.

Use this link for the download:

http://mfi.re/listen/1k45b3qm15z8qcx/Fr._D._Hewko,_July_7,_2013,_Post_Falls,_ID.MP3

This sermon begins on the topic of what it took for this neo-
modernist revolution to take place, with Benedict XVI and
Summorum Pontificuм.

Fr. reads the Epistle and Gospel for the 7th Sunday after Pentecost,
gives some announcements (including his pilgrimage this summer
for the missions of the East Coast including Mass at the site of the
first Mass in the Americas in 1535, probably St. Augustine FL, and
that many boys who wanted to go on this cannot because their
pastors threatened to expel them from school if they went, etc.).
All the patterns of compromise are happening all over again. Min. 7
It's happened 9 times over, and it's happening again.  It's here.

7:50
Fr. Hewko recalls that it was good to have the presence of Fr.
Girouard from Canada.

Fr. Giorge (?) with Fr. Jahere (?) who couldn't come, and he says
about the letter of HEBF* of April 14th 2012 to the other 3 bishops
was the Modernist Manifesto, and should have been the dividing line
for everyone, the day before the nefarious AFD.

Latch on to that window of grace -- because it passes!  

We SSPX priests have studied the tactics of the Modernists!  We
are armed for it.  There is a time when they can have an excuse,
but then the time comes when there is no more excuses.

St. Catherine of Siena "The world is rotten because of silence!"
10:00

Fr. Fore was one of the priests who ABL was going to consecrate
bishop, but Fr. de Galarreta was instead.

Fr. Raphael from Mexico will establish a monastery in Colombia.

Sermon begins at 13:20

--------------------------------------------------

It reminds me, all the Accordistas running around saying that
HEBF* has "rescinded" his AFD and therefore everything's okay.
Well, has HEBF likewise rescinded his Letter from the day before?
Has he likewise rescinded his Modernist Manifesto?  How can he
rescind his Manifesto?  

If Joseph Stalin had rescinded his Communist Manifesto would
anyone have believed it?  If Adolf Hitler had rescinded Mein Kamph
would it have made the news?  Would the printed books have been
recalled?  How does that work??  

What does it mean to "RESCIND" the announcement of false
doctrine?

Along this same line, when we hear those who defer to the leanings
of accordista priests in the SSPX, or those at least who are not
taking a stand against the aggiornamento agenda of HEBF*, we
hear them unwilling to listen to the facts of the story.  Their eyes
glaze over, and they're proud of it.  They think that eyes
glazing over is some kind of VIRTUE!

It seems to me this sermon provides excellent antidote for such a
conversation.  Fr. quotes Scripture in several places where Our
Lord prophesies that Church leaders will come in the last times
who lead the Faithful astray.  

It is an excellent exercise to propose a false continuation of these
Scriptures, that is, things that were not written there which would
have been doctrine that these Accordistas are following today.

More on this later..........

---------------------------------------------------

21:00
Where do we find what is contained in Tradition?
There are basically 5 sources:

Fathers of the Church
The great Councils of the Church  (Vat.I is the last real Council of the Church)**
Papal decrees
Sacred traditional liturgy
Writings of the saints and Doctors of the Church

**[It seems to me Fr. means to say that Vat.I is the last credible
Oecuмenical Council of the Church, for it is in conformity with the
Faith of all time;  however, Vatican II did happen, and while we are
not able to pass definitive judgment on it because that takes a
pope or a pope with a new Oecuмenical Council to do so, we can
nonetheless abstain from following the erroneous doctrine of Vat.II
insofar as everything in Vat.II that is good was already in the
Tradition of Holy Mother Church before Vat.II, and everything that
is new or novel in Vat.II is in OPPOSITION to the sacred Tradition
of Holy Mother Church, and therefore the simplest approach would
be to entirely discard Vat.II -- lock, stock and barrel, but like I said,
that takes a pope to do that, or a pope together with the bishops
of the world.  Aaaahem - which is what Our Lady asks for with the
Collegial Consecration of Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary.
It seems to me Fr. Hewko refrains from using the word oecuмenical
because it is commonly misunderstood today as 'ecuмenical' as is
'ecuмenism' -- which has been a seriously corrupted word thanks
to the nefarious work of Modernists in corrupting the language of
the Church.  Incidentally, Traditio.com does no favor for the faith
of Catholics by harping with "oecuмenism" making the Latin
dipthong 'oe' into a kind of earmark for derision, for in that way,
Traditio does the same thing that the Modernists do, which is to
cast aspersions of scorn on what has long been part of Catholic
practice and tradition but the meaning of the word is now being
changed by frequent misuse of it.]


