Question:
Why can we expect that the current Vatican will do nothing to
restore the Feast Day of Corpus Christi in the Universal Church,
since it has fallen into disuse?
Answer:
Read the following speech given on this topic, the substance of
the Secret of Fatima.
The ѕυιcιdє of Altering the Faith in the Liturgy
important contribution to the literature of how the
Traditional Mass has never been suppressed.
Not just a defense of how the Traditional Mass has
never been forbidden, Father explains that
it is the duty of the Roman Catholic to adhere to the
received and approved rites.
The Novus Ordo is the preparation for the
One World Religion as foretold by Pope St. Pius X:
Appropriately, on the topic of Liturgy and Sanity,
my book has the title, which is in fact the words of Pope Pius XII,
"the ѕυιcιdє of altering the Faith in the liturgy."
It's quite clear that if something is suicidal, it is not
healthy, it is not sane.
Pope Pius XII in the context of the Message of Fatima,
referred to the "ѕυιcιdє of altering the Faith in the Liturgy."
He himself had not opened the envelope containing the one
page letter in which sister Lucy wrote down the words of Our
Lady of Fatima that form the Third Secret, but he was informed,
as I've explained my articles and previous talks, Pope
Pius XII had sent Father Joseph Sweigel, who met Sister Lucy
on the second of September, 1952, and
Sister Lucy explained entirely what is in the Third Secret to him,
and he brought the Secret back to Rome, verbally.
Pope Pius XII however, was already in contact with those who knew
the content of the Third Secret. And so he explicitly mentioned
the message of Our Lady to Lucy of Fatima,
his preoccupation, and he said the day would come when the Church would
doubt as Peter had doubted, and he referred specifically to
"the ѕυιcιdє of altering the Faith in the Liturgy."
That the changes in the liturgy would be suicidal, would be
easy enough to predict, because it is something forbidden by divine
law. This is something that many of the pastors in the Church had completely
lost sight of, when they decided to authorize the overhaul of the liturgy
and revise it, although most of the council Fathers at the Second
Vatican Council had no intention of making changes so radical as
those that were made.
But the changes themselves were carefully planned, long in advance,
and they were planned for a specific purpose. And if we examine where
those plans came from, where they originated, then we can grasp the utter
madness of allowing the altered liturgy to continue,
because it is in fact, something far worse than at first glance
we might imagine.
I remeber back in 1983, I was visiting some friends that I had studied with
in my seminary days in Italy. This was in the Philippines,
outside the city of Manila in MetroManila in Novaliches,
an old friend of mine, Father Antonio, had a stack of magazines,
the name of the magazine is Chiesa Viva, the living Church. It's published
by Father Luigi Villa, a very staunch defender of tradition and orthodoxy.
So one afternoon, Father Antonio took out the magazines and started
reading to me from one issue an article.
Dom Villa had published Masonic docuмents going back to the 1920's
and these Masonic docuмents outlined exactly what changes they
wanted to have made in the liturgy, how they wanted Mass to be
reformed. And this was the first time that I really began to understand
just how wrong were the reforms in the liturgy that took place after
the second Vatican Council. Because every single thing
that was outlined in that docuмent, what kind of changes
the brethren of the Lodge wanted to have made in the Mass:
these were precisely the changes that were introduced in the Novus
Ordo Missae of Pope Paul VI.
The liturgical reform, point by point, carried out exactly the program
of liturgical reform outlined by Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ. Now depending on
what is one's grasp of the nature of Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ,
directly proportionate to our understanding of what is Masonry,
will be our understanding of the gravity of the danger and
the madness of having replaced the received and approved rite that
had been customarily used in the solemn administration of the
sacraments and the Holy Mass of so many centuries, and that
replaced with a concocted liturgy made according, and precisely
according, to the specifications set forth by Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ.
Some people even have the idea that Masonry is not such a threat
as it had once been considered to be in the past.
