+++IN COMMEMORATION OF JARED CHEEK AND MATTY MOLNAR++++

Tweet

+

Feast of the Seven Sorrows of the Blessed Virgin Mary, 2015 A.D.

Adorolata

A dear friend used to say while he was in seminary:

"Don't sin, and do what you will."

This is bad theology.  If we do what WE will for ourselves, our imperfections will turn to sins, inevitably, if even first by small sins as concessions, and little by little into larger sins.  However, it's even more dangerous than being just plain "cold" of the faith, but it espouses lukewarmness as the idea.  

It's not.  Our Lord made that clear: "But because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold, not hot, I will begin to vomit thee out of my mouth. "  Revelation 3:15

It doesn't matter if one gives his entire time, energy, and goods over to God.  God wants our hearts, and not just in a sentimental way.  He wants our WILL.  We are here to do GOD'S WILL, not our own.  Even Jesus Christ said that he "came to do the will of (his) Father," to humiliate his own --- in a good way, out of TRUE CHARITY --- which IS love of God, and secondly, love of neighbor out of that FIRST love: love of God.   

We need to remind ourselves and be reminded by others that because we are imperfect, we each also have an imperfect knowledge of God.  Therefore, we must not presume that we rely on our own understanding by doing the bare minimum, and simply obeying the Commandments.  We must have our actions out of love, that we conform our wills to God's, and then we can begin the path of spiritual progress.  The very last stage of the spiritual life (after the Purgative stages and Illuminative), is the Unitive stage, which is ultimately has in it's final part union with God's will.  This is what the saints in Heaven have, but one cannot enter Heaven without such union, if achieved in this life first, or later by purification in fire.  However, there are many in Hell who suffer eternal fire because they were lukewarm in this life, and died, as most of us will die, in an unplanned hour. 

LET US BE GRATEFUL FOR THE SACRAMENTS THAT LEAD US TO CONFORMITY and eventually to unity, if we truly love Christ and seek to obey God and HIS HOLY WILL in ALL THINGS.  

Not my will but GOD'S WILL BE DONE.

In loving memory of JARED CHEEK and MATTY MOLNAR.

REQUIEM aeternam dona eis, Domine, et lux perpetua luceat eis.

Requiescant in pace.  Amen.

Angel in Chapelle Royale
Dreux, France
Jean Marie Bienaimé Bonnassieux
(1839-1848)

Karl Keating's Comments on Michael Voris's False Allegations re.: SSPX

Tweet

+

Feast of Our Lady of Sorrows


Karl Keating:

"NOT A GOOD WAY TO START A SERIES ABOUT THE SSPX"

"Today’s episode of Michael Voris’s “The Vortex” is titled “SSPX Sadness.” It’s about the Society of St. Pius X, the religious group established by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre. Apparently this episode is the first of several that will air this week, with a more in-depth program to be devoted to the SSPX on Friday.

While much of what Voris said is accurate, much is not. I don’t know if he has time to rectify his errors before later episodes air, but it would be good if he could do so. His basic error—and the only one I’ll mention in this post—is to state that the SSPX, as an organization, is in schism. It isn’t, and the Vatican hasn’t claimed it is.

In 1988 Lefebvre (1905-1991) and Antonio de Castro Mayer (1904-1991), the retired bishop of Campos, Brazil, ordained four SSPX priests as bishops. This was done without papal approval and in contravention of canon law. All six men were excommunicated latae sententiae—that is, automatically.

Their excommunications were confirmed immediately by John Paul II, who noted that the illicit ordinations displayed a schismatic attitude on the part of the six. (The excommunications were lifted by Benedict XVI in 2009; this lifting in no way implied that the excommunications had been unjust or unwarranted.)