St. Vincent of Lérins (died c. A.D. 445) says to put it to the test of
Tradition.  

How do we know the value of these docuмents from Menzingen
lately, the AFD, the General Chapter 6 Conditions, or the Declaration
from June 27th, 2013?  Use the test of Tradition.

Just as in Vat.II where it says that Latin shall be retained, it then
says that the vernacular may be used where bishops see fit.   That was
the catch-phrase that undermined all of Latin use in the liturgy.  So too,
here in the Silver Anniversary Re-Declaration (SARD) of June 27th,
paragraph 11 undermines anything good that came before that in the
SARD [this is my term, 'SARD', not Fr. Hewko's].


At minute 33:20,
someone's cell phone ring tone is heard, and Fr. pauses
till it's finished, then he says the following:

Once you swallow the errors of Vatican II, even one drop,
you're dead.

Why is Vatican II so dangerous?  Because it attacks:
Jesus Christ as God
Jesus Christ as King
Jesus Christ as high priest

It is a danger to your faith. It is lethal to the Faith of Catholics.


35:30
What does Almighty God think of this new position of [the ExSPX]?

What does God say to Moses?  (Ex. xxxiv) Destroy their altars, break
their statues and cut down their groves. That's how God wants us to
deal with false religions.  And that's what ABL said:
You don't shake hands with the Communists, you don't shake hands
with the Modernists, you don't dance with the devil.

Fr. Tomas Aquinas saw, when they start doing that, they become
more liberal and they slip, and they compromise.  He saw that with
Dom Gerard,he saw that with Bishop Rangel and Bishop Rifan, and
and now, it's happening again.


At minute 38:20 Fr. Hewko says,
Our Lord warned of false prophets disguised as sheep.  It's in today's
holy Gospel.  And whenever they start talking anything about Vatican
II, you know it's poison. Any minimizing Vatican II and the Newmass,
you know it's poison.  Stay away from it.  

And Our Lord warned us about many they would lead into error and
would shake even the elect.  And then the Apostles, hearing this from
Our Lord's own mouth, what did they say?  

38:58
St. Paul to the Catholics of Rome:
I beseech you, brethren to mark them who make dissensions and
offenses contrary to what? --

Mark them who are contrary to the fellowship?
Mark them who are contrary to the sentimental gatherings?
[Mark them who are contrary to interfaith bible study or dialogue?]

No. It's always, Mark them who make dissensions contrary to the
doctrine. The doctrine, the doctrine, the doctrine.

The Catholic Faith is built on the doctrine.  When you change that
you lose it.  

If any one, even if he's an angel, [like Joseph Smith and the
Mormons] brings to you doctrine which is different from that
which you have received, notice Tradition has already been
established, let him be anathema.

St. John, the Apostle of Charity
If any one, comes to you bringing not the Catholic Faith, bring
him not into your house nor say to him, "God speed you."

And what do we have from Tradition?

Then we have St. Ingatius of Antioch.  What did he say?
Avoid the heretics!  They are the successors of the devil who
seduced the first woman.

41:00
What would ABL say about these things today?  Fr. Hewko asked
Fr. Fore, and he said, without a doubt, ABL would have been with
the Resistance.  

-----------------------------------------------------
When an Accordista's eyes glaze over it's too late. You have to
start asking these questions before the eyes glaze over.

Examples:

St. Paul to the Romans:
If any one, even if  he's an angel, [like Joseph Smith and the
Mormons] brings to you doctrine which is different from that
which you have received (notice Tradition has already been
established), let him be anathema. But if that man rescinds
his false doctrine without abjuring his error, everything is okay
and it's all back to normal.  

Does that fit in okay?  Because that's what you're doing with
HEBF*

Or St. John, the Apostle of Charity:
If any one, comes to you bringing not the Catholic Faith, bring
him not into your house nor say, "God speed you." But, after all,
if he rescinds his erroneous faith and complains that Rome
fooled him and it's someone else's fault, then he should be right
back in charge acting as the Superior General and everything's
gonna be okay.  EGBOK.

And it's EGBOK with HEBF*, too, is it not?