If we consider the history of the organization we will understand
that it is the most frightful and powerful organization in the entire
world. All too often we tend to view subversive movements,
Communism, Grand Orient Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ, some of the more extreme
secret societies in a disconnected manner, as though it were
from some distance, Satan is pulling the strings these organizations
have sprung up like mushrooms, with the purpose of doing harm to
the Church, to the Catholic Faith, for the ruin of souls.
But it's something far worse than that. If we want to understand
where these things have their origin we must look to Sacred Scripture.
Already in the Apostolic Age the early Church was attacked by heresy.
That heresy was gnosticism. In its earliest manifestation in the Church,
it was called Docetism because, based on the Greek verb meaning to seem,
it was a denial of the Incarnation of Jesus Christ. This was the basis
of that heresy. And so the Docetists taught that Our Lord Jesus Christ
had an apparent body, but since they believed in a dual principle of
good and evil and that good is entirely spiritual, and therefore,
everything that is material is evil, the only conclusion for one who
believes this way is that God could not be in incarnate in a human body
where all material is evil.
And so their doctrine was that Our Lord's body only seem to be a
material, human body, something like the glorified body of those who have
gloriously risen from the dead but with no substance of body at all; mere
appearance. [Remnants of this idea were adopted by Mohammedism.]
St Paul commented that the mystery of iniquity is already operating among us.
If you carefully examine historical docuмents, ancient chronicles,
and there are some writers that have actually undertaken the task
done the homework for us. You will see that century by century, in an
unbroken succession, the mystery of iniquity has attacked the Church
founded by Jesus Christ, which is the Ark of Salvation.
In the Old Testament we see the struggle between the followers of
almighty God, the chosen people, the Israelites, and the pagan gods
and their followers. St. Paul, of course, tells us, and not just St. Paul
but the Scripture itself in the Old Testament, that the gods of
pagans are devils.
Century after century there has been the combat between the devil
and his minions, and God and His Faithful in both testaments.
And so the mystery of iniquity unfolds and develops down through
the centuries. At root it is always the selfsame thing, but it presents
itself to successive ages each time always wearing a different mask,
multiple different masks. And so it was, that when Adolf Hitler signed a
treaty, the non-aggression pact with Stalin, his fellow nαzιs were
highly critical. How could he make a deal with the Communists, who were
the arch enemies with the nαzιs?
Hitler in his own defense, said, Communism and national socialism are
essentially the same thing.
The mystery of iniquity wears different masks so that it will be in
control of apparently opposing groups, opposing organizations and
opposing nations and diverse religious organizations, gaining control
of them so they will all, in spite of their mutual opposition, be
working for the same end, for the same purpose.
Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ, as Albert Pike explains, is gnostic in its very essence.
And as Pike further explains, the sacred scriptures of Masonry are the
so-called Jєωιѕн Kaballa. It is a pantheistic system of pseudo-religious
thought, formulated philosophically in the system of Hegel; in a
mystical pseudo-theological manner, by Pierre Teilhard de Chardin;
in a pseudo Judaic garb by the Kabbalists.
But it is all, as the Masons themselves quite appropriately termed as,
the ancient mysteries.
What are the ancient mysteries? It's the pagan mysteries of old.
The ancient Caananites believed in the god called Baal. His proper
title would be Beelzeebul, a name that means, the lord of the earth,
or prince of the world.
So here we get the origin of the name designated by Our Blessed Savior,
Jesus Christ. He refers to the Prince of Darkness, the prince of this
world. In ancient Caanan, they built temples to this false god. In those
temples they had a liturgy, according to the mythology of that religion,
Baal had been cast out of heaven. Of course, We read in Scripture
that God condemned him to hell for all eternity, and the great battle,
Michael and his angels cast him out of heaven.
Our Lord Jesus Christ stated in the Gospel, I saw Satan fall from heaven
like lightening.
But the devotees of Baal chanted in their liturgy that in the end Baal
will triumph, he will conquer heaven, he will regain the kingdom
that he has lost.
Now, one does not have to be well-versed in
metaphysics to understand the basic principle that there can only be one God
there cannot be two or three or any others. Because God is a supreme being.
