Author Topic: Eleison Comments - Wither, "Resistance"? - I (no. 581) (Read 958 times)

MaterDominici · « **on:** September 02, 2018, 12:03:20 AM »

“Eleison Comments” by Mgr. Williamson – Issue DLXXXI (581)

Whither, “Resistance”? – I

Resistants, you may by no means desist.
What saves the Church today? Those who resist!

If anybody still wonders what the Catholic “Resistance” movement is meant to be doing, recent events in the United States make it more obvious than ever – it must keep the Faith! With the official publication last month by the State of Pennsylvania, USA, of an 800-page docuмent proving beyond doubt the guilt of high-ranking Catholic churchmen in abominable crimes against the law of the land and the law of God, millions of Catholics will be tempted, and not only in the USA, to doubt the Faith and to quit the Church.

One reader of these “Comments” names three disturbing Internet links, and he writes:

“My heart is hurting. Jesus didn’t teach this. I am bitterly weeping. I am a hard-headed man and don’t cry often at all. I can’t take this. I’m sorry, but if this continues I will have to become Eastern Orthodox or I will absolutely lose my mind. I just can’t take this monstrosity any more. I am in physical pain because this is making my chest hurt. I’m going to lose my mind. All the prayers and Masses are in vain if this is still being done by those who partake in prayers and Masses. Our Lord is being turned upside down by these heretics! I can’t take it!”

Now sin happens, and sin will go on happening until world’s end, even among priests and bishops because God does not take away their free-will, and no wise lawmaker in Church or State trusts in mere legislation to abolish sin. The grace alone of Our Lord Jesus Christ can cleanse souls of sin (Rom. VII, 24, 25). That is why the State is basically powerless to heal the deepest human problems of priests, or families, or nations. It is obliged to do its best to protect its citizens, but all intelligent and honest statesmen recognise that the Catholic Church alone is fully possessed of the means to reach with healing into the depths of human souls. That is why they will favour the Church as best they can for the good of the State, and protect as best they can the reputation of bishops and priests, and leave the Church to deal with her own criminals, if they will. But if the Church refuses to deal with its criminals, then the State has to intervene.

What is so scandalous in the present plague of abuse by churchmen of adolescents and children is the extent of the abuse, the systematic cover-up of the abuse by high-ranking churchmen, and the height of the rank of some of them, reaching up to the very top of the Church. In fact the scandal has been known about in the USA for tens of years, and it is wholly impossible that it was not common knowledge in Rome also. For tens of years, however, a network of ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖs has had immense power within the structure and hierarchy of the Church, to the point that they exert far-reaching control in Rome over the appointment of bishops, and in the dioceses over the choice of seminarians. It can be more and more difficult to become either bishop or priest without belonging in person to that network.

But what can possibly explain such a disaster among so many churchmen? The only proportionate explanation is the loss of faith let loose by the Second Vatican Council (1962–1965), following on which the great protector of the priest’s perseverance, his Breviary, and the purpose of his existence, the Mass, were both maimed and crippled ( Sacrosanctum Concilium, Chapters II and IV). Take away from any man the purpose of his existence, and he is bound to look elsewhere for satisfaction. At least one American commentator blames Satanism for the disaster, a sin directly attacking God and, as such, much graver than sins of the flesh. But men only turn to Satan when they have turned away, or been turned away, from God. Vatican II opened the door for seemingly the entire Church to turn away from God.

Kyrie eleison.

Incredulous · « **Reply #1 on:** September 02, 2018, 01:29:55 AM »

SeanJohnson · « **Reply #2 on:** September 02, 2018, 06:59:09 AM »