Or, take St. Ingatius of Antioch.  What did he say? Avoid the
heretics!  They are the successors of the devil who seduced the
first woman. But the minute the heretics rescind their seduction
like any good con man does when he meets a little opposition, then
they're to be right back into your good graces and entirely trustworthy!

So too, your position on HEBF* is therefore well founded, no?

Or, take for example Our Lord in St. Matthew chapter 7:
13Enter ye in at the narrow gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way that leadeth to destruction, and many there are who go in thereat. 14How narrow is the gate, and strait is the way that leadeth to life: and few there are that find it!
15Beware of false prophets, who come to you in the clothing of sheep, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. 16By their fruits you shall know them. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?

--But if they rescind their inwardly ravening wolfness, and if they
rescind their thorns, and they rescind their false prophesy and
they rescind their deceptive practice of wearing the clothing of
sheep, then EGBOK!  Everything's Gonna Be O-Kay!

How come Our Lord didn't say that?  


................things like that, as Fr. Frederick Schell used to say,
bless his soul.

.

Dear CNC-Bill,

It seems to me that what you are seeing so closely matches my
own experience, and only after hearing your description does the
words of my friend come to mind, words from about 8 years ago,
but nonetheless most appropriate:  

We are under a Diabolical Disorientation.  

This Diabolical Disorientation (which my friend called "D2" in order
to make it less challenging for modern man to pronounce) has an
effect on everyone.  It used to be only non-Catholics who would be
affected, but now, after Vat.II and the "smoke of satan coming in
through some crack" we are all under its effects.  

But it hits some more powerfully than others.  It has hit many of
the faithful, who are unaware of its effects.  And it has hit the
highest offices of the SSPX as well, taking many of the Society
priests with them.  The Apocalypse tells of the tail of the dragon
that would sweep one third (1/3) of the stars from the heavens,
and those stars can be thought of as being our priests who guide
the way for our spiritual navigation through troubled waters.

The professional person of some stature in your parish who does
not know anything about the AFD, the re-branding project, the
hiring of a Mossad lawyer to counsel the ExSPX, the conspicuous
waste of Society funds on an unnecessary new seminary, the
unjust expulsion of every solid priest in sight, the duplicity of
HEBF* in all that he says and does -- this is willful ignorance.  

The word is pertinacious error.  Call it what it is.  Pride cometh
before a fall.  The devil is a past master at manipulation, and he
goes quiet when silence suits his purpose.  Do you suppose that
he hasn't faced our same nature in the past?  He has thousands
of years' experience, and from the beginning has intelligence that
we cannot even dream of.  

Your acquaintance of stature is under D2, Diabolical Disorientation.

That's the only way to think of it that will make any sense.  It is
a battle not of man, for the e-mail info and the verbal descriptions
you offer him would make a difference.  Since they will not, it
goes to show that this is a battle of the powers and principalities
in high places, a spiritual warfare that is outside of our ability to
comprehend, in this life.  Only in the next life will we be able to
see the whole truth of what has been going on, and we will be
then able to know the awesome power in each of our hands
even now:  the power of voluntary self-sacrifice and prayer.  


Penance! Penance! Penance!  


The angel above Our Lady, 96 years ago today, July 13th, 1917,
said to the three shepherd children at Fatima.  Francesco of
the Hidden Jesus could not hear him, but his sister Jacinta and
his cousin Lucia told him later, but he could see the angel with
the flaming sword crying out.  Our Lady's grace from her hands
prevented the angel's sword from affecting the world.  Can you
imagine what may have happened if not for the intercession of
Our Lady at that moment?  That was in the middle of WWI, if
that wasn't bad enough!  War is a punishment from God.

Kyrie eleison.






P.S. I hope you don't mind my adjustments, below:

Someone of stature in the parish made it a point to talk to a friend of mine (another supporter of the Holy Resistance)....and, obviously, wanted to dissuade him from further supporting the Resistance.  This professional person of some stature knew nothing about the AFD.  He had never read Bp Fellay's response to the other three bishops...Nothing...  "Everything's wonderful here at St. Anthony's, so why should I bother with all that...?"

(Everything's not wonderful..good priests are being expelled for merely telling the truth,
We're spending money on an unnecessary new seminary instead of elementary schools for our parishes..
A Mossad-connected lawyer is our Sup Gen's investment partner, lawyer and chief harasser of Bp Williamson..
Our Sup Gen thinks we need re-branding..
And suits his msg to whatever audience he happens to be addressing)

He didn't know about the re-branding either...Incredible.. My friend didn't buy it....offered to e-mail him some info...which will, no doubt, be ignored....