Everything that exists is composed of potentiality and act. It doesn't
require great analytical powers to arrive at this conclusion. It is something
that is plain as day. And since all things that we come into contact with
are created, because they are composed of this dual principle of potentiality
and act, we know that everything in this universe, material or spiritual, is
created by God, because what is not essential being is participated being, and
that which is participated being depends on that which is essential being for
all of its existence.
So we encounter this principle in the Quinqivia the 5 ways where St. Thomas
Aquinas proves the existence of God. 5 distinct proofs but each one hinges
on that principle of potentiality and act, and therefore, all reality can only
be rationally understood in having intelligibility
if we understand that there is a
supreme being who is essentially, perfectly
infinitely the pure act of being, and
everything else that exists is creation, created by God.
And that's why God revealed His name to Moses when He said, I am Who Am,
because God is revealing Himself as the infinite, eternal and perfect act
of being, the source of all being and therefore the creator of all things.
From this we gain the certain understanding, there can
only be one God, there exists one God and therefore that is
our first Article of Faith. When we profess our faith we say,
that I believe in God, the creator almighty, creator of
heaven and earth. A corollary of this truth, is as
St. Maximilian Kolbe explained to a Japanese pagan philosopher,
since there is only one God, there can be only one true religion.
Masonry is a religion, it proclaims itself as such. It is
the religion of the ancient pagan mysteries.
The pagans would gather all the gods together and work them into their
system, their mythological system of belief. But in the hierarchy of the
so-called gods, there was one who had the highest place, and that is the
one who is the arch-enemy of almighty God,
who identifies Himself, with those to whom he chose to
revealed Himself, to the patriarchs Abraham Isaac and Jacob.
The entire Old Testament we can see is a struggle between
the one true God and the false god, the one who fell from
heaven like lightening.
Albert Pike explains in the Morals and Dogma of Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ, that
those ancient, pagan mysteries are properly the substance of the religion
of Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ. As Scripture teaches us, the gods of the pagans are devils.
And Pike goes on to reveal who is the god of Masonry, with those terrible
words, "Lucifer, the Light Bearer, doubt it not."
Now this is something that should really fill us with horror, when we consider
that Masonry is a pagan, satanic, lucifarian religion, dedicated to the utter
destruction, and overthrow of the Catholic faith, the Catholic religion, the
Kingdom of God established in this world by Jesus Christ, Our Lord.
The liturgical reform carried out by the Consilium after Vatican II point by
point carried out the reforms prescribed by Masonry, whose program is to
destroy the Catholic faith, to subvert our worship, and replace the true
religion with the false, Lucifarian religion of Masonry.
This alone, this consideration alone, shows us what is the madness
of carrying on with a liturgy, established in the post-Conciliar
liturgical reform, under the leadership of Annibale Bugnini,
who was, in fact a Mason!
What we have to confront, is the movement of an enemy, an enemy that
occupies by stealth.
It reminds me of the Korean War. The Communists were so clever.
The way they infiltrated across the border of China into Korea, the Allied
forces of General MacArthur were not even aware that they were ready to strike.
No one saw any evidence of the presence of massive numbers of enemy
troops, Nevertheless the Communists were prepared and ready to strike,
and they dealt a deadly blow.
In the Catholic Church, under the camoflage of every imaginable explanation
why we have to carry out these utterly ruinous reforms and continue and
persevere, until there is nothing left of Catholicism, every conceivable
excuse and explanation is given to justify it, but this is all camoflage.
But what we see is taking place in the Church today, is the occupation by an
army of enemy forces.
In the Book of Lamentations we read, all the kings of the world and all
the inhabitants of the earth could not believe that the adversary and the
enemy, had entered in through the gates of Jerusalem. One might legitimately ask
could this refer to what has happened to the Church since the Council?
The answer is emphatically "YES."
Because that is the substance of the Secret of Fatima.