To the extent there was a schism, it was personal and on the part of the six bishops. The effects of their act did not automatically transfer to their followers, whether the priests and seminarians who are the formal members of the SSPX or the society’s lay followers, or to the SSPX as an organization. The SSPX is said by Rome to be in an irregular status within the Church, but it is not said to be in schism. It thus is incorrect to assert that the organization, its priests, or its followers are in schism.

Michael Voris should amend his comments to make this clear. There is plenty of reason to criticize the SSPX, its current leaders, its founder, and some of its vocal advocates, but that criticism should be in the context of an accurate representation of the status of the organization.

(There are other errors in today’s “Vortex,” but I don’t have time to dissect the whole episode.)"

The Upcoming Schism

Tweet

+JMJ+

Feast of the Precious Blood of Jesus, 2015 A.D.
Jesu, Salvator mundi,
tuis famulis subveni,
quos pretioso sanguine,
quos pretioso sanguine redemisti.

The tone of this post will be much different that the previous posts.  

I haven't been posting in quite a while.  The main reason I started this blog was because I wanted some place to virtually 'store' my favorite digital, religious images, prayers, considerations, etc., while practicing my HTML.  It was during a time when my health was in crisis, and things were not looking too good for me in the longevity department.  The good Lord deemed that He still would work on me longer, and I am happy to say I am still here (to further work out my salvation, for my hope is to be in Heaven).

Today, however, there are a few things I would like to say to a lot of well-intended, but very confused Catholics.  

First, I would like you to paint an image in your mind of a well-dressed man whose arms are on strings like a puppet, wearing a thorny crown for show that he has suffered, with his arms somewhat extended by the ropes, and his nose growing like Pinocchio.  Then imagine a faceless man pulling the strings, dressed in an expensive polo shirt and jeans, and behind him are men holding masonic images.

Pinocchio had good intentions.  

What I described is what I see when I hear Michael Voris talk about the SSPX.  

I am NOT a fan of the SSPX, but for reasons far removed from what has ever come out of Michael Voris's mouth.  I do have respect for the late Archbishop Lefebvre but not for signing Nostrae Aetate (an action which he immediately regretted).  However, I am also not a fan of  a lie being presented as truth, and then making an argument based on that false premise.  For instance, it is a LIE that the SSPX is in schism.  Yes, Pope John Paul II had said that they were in schism, but even then, it was for reasons that were very odd.  Never-the-less, since then, the current pontiff in the visible hierarchy permitted by God (who is obviously visiting a vengence on His people for their spiritual laziness) has declared that they (the SSPX) are NOT in schism.   This is clearly why Michael Voris conveniently did not even mention the current Pope's declaration, and went straight to Pope John Paul II (because, hey, he's like a ROCK STAR, in pop culture!).  So, let's start from there, and "uncover the LIES and FALSEHOODS" of the online network known as "Church Militant"...

Let me start by saying that Voris has made a lot of GOOD shows.  I am very confused by his flip-floppiness in his own philosophies, though, and it makes me wonder if his boss, Terry Carroll, has anything (*cough*) to do with it.  I want to believe that Mr. Voris is well-intended, and just maybe he was hypnotized by the man who gives him his bi-weekly check adding up to only "$40K"  per annum.  God bless him and that work he has done that is good, and there is a lot of it!  He and his Ivy League friend, Christine Niles (who also used to have her own podcast produced by Terry, and had a repeated guest who was a heretic prelate, mixed, of course, with some orthodoxy on other occasions) may both mean well, but their passion for the faith sometimes gets eclipsed by their passion for affiliation, and their pride seems to cloud their judgment.

But "Who is TERRY CARROLL?" you ask.   Check this article out by Christopher A. Ferrara: Pay No Attention to the Man Behind the Vortex

Now, let me also share with you what I PERSONALLY know about the man that ought to be, BY JUSTICE, PUBLIC, as although the man wants to be hidden from the public, his WORKS are NOT HIDDEN, and are PUBLIC, but he carefully orchestrates them from behind the scenes.  (That's what a producer does, but misleading the public, more specifically, traditional and semi-traditional Catholics on the internet, is another thing.)  