Neil,

"--But if they rescind their inwardly ravening wolfness, and if they
rescind their thorns, and they rescind their false prophesy and
they rescind their deceptive practice of wearing the clothing of
sheep, then EGBOK!  Everything's Gonna Be O-Kay!

How come Our Lord didn't say that?"   :surprised: You are a genius.

.


Before the cell phone rang at 33:20, Fr. was saying some things
that are very important, but at the time, when I first listened to
this sermon, the relevance was too vague in light of all the other
material being presented.  In retrospect, the other material is
more fundamental, and this following material is more advanced.

You need to grasp the fundamentals first, before you go for
the advanced course.  

We are facing an obstacle today, whereby many Faithful and even
priests (the Faithful get this from the priests, actually) have
fallen prey to a weakness, by which they place their own
personal preferences before the Faith, such that they are unable
to see the danger of compromising with error.

They think, for example, that it would be absolutely intolerable
to be sent to Africa to evangelize to the baboons or to the
south pole to evangelize to the penguins, and so, they don't
mind saying that HEBF* is really doing fine, and EGBOK (which
see).  They just want to be a parish priest, getting to know the
faithful of the local area, and keeping their spiritual family close
by, under the hen's wings, so to speak, or the pelican, who
pecks at her own breast to provide blood for her chicks so
they won't starve...........

In just 2 (two) minutes, out of 65 (sixty-five), Fr. Hewko gives
the meat of the problem and what we should think about it.

Here is the content:





We must resist - we recognize the pope is the pope, but he has
the right to our disobedience.  We simply carry on, with what the
Church has always done:  the same Mass, same doctrine, the same
Catholic Faith.  

31:11
What has happened now is, no -- (as far as we know) no written
agreement with Rome.  

But what was so dangerous about a written agreement with Rome,
NOW??

The danger was, in five years, we might end up saying, "Hey, the
Newmass is legitimate!  It's legitimately promulgated!"  

We might end up saying in 5 years, "Hey!  The canon law, the
Newcode, is acceptable!  No problem!"

We might end up saying that Vatican II is acceptable in the light of
tradition, and even WORSE, saying that Vat.II elightens and deepens
Catholic Tradition!

But look what's hap---, look at what has happened, dear Faithful!
Look at this deceit -- look at THE CRAFTINESS of what has happened!
There is no written agreement, but these very ideas:  the Newmass
is legitimately promulgated (it's the same as being legitimate - it's
one step from saying it) -- it's already been accepted, in the
Declaration!

Notice that it's called, not "prudential declaration," nor is it called
"practical declaration."  It is called, "DOCTRINAL DECLARATION."
It deals with doctrine, deals with the Catholic faith, and it's an
official docuмent, signed by the leaders of the SSPX, officially given
to the official vicar of Christ in Rome, who's a Modernist, right now,
so that it officially expresses the official position of the Society, which
officially accepts the Newmass as legitimately promulgated!

It officially accepts Vatican II in the light of tradition, it officially
accepts the Newcode, and the new profession of faith, all of which
Archbishop Lefebvre said, "Never can we compromise on these things!"

So the poison has been swallowed. The poison is in the bloodstream
of the Society!  And this is why the situation is so serious, so grave,
because............[the cell phone ring tone interrupts Fr. here and then he
says..] ............ Once you swallow the errors of Vatican II, even one drop,
you're dead.

Why?  Because Vatican II, in summary, attacks Jesus Christ as God.

It attacks Jesus Christ as King.

It attacks Jesus Christ as eternal High Priest.

That's why it's SO SERIOUS.  It attacks the foundations of the Faith!

And none of us -- you don't have the right to put your faith in danger.


[This explains the error and HERESY of religious liberty in a nutshell.  
Nobody has the right to practice false religion, because nobody
has the right to put their faith in danger! Where does it say that in
Dignitatis Humanae???]


And the Catechism teaches, if a parent tells their child, you've gotta
go steal from the store, I need some more butter for the cake tonight,
go steal from the store, except in the case of clear starvation, the
child has to say, "I can't obey you, that's sinful!":


....out of time....

.


PROGress REPort...............


I tried this one out on several test cases.  They didn't know they were test
cases, so it's accurate information.