One might first wonder, how can it be? When the world awaited the
revelation of the Third Secret of Fatima, and it appeared that
Pope John was planning to reveal the secret before he opened it.
When he opened the envelope and read that single sheet of paper, he decided
it could not be revealed. The press release from the Vatican said that it would
probably never be revealed.
I've heard it from a number of sources, and this is close to 30 years ago, when
people were still alive who knew Pope John XXIII personally; these are
good sources.
Pope John opened the envelope, he read it, he turned white, and he almost fainted.
One might legitimately ask, if the Church is faced with something so horrifying,
and so dangerous, that the Pope would be so struck with horror as he read it, then
why did he keep it secret?
People have asked this question over and over again, I'm sure for nearly
everyone here, this is not the first time you've heard this question.
Today I'm going to answer the question.
One who had the privilege of reading the secret was Malachi Martin. It was handed
to him by Pope John. He was together with Pope John XXIII and Cardinal Bea.
Malachi Martin said of the Third Secret of Fatima, that there is something there
so horrifying, that if it were made known to people that Churches would be filled,
that people would be kneeling before the Blessed Sacrament, that they would be
striking and beating their breasts, begging God for mercy.
So when we, quite correctly, guess that in the Third Secret, there are things such
as the material annihilation of entire nations, nuclear war, great catastrophes,
these things are horrifying enough, but I don't see the churches filling up with
people, falling on their knees and begging for mercy, because there is something
so horrifying, that it would be scarcely to be imagined and would be difficult to
guess, were it not for the fact that Pope Benedict, before he was elected to the
Roman Pontificate, 22 years ago in an interview that was published in November of
1984, he gave the secret away without realizing it.
But what he said, in principle, contains the horrors of the Third secret.
I'm sure nearly all of you have heard the quotation before, when Cardinal
Ratzinger said that the Third Secret deals with the dangers to the faith and
the life of the Christian, and he said that what is set forth in the Third
Secret has been repeated again and again in other Marian Apparitions.
And in my articles, I have dealt in detail with the chastisements foretold in
some of the other Marian apparitions.
He also pointed out Scripture: the eschatalogical texts of Sacred Scripture,
where the Marian apparitions reveal so much up to a certain point -- if we want
to begin to grasp the full horror of what is in the Third Secret -- bearing in
mind that Cardinal Ratzinger joined together the contents of the Third Secret
and the chastisements foretold in other Marian apparitions, with the dreadful,
apocalyptic, eschatalogical text of Sacred Scripture.
In the early days of the Church, Saint Paul warned us that the mystery of
iniquity is already operating among us. When it culminates into the fullness of
its horrors, then we will recognize that it is what we know it to be,
named in Sacred Scripture as the mystery of Babylon.
Why Babylon? Why does Scripture refer to the mystery of iniquity in such terms?
It is because we have in the Book of Genesis, a prophetic symbol of that
apocalyptic Beast, the Tower of Babel. The encouraging thing about the Tower
of Babel is that it is never fully never completed. Not because the builders got
tired of what they were trying to do, since they had been working on it since
Old Testament times.
If we recall, in the Book of Genesis, it was God who destroyed it.
This is the connection with the message of Fatima.
The destruction of that mystery of iniquity, the mystery of Babylon
Pope and the bishops consecrate Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary.
But in order to set into place the abomination that makes desolate
our Holy Catholic religion has to be subverted and destroyed as the Masons
explained, in order that it be replaced with the Satanic, Masonic worship.
That will be the religion of the nєω ωσrℓ∂ σr∂єr, the one world government, the
one world religion, foretold by Pope St. Pius X.
Pope St. Pius X seeing the stage to which the mystery of iniquity has
developed, hopefully spoke of this fear that the Antichrist was already alive
and living on this earth.
This is where we get to the liturgical reform. The actual liturgical reform
that has taken place in the Church is a Masonic reform.
It is designed for the purpose of destroying the Catholic faith and replacing
it with a false religion. The Masonic project is the unity of all religions
in one, great universal, so-called Church.
