falsity, but that even priests considered as "traditionalists" had believed the barbaric slander.
"That bishops consecrated by the Vietnamese bishop are cismatic like himself ... that the consecrations are valid but illicit since there was no Papal license ... that such bishops are at least "suspended" by Canonical Right (as also bishop Cortés, from Chilapa) ... that they were consecrated with 1the Modern Ritual..." and so on with the same yellow press tone.
The validity of consecrations made by Monsignor Thuc and of the consecrated ones made so by him, is firmly grounded in the non-interpolated Canonical Right, besides the Traditional Eclesiastic Magistery. The validity is therefore real, since there is no legitimate Pope, the illicit thing would have been to request the Usurper the election and everything else so that there were catholic bishops, being him anything you want except catholic.
To accuse Monsignor Thuc of cismatic because he has consecrated cismatic bishops at El Palmar de Troya, would be the same as accusing the bishops who have consecrated those that later on became heretic or cismatic; because, as has been said, after having received the consecration from Monsignor Thuc - as he himself has said several times and nobody has said it is untrue - "they went into the schism". Who has thought that the bishop who ordained Martin Luther is heretic as Luther himself? Nobody.
Father Barbará that pressumes of being a "traditionalist" with his slanders has become a public detractor and slanderer of catholic bishops and a good collaborator of the progressive ones and their blodd equals the Jєωιѕн.
Monsignor Thuc has also been accused of having consecrated with the Modern Ritual. This was also a gratuituous and falsa accusation; because the only witnesses of such consecrations were those who gave Monsignor Thuc the lithurgical books, being those persons the most attentive, together with Monsignor Thuc, in making those consecrations follow the apostholic successions of the Traditional Catholic Church. Besides, the consecrated ones themselves would not had accepted Progressive Rituals, being them persevering catholics interested in following the Catholic Tradition.
When Monsignor Carmona R, just recently consecrated, was attacked in a Pastoral Letter by the progressive bishop of Chilapa Monsignor Cortés (six months after he died) he defended himself in a legitimate manner with another Open Letter, invoking valid arguments of Sacred Theology and Canonical Right, besides others. He then reminded Monsignor Cortés - who had declared him cismatic in his Pastoral Letter and not even as bishop; anyway, he "suspended" him and declared void all his ministerial acts - that before taking up the Episcopal Consecration he thought it a great deal before God and took into account the Rules of Right (II of Pope Gregory IX and 88 of Pope Bonifatius VIII. Rule 4th of Pope Gregory IX says: "Need makes licit what is illicit", and the 88 by Bonifatius VIII: "It is true that sins against the law he who adheres to the letter of the law and decries its spirit".
"It is for everyone to see - said Monsignor Carmona - the need for catholic bishops as well for catholic priests, since there are so many faithful catholics who do not have the priestly ministry, that need and look for a way to receive the Holy Sacraments, etc., catholics, not modernists, that is false ones."
"It is not reasonable to assume - he continued - that the legislator had attempted to damage the Catholic Church so much, in whose favor he gave those laws, that by the Vacant Site it could not be delivered to consecrate catholic bishops and, therefore, to ordain true priests, nor administer Sacraments, celebrate Masses ..."
If we continue like this, without true priests nor true bishops (there were only left at the start of the decade out of 80, 2: Monsignor Thuc and Monsignor Lefèbvre, at least publicly known), the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass would be ended, and it cannot be ended because it is perpetual and is sustained by the promise of the Lord: "For I AM with you all the days till the consummation of the centuries" (a promise impossible not to keep) and Luther's statement would have become true (in these or similar words): Let us put an end to the Mass and we shall have finished with the Church. On the other hand, the vehement desire of International Judaism: Destroy down to its basis the Church of Jesus, the son of man, not the Man-God. And they would sing victory, the communists, as well as the masons that have announced the very near, very near death of God ... (Nonsense, of course).
Monsignor Thuc himself in his Declaration at Munich, on February 25 1982, said, among other illuminating statements, what follows: "I believe that after fifty years this Holy Sacrifice of the Mass will not be celebrated any more." He also declared: "I as a bishop of the Roman Catholic Church deem that the Site of the Roman Church is Vacant and that I, as a bishop, must do all I can and must so that the Roman Catholic Church lasts for the salvation of souls."
Look here the faithful bishop of Jesus Christ, legitimate successor of the Apostles, seconding "in all I can and must" the apostholic work in our days, when it seemed "the Church of Christ was completely 'demolished'."
If one can recognize great merit to catholic theologians who are the defenders of the True Faith and Religion, sometimes writing illuminating books, sometimes collaborating in catholic magazines and newspapers, sometimes teaching by word of mouth the clear and pure Truth on the so called Second Vatican Concillium, the merit of Monsignor Thuc seems all the greater as initiator of the restoration of the Catholic Church consecrating catholic bishops. How Monsignor Lefèbvre would have been deserving consecrating bishops!
Well-informed persons regarding the background of Progressism and of the so called Second Vatican Concillium, mischievously presented by Paul VI as only Pastoral, etc., know that International Religious Judaism is the intellectual author, at least, of the so called Demolition of the Catholic Church. We would not err if we said that its plot against the Church is secular and not of a few centuries, due to the peculiar character and satanic tendency of all good Jews against Jesus Christ and his Church.
In the Bible we can read the black history of the Jєωιѕн people, illuminated by turns of divine interventions; that lets you see a series of treacheries to God, the Only True God, that climaxed with the deicide by crucifixion of the Lord, the Only Born from the Father; because - they said and continue saying - "being a man you call yourself God, Son of God and God as the Father ..."
"Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets that have been sent to you ..." said in divine reproach Jesus Christ Himself - that also announced or heralded the destruction of the Holy City, of which there would not be left "stone upon stone".
What is more, the same ones who asked for the death of the Lord, asked in their own words: "Let His blood fall upon us and upon our sons! (in their maximum expression of satanical hatred against, the Lord).
"Sons of Satan of the Devil" He Himself told them too, not in passionate retribution for their calling Him "bedeviled", servant of Belzebub, prince of the demons, but in clear manifestation of the adjectives they had earned on account of their bad to worse conduct towards Him and towards the Celestial Father.
In the same way Lucifer did not want to recognize and adore the Incarnate Word nor serve him, since he knew the Divine Plan of Redemption for sinful Humanity, in the same way the Jews did not want to recognize Jesus Christ, Incarnate Word, despite their knowing the prophecies about Him. They are still waiting for the Messiah, a reason for not accepting the Church founded by Him.
It is true that it was founded on and with persons of the Jєωιѕн race, as He himself was; but he founded ANOTHER CHURCH, since the Mosaic one was deformed, profaned, based more on human traditions than on the Law of God.
"Because of this - he told them publicly- The Kingdom of Heaven and God will be given to others, after having been taken from them (Saint Matthew, XVI, 53), that is to say the salvation of the Church would not be any more for them, that considered themselves to be in the Church of God (God's People) but for the Gentiles that were to be admitted into her. Besides, he said to this end: "He who believes and be baptised, will be saved; he who does not believe will damn himself." The Jews do not believe in Him, even if they are baptised. If they truly believe and are baptised leaving aside their wickedness against Him, it is clear that they are on the way to their salvation, as doubtless were saved those among the first converted ones and others by the preaching of the Apostles, and at the end of time they will be converted - as has been prophecised - and will savethemselves; but meanwhile, they are demolishing the Church of Jesus Christ Our Lord. We are seeing how the Catholic Hierarchy before reneged the Divine and Catholic Faith and has adopted not only the "Faith" of sects but even the ideology of false pagan religions; what is more, even Communism, that is "intrinsically perverse" mainly because it is atheist. Now the Catholic Hierarchy of the past lives together with those who were its enemies and the enemies of the Catholic Religion, to undertake the worst Ecuмenism, not the one commanded by Our Lord Jesus Christ, but damned repeateadly by the Eclesiastical Magistery traditionally catholic.
EPISCOPAL SILENCE AND VATICAN EXCOMMUNION
Despite the sufficient publicity given by the various communications media of universal reach to the new catholic bishops in Mexico right from the beginning of 1982, neither in Europe nor in America was there any attack or protesting as a moral person the "progressive bishops" before the unexpected presence of "clandestine bishops" (La Prensa, Mexico City daily newspaper) regarding whom the former Jesuit Father Ramírez, spokesman of the "maximum eclesiastical authority of the city" declared that "their consecrations were illicit; but may be valid". The Mexican Episcopal Committee lasted in silence more than a year, the one who could have felt more the "clandestine ones", as an obstacle together with the "bishops in power" (in fact, not by right, it is clear). Its silence was triumphant or castigating, as the vanquisher or that of a tyrant? In reality, it lent itself to many interpretations.
Perhaps Cardinal Corripio Ahumada imposed his criterion on the rest? Since he knew that there were in his Archdiocese "traditionalist priests" and since, after doubtless some sort of secret investigation, he declared with these words (or similar ones): "Leave them alone ... they are old of age and they will not tarry long to die and thus everything will be over ..."
His "life-forgiving license" could be qualified as prudential, if he had adopted the criterion followed by the zanedrin defender of the Apostles.
The only protestant "bishop" seemingly really "castigator" that at the beginning of 1982 sent a Pastoral Letter whipping Monsignor Carmona R, six months after he had received (almost by return mail) another Open Letter maturely seasoned with valid arguments of same logic and catholic doctrine, he died ...; a fact that greatly impressed his correligionaries; because instead of the catholic bishop dying, the one who died was the progressive one, admonished by Monsignor Carmona R.
On April 7 1983, the news arrived in Mexico through the mass communications media of the Excommunion launched by John Paul II against Monsignor Thuc and all bishops consecrated by him and his successors, razing equally all the cismatic-heretics of El Palmar de Troya, twice before excommunicated; once by the sacred rules of Cannonical Law and another by the Progressive Vatican, that is, a triple excommunion ... and for the truly catholic bishops, invulnerable to the sacred cannonical rules, just as much as the progressive vatican fulminations.
Of course that to catholic bishops there was no reason to worry in the least about the Excommunion by the Antipope John Paul II. When some newsmen approached them, they answered that they did not care about the vatican excommunion, that has no validity, lacking all validity.
For their part the four Mexican catholic bishops signed a full page advertisement in Excélsior, a Mexican daily newspaper, titled JOHN PAUL II IS NOT A CATHOLIC POPE, a declaration that was made by Monsignor Thuc a year ago in Munich, Germany and supported since then with other most important declarations by the same Monsignor.
In Acapulco, Guerrero, on May 26 1983, they subscribed ample declarations denouncing on the basis of historical proofs of the Vacant Site, the Invalidity of the New Mass, the False Ecuмenism and the False Religious Liberty, the Invalidity of the mentioned Excommunions and the Great Swindle that the New Church commits when it presents itself and acts as if it were the True Catholic Church.
El Sol de México first and then El Seglar (this one on June 1983) published these declarations.
Adolphus,
(Episcopus Catholicus)
Mexico City, June 1983. |
Topic: Autobiography of Archbishop Thuc (Read 508783 times)