Fr. David Hewko has found serious doctrine in plain sight.  It's been there
all along, only it hasn't been put into words just this concisely, apparently,
until he came along.  Now, maybe he's quoting a Doctor of the Church,
but he didn't say he was, so until further notice, it seems to me that he is
giving us the product of his life of prayer, study, contemplation and
penance, when he says to us these words:


"You do not have the right

. . . . to endanger your faith!"  



As I said before, and now I say it again, only with more emphasis,
this is the truth in a nutshell.  This is the stuff of greatness.  Anyone
who can take the 17 pages of Dignitatis Humanae, which is arguably an
heretical docuмent (it was unquestionably the most controversial one
of the entire Vat.II docs), and put it to rest with a sentence of 10 words,
is not a player outside of the Major League.

So, correct me if I'm wrong, but this is a wonderful example of how the
truth, simply stated, puts error in its place and dispels the darkness of
heresy in one fell swoop.  

I tried this out on several groups of people today.  Everyone who is a
solid, traditional Catholic had no problem with it, and gave me big
smiles, and everyone who is a Novus Ordo Catholic and proud of it
gave me frowns, lowered eyebrows, shaking heads and grumbles.  One
man who is neither, but seemed to be a practitioner of the false religion
of the Salvation Army (whose founder's name and date curiously parallel
the infamous deed of John Wilkes Booth), could only launch into a 5-
minute soliloquy on the most grave error of "narrow-mindedness."  

There seems to be a corollary:  

You do not have any right to endanger your faith;  when you have the
True Faith, you only have a right to protect it.


Now, take the entirety of Dignitatis Humanae, all 17 pages of it.



When FDR's voice broke the radio airwaves on December 7th, 1941,
and made the announcement that it was "a date that will live in infamy,"
he probably had no idea how prophetic his words would become
exactly 24 years later.

Fear not him who would kill thy body;  rather fear him whose wickedness
and snares would send thy soul to hell in eternity.  Fear not the vile deed
of military assault, but rather fear the publication of false doctrine like
Dignitatis Humanae under the color of the authority of Holy Mother Church
(cf. the Third Secret of Fatima, now in its 96th year of suppression).

I'm not going to copy the whole thing here unless someone REALLY
wants it.  But please show me where this proposition and/or its
corollary (A & A-prime) fit into DH any which way:

A) . . . Nobody has any right to endanger their faith.  
A')  . . When one has the True Faith, one only has the right to guard it.
[/i][/color]
I would love to see any responses on this from anyone.  

I asked a very solid traditional priest about this and he told me,
"What about the rights of God?  Everyone goes around worrying about
the 'rights of man' and we should be worried first and foremost about
God's rights, not the rights of man!"


There is a plenary indulgence (under the normal conditions) at the hour
of death for anyone who diligently prays this prayer daily throughout
their lifetime:  


Angel of God, my guardian dear, to whom God's love commits
me here, ever this day (alt. night) be at my side, to light, to guard,
to rule and guide. Amen.


This doctrine, A and A', above, is a direct outgrowth of this Guardian Angel
prayer, for the light, guard, rule and guide that is asked for, is that of God,
through his agent -- your own, personal guardian angel.  Is it any wonder
that "angel" and "agent" are only different by the fact that the "t" in agent
is CROSSED?  

I was born into novus ordo so therefore i am now doomed???

I thought archbishop Lefebvre said don't shake with modernists but reach out to novus ordo and others to convert them.

.

I tried this out on several people to check their reactions.

We do not have any right to introduce doctrinal error
into our Faith.

I told this to one man who was very proud of having stood up
for the Catholic faith at a company award ceremony when
they had been making anti-Catholic jokes, as if to presume
there were no Catholics present, but as soon as he made it
known he was both Catholic and present, the jokes ceased.  
When I told him about this, above, he was squirming.  I
mentioned how in one sentence it puts the lie to Dignitatis
Humanae, and he was ill-at-ease with any questioning of
Vat.II.  Then I said that it was contained in a sermon that lasts
an hour, and he was suddenly all over this.  

"TOO LONG!" He said.  "Any sermon longer than 10 minutes is
way over the top, and I'll let them know about it."  

I tried this on a sede priest, and he said it was worded very
oddly, because we put our faith in danger every day, facing the
world in business and daily activities.  I wasn't able to tell him
that it involves the danger to our faith in Vat.II and introducing
elements of Newmass into our liturgy, because he would say
you have to decide if you're going to accept the validity of the
popes since Pius XII, etc.   That's his blanket response to all
this.