And in order to unite all religions together, they must get rid of dogmas.
We are told that "dogmas divide."
We must have a religion that all men can agree on. And so
the Masonic writers say that what we need to do with Christianity: we
must have a dogma free Christianity.
And so they constructed a liturgy, the novus ordo mass: and you cannot
help but notice how the dogmatic content: in some places is very much
obscured and in other places entirely eliminated. It's not an accident why
the new mass of Paul IV is so devoid of dogmatic content.
Now, someone might object: the Liturgy is not a catechism class. It's not
supposed to enumerate the dogmas of faith clearly so we can learn from it.
That's what the catechism is for. But that is a wrong objection.
As Father Sommerville pointed out in his talk,
the teaching of the Popes has been, and it goes back to the time where it was
formulated, by Pope Saint Celestine in the fifth century:
Legem credendi statuat lex supplicandi.
Let the law of prayer establish the law of belief.
That principle must be rightly understood.
The law of prayer is not something that can be legislated.
How did it turn out that the law of prayer established the law of belief?
Logically, you would think it was the other way around.
You have the Creed, the dogmas of our faith, and if we're going to
construct prayers and liturgies, we're going to have to make very sure
that those prayers conform to the dogmas of our faith. So you might
justifiably wonder, why did not the Church say,
Let the law of faith establish the law of prayer???
But in fact, it's been repeated over and over again down through the
centuries:
Let the law of prayer establish the law of belief.
If we understand how liturgy comes into being, then it becomes perfectly
clear, the aptness, the appropriateness the correctness of the principle.
I quote in my book the great scholars of the 20th century when he said
that liturgy is not created or composed, it's not concocted, I don't
remember the verbatim quotation, but words to this effect:
Liturgy grows in the devotion of the centuries.
The development of the traditional liturgies began in the Apostolic Age.
The Apostles preached the Faith and it was that faith that was received
under the prompting of the Holy Ghost, which poured forth into prayer
and became the basis of our Sacred Liturgy.
It is the Faith under the guidance of the Holy Ghost, that
down through the centuries formed our liturgy. And thus it was
the faith that first established the law of prayer.
And THAT is why the law of prayer established the law of belief.
Because it is entirely produced and created,
the product of our divine and Catholic faith.
It is in THIS manner that the the law of prayer establishes the law of belief.
And with that in mind we can understand perfectly well that
a liturgy concocted by the members of a commission can never be the law
of prayer, and it can never establish the law of belief.
And so it is, that the liturgy is not something that
Church authorities simply concoct and compose and
by decree impose upon the Church.
It has never been that way, and and it cannot be that way, because it is
the law of God, expressed in the solemn profession of faith,
the Tridentine profession of Faith, and repeated again and again,
also in the First Vatican Council.
The principle is set forth in our profession of faith
that we must adhere to the received and approved rite
customarily used in the solemn administration of the sacraments.
Received and approved: what that means is the rite that has
been received, handed down in the process of tradition.
The perpetuation of that tradition establishes the custom, the customary liturgy;
custom which is the best interpreter of laws, according to
the code of canon law. The law of custom therefore, in liturgy is a
law unto itself, because it is a profession of faith.
It is not a human law, it is not an ecclesiastical law,
it is Divine Law that binds the Catholic conscience
to the received and approved rites customarily used in the
solemn administration of the sacraments. This is the reason that
Pope St. Pius V in Quo Primum declared so solemnly, and
although he uses a legal that is very similar to expressions used
in other docuмents of merely ecclesiastical law and this similarity
of expression is sometimes used as an argument that Quo Primum is
just an ecclesiastical law enacted by one pope and that can be
repealed by another. But look carefully and you'll see that there
is a far more solemn wording to this docuмent of Quo Primum.
Pope St. Pius V says, by our apostolic authority We statute,
decree and declare that this present docuмent cannot ever be
revoked or modified.