_Lucifer's Lodge_ by William H. Kennedy is a highly disturbing book detailing various accounts of pedophilia and other forms of sɛҳuąƖ abuse as well as Satanic ritual among Roman Catholic priests, as well as speculation concerning various Satanic secret societies and sex magic cults which have infiltrated the Roman Catholic Church. The author, a friend of Father Malachi Martin (who wrote a fictional account detailing Satanism within the Vatican, _Windswept House_), has unearthed many very bizarre and twisted details of the sɛҳuąƖ activities of predator priests. However, unlike certain other books which have been made available detailing the sex scandals (particularly within the Boston Archdiocese under Cardinal Bernard Law), this book attempts to show that Satanic abuse may be involved. As noted in the introduction, by Tracy R. Twyman, throughout the Old Testament the ancient Hebrews encountered various depraved sex cults (which included bestiality, ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity, and pedophilia) which were repeatedly condemned by that ancient people and their God, Yahweh, as Satanic in nature. Satan, or Lucifer, is regarded by Christians to be a fallen angel, cast out of heaven for pride before God, and according to Christian doctrine has been trying to destroy Christ and His Church since its inception. Indeed, to instate the reign of Antichrist upon the Earth, Satanists seek a worldwide institution to serve as a vehicle for their diabolical plot. No institution could be more fit for that role than the Roman Catholic Church and its venerable hierarchy. The author distinguishes between modern day Satanists (of Anton LaVey's Church of Satan, for example) who are mere hedonists and self worshippers, and the more diabolical kind (unrecognized by modern day Satanists) who may engage in human sacrifice and sɛҳuąƖ depravity. The first chapter of this book concerns the original "Satanic Panic" of the 1980s, a modern day witch craze, which brought many innocently accused into the spotlight. However, as the author notes, this original Satanic scare may have merely covered up the more diabolical kind, which currently may exist within the Roman Catholic Church. The author next considers some severely sick and disturbed individuals among the Roman Catholic priesthood. Many of these are sɛҳuąƖ predators, although not all pedophiles (and quite a few are blasphemers as well). Perhaps one of the sickest individuals considered is that of "Father" Paul R. Shanley, a "priest" in the Boston Archdiocese, who engaged in pedophiliac and ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ acts with countless victims (especially among disaffected and troubled youth), was an active member of the gαy Liberation movement, and whose perverted speech on "man-boy love" served as inspiration for the founding of the ultra-sick NAMBLA organization. This part of the story is particularly difficult to take, and the reader may feel him or herself having to retch several times over as he completes this most vile chapter in the history of pedophiliac priests. The odd thing about these priests is that nothing was done to defrock them and remove them from interacting with the youth by the Catholic hierarchy. In fact, many of them were given protection or variously re-assigned. The author also examines the secret psychiatric hospitals where many of these so called "priests" are sent to be "cured" of their diabolical disease. The author also shows how certain other priests within the Church, particularly those of a traditionalist bent, have been prevented from stopping the perverse actions and goings-on. Indeed, one Father Alfred Kunz, a friend of both Fathers Malachi Martin and the Dominican Charles Fiore, was found murdered, in ritualistic fashion (his throat was cut, having revealed the secrets of the brethren and a mutilated calf was found nearby), for having promised to reveal details of the pedophiliac priesthood. Much of this book is spent detailing various aspects of the secret societies involved in Satanic ritual and "sex magic". The author refers to these as "the underground sewer", referencing Saint Thomas Aquinas and his remarks on prostitution. According to certain heretical movements (and according to the popular book _Holy Blood, Holy Grail_), Christ may have been married as well as promiscuous and have spawned a bloodline. This is certainly the most diabolical of all heresies, attempting to mar the innocence of Christ. Indeed, even the Mormons have been known to believe such things, and supposedly a geneological chart detailing the supposed "bloodline" of Christ through the French and Merovingian kings can be found at their temple in Salt Lake City. The author argues that this cult has infiltrated the Roman Catholic Church as well, perhaps as far up as the Vatican, and refers to it (as did Malachi Martin) as "Lucifer's Lodge". Certainly this is a most disturbing revelation. The question remains as to what Catholics can do to reclaim their Church from the treacheries of Satan. Given the sorry state of the American Church it remains a difficult question to answer. The Catholic hierarchy, overtaken by liberalism and the so called "Spirit of Vatican II", continue to enact diabolic "reforms" within the Church and protect pedophiles and ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖs. Indeed, many of the ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ priests are blackmailed by the pedophiles into protecting their cult. Satan's serpents continue to move against Christ and His Church as well as climb the rungs of the hierarchical ladder making their way up to the Pope himself. Perhaps this is an indication that we are living near a time of great turmoil, as revealed in prophecy.

SeanJohnson · « **Reply #3 on:** September 02, 2018, 07:16:06 AM »

A Cancer On the Papacy
Friday - August 31, 2018 at 1:01 am
By Patrick J. Buchanan
http://buchanan.org/blog/a-cancer-on-the-papacy-129988

This summer, the sex scandal that has bedeviled the Catholic Church went critical.

First came the stunning revelation that Cardinal Theodore McCarrick, former archbishop of Washington and friend to presidents, had for decades been a predator-priest who preyed on seminarians and abused altar boys, and whose depravity was widely known and covered up.