OK, let me just cut to the chase:  I know Terry has funded other shows on the internet which support people like Dr. Phil Mango, John Eldgredge, Gregory Popcak, etc.   I saw the connection, not knowing a thng about the producer of one show, and called in one night when Dr. Mango said some blasphemy against the Blessed Mother.  He went BALLISTIC, but these guys who host the show... the main host living at his mother's home, could somehow afford VERY SOPHISTICATED ON THE AIR EDITING equipment, and edited out his screaming tyrade (did I smoke someone's serpants???) on the airing delay.  

That night I heard from someone I knew affiliated with the hosts, and he worked as a (get this) go between on behalf of the show's producer, Terry Carroll.  I was asked to not give out his name to ANYONE.  Well, I've renegged on this because of the gravity of the danger he is posing* (&double-meaning to that word there).  Mr. Carroll wanted to know who I was, who I was "with" --- as apparently he believed I was "working with someone".  Well, I certainly hope I was and still am!  The pay, however, is not in money but in merit, may it please God.  LESS THAN AN HOUR of hearing from Terry, I started getting attempts of hacking on my computer over, and over, and over again that very same night.  I asked our 'go between' contact if there might be a connection, and he asked Terry, and the word back was that it happens to him, too, and that the "government" was probably spying on him, so I have to be careful not to tell anyone about my "associating" with Terry.  And I am very gullible and wanting to believe the best in people, so (don't laugh), I actually believed that Mr. Carroll had nothing to do with the attempted break ins to my pc.  (I happen to work in IT, so I knew what was happening and was pretty impressed with the attempts, although, they were unsuccessful.)

Umm... sorry, it's more dangerous not to mention this, as I have come to learn it's time to spill the beans.

Now, let's cut over to Michael Voris's recent revisting his hatred for the SSPX.  This is a smoking gun of the element behind Voris and even all the good works.  

Let me first lay out a concept regarding black propoganda, as I've repeatedly mentioned over the last several years in previous posts:   it's simply the single, most effective means of selling unpopular ideas or ideals to the very groups that are most against them.  Simply it's a type of magic by delivering something that appears one way, when it is really another in hidden aspects, by concealing what you are not meant to see with a plausible diversion.

Plausible diversion:  No devout Catholic wants to be in schism.  Yet, we know that the SSPX IS NOT in schism, so much that even Pope Francis declared that they are not in schism.  So, what's happening?   Voris only goes with the Pope when it suits his/Terry's interests?  But why NOW?

In "Church Militant's recent video released today, he made a conclusion based on a false premise:  the conclusion that the faithful will not receive valid Sacraments if they are celebrated by any SSPX priest, and bases it on the (FALSE) premise that they are in schism.  Even if you believed that the reason they were in schism was because of Pope John Paul II having said so (if even for strange reasons), then you would be obliged to believe that they are no longer in schism because of what the current pontiff has declared.   (Note:  if a priest can hear confessions, he most certainly can provide the other Sacraments. Remember two words:  supplied jurisdiction.   Now, Fr. Z.,  and his fans will have a problem with that, but that's with them.  The fact is, the faithful are not obliged to go to priests who do not celebrate the traditional Mass, or who even celebrate both as if they are equivalent rites.  I don't want to go on too much of a tangent here, but any liturgy that has at it's inception the premise of becoming more "relevant" to popular culture and its errant, predominating philosophies --- not even compatible with traditional doctrine --- has major issues, no matter how much of it is said in Latin.  Fr. Z. talks about "Modernism 2.0", but he represents Modernism 2.8.3.)