Now, either he has declared solemnly by his apostolic authority,
that the docuмent cannot be repealed or diminished any way, or else
words have lost their meaning. Some people are still mystified, and
some men with more degrees than I have and more degrees than I
will ever have in such departments of canon law and theology,
they have a problem accepting this point.
I understood, however, in a book I had earlier read, it did not cite the
dogmatic sources, but I was given the clue when I read that
Quo Primum is not a dogmatic definition. It is BASED ON DOGMA,
so I decided, that if this is true, I would be able to find that
dogmatic expression somewhere. And I eventually did.
It is in the Tridentine profession of faith;
it is in the Coronation Oath that the Popes had to solemnly swear for
600 years from Pope St. Agatho until Celestine the fifth. They solemnly swore,
testifying to the fact
that they did not possess the authority to change the Church's rites and discipline.
Pope st. Gelasius explained, there can be modifications made of the
Church's discipline. To make a modification and to radically alter it
are two entirely different things.
The popes solemnly swore to Saint Peter that they
did not have the power to change the liturgy and the discipline of the Church.
Down through the centuries the popes have pointed out that the pope can
make modifications according to the emerging, different needs of the Church.
Down through the ages, of course it is clear that some modifications are
going to be needed to be made because there are changes to the ways that
we live down through the centuries this is only common sense,
basic principle enshrined in this docuмent of tradition, is that the
Pope does not possess the authority to overthrow the liturgy
To overthrow discipline of the Church.
The Pope has supreme power, not absolute. Only God has absolute authority.
Supreme authority means that the pope has the highest authority on earth.
But it is limited and circuмscribed according
to the teaching of the Church. And it is limited regarding the liturgy,
according to those docuмents that set forth the
Church's traditional faith, the rule of faith which is Tradition.
And the rule of faith is that the Catholic conscience is forever
bound to receive, to embrace, and hold on to,
adhere to the received and approved rites handed down in the Church.
This is the reason Pope St. Pius V in Quo Primum, says, regarding the Mass
that is in his 1570 missal, he says, this is the rite, handed down
in the Roman Church.
Which means to say, the Roman Rite, the venerable Roman Rite in
the Tridentine Missal, is the received and approved rite handed
down in the Roman Church. As such, the dogma of faith binds the Catholic
to the received and approved rite, and therefore to that Roman rite of Mass
set forth in the Tridentine missal.
The same principle is at work earlier in the Council of Florence.
The question of leavened bread or unleavened bread:
The Council of Florence decides, and defines, that in the
Greek Church, the Sacrament of the Eucharist is to be confected
with leavened bread, and that the Blessed Sacrament in the
Roman Church is to be confected with unleavened bread.
And the docuмent gives us the reasons:
each is to follow the custom of his own, ritual Church.
And therefore, the unleavened bread pertains to the custom of the
received and approved rite of the Roman Church and therefore
it is sanctioned by divine law, and it cannot be changed.
No Pope can arbitrarily ever tell us we must use leavened bread.
Because it is by divine law that we adhere to the customary,
received and approved rite. Likewise the Council of Florence defined
that in the Greek Church they are to use the leavened bread because
that is the custom in their received and approved rite.
This is why something that would appear at first glance to be merely
disciplinary is solemnly decreed and solemnly defined, because liturgy
is not mere discipline. There is a disciplinary consequence and a
disciplinary aspect about liturgy, but first and foremost, the
liturgy is governed according to divine law as it is set forth,
St. Paul in the very foundational principle of all liturgy, says:
I handed on that which I have received.
And St. Paul in the context makes it clear he is not simply talking about
dogmatic teachings, speculative doctrines, but such concrete things as
liturgy itself, because it was in that context that he spoke of the very
first Mass, when Our Blessed Lord took bread and wine
and changed it into His Most Precious Body and Blood.
And then St. Paul says, I have handed on that which I have received.
This is the principle of divine law, the liturgy to be handed on
is that which is received.
Therefore, by Divine Law, that which is the received and approved rite
cannot be replaced or changed.
One doesn't have to be a prophet to understand that if we depart from
divine law, transgress the divine law, we are not going to obtain a
good result. But that is what was done with the liturgical reform of the
Second Vatican Council.