Came then the report of a Pennsylvania grand jury that investigated six dioceses and found that some 300 priests had abused 1,000 children over the last 70 years.

The bishop of Pittsburgh, Donald Wuerl, now cardinal archbishop of Washington, defrocked some of these corrupt priests, but reassigned others to new parishes where new outrages were committed.

This weekend brought the most stunning accusation.

Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano, Vatican envoy to the United States under Pope Benedict XVI, charged that Pope Francis had been told of McCarrick’s abuses, done nothing to sanction him, and that, as “zero tolerance” of sɛҳuąƖ abuse is Francis’ own policy, the pope should resign.

In his 11-page letter of accusations, Vigano further charged that there is a powerful “ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ current” among the Vatican prelates closest to the pope.

What did the pope know and when did he know it?

Not unlike Watergate, the issue here is whether Pope Francis knew what was going on in the Vatican and in his Church, and why he was not more resolute in rooting out the moral squalor.

Orthodox, conservative and traditionalist Catholics are the most visible and vocal demanding an accounting. Progressive and liberal Catholics, to whom Pope Francis and Cardinal McCarrick were seen as allies on issues of sɛҳuąƖ morality, have been thrown on the defensive.

Now, accusations alone are neither proof nor evidence.

Yet there is an obligation, an imperative, given the gravity of the revelations, that the Vatican address the charges.

When did Pope Francis become aware of McCarrick’s conduct, which appears to have been widely known? Did he let his close friendship with McCarrick keep him from doing his papal and pastoral duty?

This destructive scandal has been bleeding for decades. Too long. The Church is running out of time. It needs to act decisively now.

Priests who prey on parochial school children and altar boys are not only sinners, they are criminal predators who belong in penitentiary cells not parish rectories. They ought to be handed over to civil authorities.

While none of us is without sin, sɛҳuąƖly active and abusive clergy should be severed from the priesthood. There needs to be a purge at the Vatican, removing or retiring bishops, archbishops and cardinals, the revelation of whose past misconduct would further feed this scandal.

For too long, the Catholic faithful have been forced to pay damages and reparations for crimes and sins of predator priests and the hierarchy’s collusion and complicity in covering them up.

And it needs be stated clearly: This is a ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ scandal.

Almost all of the predators and criminals are male, as are most of the victims: the boys, the teenagers, the young seminarians.

Applicants to the seminary should be vetted the way applicants to the National Security Council are. Those ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖly inclined should be told the priesthood of the Church is not for them, as it is not for women.

Secular society will call this invidious discrimination, but it is based on what Christ taught and how he established his Church.

Inevitably, if the Church is to remain true to herself, the clash with secular society, which now holds that ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity is natural and normal and entitled to respect, is going to widen and deepen.

For in traditional Catholic teaching, ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity is a psychological and moral disorder, a proclivity toward acts that are intrinsically wrong, and everywhere and always sinful and depraved, and ruinous of character.

The idea of ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ marriages, recently discovered to be a constitutional right in the USA, remains an absurdity in Catholic doctrine.

If the Church’s highest priority is to coexist peacefully with the world, it will modify, soften, cease to preach, or repudiate these beliefs, and follow the primrose path of so many of our separated Protestant brethren.

But if she does, it will not be the same Church that over centuries accepted martyrdom to remain the faithful custodian of Gospel truths and sacred tradition.

And how has the embrace of modernity and its values advanced the religious faiths whose leaders sought most earnestly to accommodate them?

The Church is going through perhaps its gravest crisis since the Reformation. Since Vatican II, the faithful have been departing, some leaving quietly, others embracing agnosticism or other faiths.

“Who am I to judge?” said the pope when first pressed about the morality of ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity.

Undeniably, Francis, and the progressive bishops who urge a new tolerance, a new understanding, a new appreciation of the benign character of ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity, have won the plaudits of a secular press that loathed the Church of Pius XII.

Of what value are all those wonderful press clippings now, as the chickens come home to roost in Vatican City?

SeanJohnson · « **Reply #4 on:** September 02, 2018, 07:23:33 AM »

"If the Church’s highest priority is to coexist peacefully with the world, it will modify, soften, cease to preach, or repudiate these beliefs, and follow the primrose path of so many of our separated Protestant brethren.

But if she does, it will not be the same Church that over centuries accepted martyrdom to remain the faithful custodian of Gospel truths and sacred tradition."

Is Menzingen listening?

Pax Vobis · « **Reply #5 on:** September 02, 2018, 12:14:21 PM »

Quote

But what can possibly explain such a disaster among so many churchmen? The only proportionate explanation is the loss of faith let loose by the Second Vatican Council (1962–1965)

V2 attacked the faith of normal, everyday Catholics. These people aren’t the ones abusing and corrupting the innocent.

The disaster among the churchmen is not due to V2 but to the infiltration by communists, Freemasons and satanists, many of these churchmen being all 3. I’d say 95% of those clerics involved were never catholic to begin with, but were Modernists in hiding which Pope St Pius X wanted about. These were the clerics that started, ran and implemented V2 in the first place.

They were corrupted and anti-catholic long before V2 even started. They belong to the same groups who lied about the hola-hoax. I’m surprised +W hasn’t made this connection...

hollingsworth · « **Reply #6 on:** September 02, 2018, 03:08:35 PM »

PV:

Quote

I’d say 95% of those clerics involved were never catholic to begin with, but were Modernists in hiding which Pope St Pius X (warned) about. These were the clerics that started, ran and implemented V2 in the first place.

They were corrupted and anti-catholic long before V2 even started. They belong to the same groups who lied about the hola-hoax. I’m surprised +W hasn’t made this connection...

Yes, I’m a bit put off by this, as well. V2 was not the trigger, but simply the final bursting forth of a huge abscess which had been growing and putrefying under the surface of the Roman Ecclesia for decades, or as some like Michael Hoffman believe, for centuries. Actually, H.E. infers the same thing every time he does a conference on the seven stages of the church.

When the bishop advises devotion to Our Holy Mother and the prayer of the Rosary, he is, IMO, totally correct . When he exposes the h0Ɩ0h0αx and Jєωιѕн infiltration, he is altogether right on. When he recommends joining independent pockets of resistance, I buy in. When he implies that the Lefebvrian model has passed its shelf life, I am, through personal experience, in total agreement.

But when he attempts to hang most of the major blame on V2 for the calamitous situation we are in, I hesitate. V2 was the predictable result of a precipitous decline over centuries, but not its primary cause.

Pax Vobis · « **Reply #7 on:** September 02, 2018, 04:38:41 PM »

Maybe +W thinks that most people can’t believe the truth? Certainly there are STILL people who don’t believe in the Conspiracy, even among Catholics. If you don’t believe in that, then you won’t believe that V2 was planned and so you won’t belive that the indult and the new mass are, at their core, subversive.

Many people are quite naive, (and stupidly stubborn) when it comes to these things. I’m sure +W realizes it's better to just concentrate on “known problems” (V2) rather than waste time explaining the big picture, especially when they don’t want to believe it anyways.

Croagh Patrick · « **Reply #8 on:** September 03, 2018, 11:58:22 AM »

I would certainly in agreement with hollingsworth on that it wasn't totally on V2 for all things gone awry, but it was certainly a catalyst/accuмulation. I always refer to this quote for inspiration:

“The most evident mark of God’s anger, and the most terrible castigation He can inflict upon the world, is manifest when He permits His people to fall into the hands of a clergy who are more in name than in deed, priests who practice the cruelty of ravening wolves rather than the charity and affection of devoted shepherds. They abandon the things of God to devote themselves to the things of the world and, in their saintly calling of holiness, they spend their time in profane and worldly pursuits. When God permits such things, it is a very positive proof that He is thoroughly angry with His people and is visiting His most dreadful wrath upon them.”
–Saint John Eudes

Author Topic: Eleison Comments - Wither, "Resistance"? - I (no. 581) (Read 958 times)

MaterDominici

Eleison Comments - Wither, "Resistance"? - I (no. 581)

Incredulous

Re: Eleison Comments - Wither, "Resistance"? - I (no. 581)

SeanJohnson

Re: Eleison Comments - Wither, "Resistance"? - I (no. 581)

SeanJohnson

Re: Eleison Comments - Wither, "Resistance"? - I (no. 581)

SeanJohnson

Re: Eleison Comments - Wither, "Resistance"? - I (no. 581)

Pax Vobis

Re: Eleison Comments - Wither, "Resistance"? - I (no. 581)

hollingsworth

Re: Eleison Comments - Wither, "Resistance"? - I (no. 581)

Pax Vobis

Re: Eleison Comments - Wither, "Resistance"? - I (no. 581)

Croagh Patrick

Re: Eleison Comments - Wither, "Resistance"? - I (no. 581)