But the new liturgy is more than just something that we
consider to be defective in the abstract. As I mentioned before,
it was designed by Masons!
The priests who formed the Consilium were fed with these suggestions from
Bugnini and his brother Masons, and whatever convincing and apparently
justifiable arguments that were given, ultimately it had been
drawn up in advance, for the purpose of a transition from Catholicism
to Masonic Lucifarianism.
It is madness,it is the height of insanity that the pastors of the Church
will make any excuse to maintain in use the Novus Ordo liturgy which was
created by the enemy within the gate for the purpose of conquering the
Church, subverting it, and destroying it, and replacing the worship of
God with the worship of satan.
It sounds unbelievable, but it is docuмented, it is demonstrable and it
is proven. And so Our Lady came to Fatima with the warning. And here we
come to the reason why the secret has never really been revealed.
And why the lies and deception have come from the highest levels of
the Vatican to keep the Secret hidden from us.
Even Cardinal Bea, allegedly a Freemason himself, and one of the leaders
of the ecuмenical movement -- he, himself was deeply scandalized by the
decision not to publish the Third Secret. In spite of all his shortcomings,
he was a man with a priestly vocation, and his primary concern was the
salvation of souls. And by not publishing the Secret, the result, the
consequence would be the the loss, the damnation of millions of souls,
that might otherwise be saved, if the world would be forewarned with the
publication of the Third Secret of Fatima.
The Third Secret begins with the words in Portugal, the dogma of the Faith
will always be preserved. Something after these words so impressed Pope
John XXIII that he turned white and almost fainted. Now I know for a fact,
something of the content of the Third Secret, if you've read my articles, then
you already know what I'm going to say.
Around 1990, one of Cardinal Ratzinger's friends told the story to
a young priest. This old priest, a native German speaker, told the young
priest that his friend, Cardinal Ratzinger had revealed to him some of the
elements of the Third Secret. Our Lady warned that there would be an evil
council in the Church. And she expressly warned against making changes in
the liturgy of the Mass. The word was "mixing other elements into the liturgy."
Which is exactly what they did: they diluted the Catholic liturgy with
foreign, Protestant elements in order to create an ecuмenical liturgy.
Which waters down the dogmatic content of our faith, and prepares
and paves the way to unite all religions together, to bring about unity
through the mixture of the different forms of heresy, apostasy
infidelity and out and out paganism.
It would all be joined together in this promiscuous unity by means of
changes in the Mass.
The New mass is the transition to the One World Religion.
It doesn't matter that this would not have been personally the goal of
Pope Paul VI. What is incredible is that the the pope was duped, but
duped he was. The pastors of the Church made a terrible mistake and
we've been living with the consequences for forty years now. But no longer
are we looking to something in the distant future as the ultimate
consequence. We are on the verge of seeing the definitive overthrow of
our religion. Catholicism will be driven underground and Catholics will
be hunted down, and the aim will be to exterminate every Catholic from
the face of the earth. And the Godless rulers of the world, imposing their
nєω ωσrℓ∂ σr∂єr, will be stopped only by the hand of God.
But this is the thing, that is so almost unbelievable, that it is through the
agency of a Pope calling a council, a council which proclaimed doctrines
that had been previously condemned by the Church.
Something unimaginable, something unheard of.
Yves Congar even went so far as to say, that what the council has taught in fact,
is explicitly condemned in the Syllabus of Errors.
Now the Syllabus of Errors, as I point out in my book, fulfills all the
conditions of infallibility. Pope Pius IX declared by his apostolic authority
that all Catholics must hold these doctrines to be condemned. It is
put forth in a very forceful manner, definitive manner, imposed on the entire
Church solemnly proclaimed infallibly proclaimed as errors. At the Second
Vatican Council we see some of those errors proclaimed as truth. Ecuмenism
as Pope Pius declared would destroy the Catholic and therefore the Catholic
Church can have NOTHING to do with it. Vatican II promotes it, now we have a
new Catechism a new code of canon law promoting these things.
Some writers will tell you it's impossible for the council, for any council,
teaching in matters of Faith and Morals to be erroneous. I remember reading
an article by Ralph Mc Innerney and another writer, Pete Vere, I think, and
their article in the Wanderer, they're quoting out of context such sources
as the Catholic Encyclopedia saying that the Second Vatican Council cannot
be in error because it's impossible for a council to teach error. Of course
this is absurd, especially in view of the fact that the principle set forth
by Saint Augustine, and reiterated by Saint Thomas Aquinas, and used by
theologians through the ages
Contra factum non est argumentum. Against a fact can be no argument.
It is entirely irrational and absurd that the second Vatican council cannot teach
error when in fact, it HAS taught error.
A young man in England wrote a book, I should say he compiled a book, on every
page on the left hand side you have the preconciliar teaching, on the right hand
side you have the post conciliar teaching; something like 290 pages of
contradictions. On the left hand side you read black, on the right hand
side you read white, two different bodies of doctrine -- two opposing doctrines.
There can be no mistake. It is as Bishop Richard Williamson said to the face
of Cardinal Castrillon Hoyos, who maintained that, they were really very close,
that there are only minor matters of disagreement, Bishop Williamson said,
No, your Eminence, it is two different religions.
People might object and say, well, how can you say that? After all, the Holy
Father himself, when he was Cardignal Ratzinger and he still maintains the
same position today, that What is set forth in the Second Vatican Council
in other words, he says there is no post conciliar and pre-conciliar, it's all
one religion, one body of doctrine.
The fact of the matter is, there are two distinct, divergent and opposing
bodies of doctrine. One cannot deny, without making a flat contradiction, and
if we are to believe that there is any ultimate principle of order and sanity
in the new church, the brave new church of Vatican II,
that is really identical in spite of some superficial differences with the
Church of all times, then one must maintain the possibility to reconcile
utterly contradictory positions and doctrines.
There is a unanimity of prophesy so we're not just talking about the
Third Secret, what is there or what is not there. Down through the ages
the saints and privileged souls had pinpointed our time, for that
great cataclysm the chastisement of the world: world war, and then
according to one prophesy, when the Communist powers conquer the world,
then the entire world will fall under the dominion of first born of hell.
as Sister Lucy pointed out, if you want to read it, it's in the Apocalypse,
chapter 8 to 13.
Now we know what cardinal Ratzinger was talking about when he says the
Third Secret corresponds to what's in Scripture, and specifically the
last things: the Book of Apocalypse.
It will appear that the Church will be totally defeated, destroyed, and
wiped off the face of the earth. The Church will be in hiding, will be under
ground it will no longer be visible. It will appear that Satan has
triumphed over Christ. And what brought it about? It was that Trojan
Horse in the City of God. Vatican II and the new mass that made it
possible. These that are the means that have subverted our Church, our
religion, and have paved the way for its fall, and to be replaced by what
Marie Julie Jaheghi foretold would be a horrible religion. It will be a
a lucifarian, demon-worshipping religion with some false trappings of
counterfeit Catholicism, in order to seduce the faithless masses.
And what sustains the error is this utterly absurd and untenable
position, that there really has not taken place anything substantially changing
the faith and doctrine, the substance of our religion from what it was
in the past by means of the Second Vatican Council and the new liturgy.
In order for one to believe that, it is necessary for one to be able
to equally profess that black is white and white is black.
And so Our Lady had to come to rescue us -- sustain our faith
with the assurance of the victory of her divine Son through her
intercession, and so she says, in the end My Immaculate Heart will triumph
And for those who insist that the new liturgy is good, and the Second
Vatican Council is Catholic, there is only one answer that we can give to
them, that is the curse of the Sacred Scriptures that says,
Woe to the man who puts evil in the place of good and
darkness in the place of light.
Topic: Why the current crisis requires divine intervention (Read 3416 times)