But getting back to my point:  WHY NOW?  Why does Voris and his puppeteer/(main)producer want to make THIS WEEK the veritable, "SLAM-THE-SSPX-AS-SCHISMATICS-AT-ALL-COSTS WEEK"?    Now, mind you, I do not attend there, but I do ironically attend an "approved" Mass.  (That sounds so odd, since when does the traditional Mass that has been given to us via tradition and has never been abbrogated need to be approved??  Oh right, since Vatican II, the "New (World) Order" minstries!)  Why THIS week, sandwiched between the Pope's recent defending, not the Sacrament of Marriage, but making another 'sacrament' of people's feelings, and the upcoming Synod?    (For those of you who do not know this, Pope Francis, who requested bishops and cardinals be more supportive of collegiality and discussion, BYPASSED the usual process for approving the two documents.  He did this because the heretical German bishops were pressing for it, among them Kasper the Friendly Heretic, no doubt.)   Maybe the Pope honestly means well, but even the path to Hell is paved with 'good' intentions, and this is no exception. The Sacraments and Commandments were not to be watered down so that we could have it easier and throw off the cross.  We are to come to Christ, not bring him down to be crucified by our lack of obedience and tepidity --- even in times of trouble, hardship and even emotional pain.  You don't believe me?  This was clear to St. Thomas More, and his enemies were all about finding a way to make an annulment easier.  (Watch, "A Man for All Seasons, and note how Cromwell proposes that they help King Henry marry in the Church with his 'new wife', "And our job as administrators is to make it as convenient as we can.")

Remember the reason Pope Francis said he was pushed to deliver these documents ahead of the October Synod?    The hierarchy that is for building the perception that dogma can change will declare that those prelates who are against the new proposals will be the ones in schism.  Mark my words.  Meanwhile, Bishops who will be defending the truth, will be marginalized by other Cardinals and Bishops.  

Now Michael Voris will have it that it is better to go with the flow of the formal obstinant heretics and materially confused than to obey the true teachings of Christ.  Consider, however, that once a prelate refuses dogmatic truths, he is not teaching in Christ.  We are to confirm to HIM, not Christ to the world.  

See:  CRISIS in the CHURCH... According to 2 Bishops and a Cardinal

Watch Michael Voris flip-flop after the Synod about the very same bishops he defends today.  He will say that we must obey whatever is fed to us from this Synod.  He's setting you up for this if you are buying what he's selling this week.  He knows what he's doing, and he's already decided.  Voris believes he will be outside the Barque of Peter if he doesn't take everything that comes out of the October synod hook, line and sinker.  

That doesn't surprise me, and it shouldn't surprise you.  Afterall, Michael Voris's spiritual director is none other than Fr. Paul Nicholson.  Fr. Nicholson, who a posted mean-spirited "tweet" on the death of Fr. Gruner (may he rest in peace+)  immediately upon hearing of Fr. Gruner's death, and who has MANY TIMES posted lewd, immodest images (would you believe, even one of Miley Cyrus twerking?) and makes crude jokes even about sacramentals... this is the Fr. Nicholson who is Voris's spiritual director.  This is a priest who celebrates the New Order Mass, and is a member of the Opus Dei, who was started by a priest who flaunted a cross with a rose in the middle, the symbol of the rosicrucians* (*a demonic order well above the rank of the Freemasons).

Fr. Nicholson schmoozing with Bishop Schneider

So why do it?   Why preach some good things, and Voris make a lot of legitimately GOOD videos?  Again, it's because the target audience are the faithful Catholics.  Who else and how else to get them to come on board with swallowing the poison to be presented to us at the synod, the same poison we are already seeing coming from the misguided, (hopefully) well-intended Pope, who, by his own closest associates when he was Cardinal Bergoglio, said of him that he was more political than 'religious'?   (Don't forget; mind the Pope's "friends" who are big players in the UN, as well as the Marxist Jesuits of Brazil.)

Fasten your seatbelts, because this will be a bumpy ride.  Faithful Catholics will be thrown under the bus.  Do you think things are bad now by our respective governments telling us that it is illegal to stand for marriage as defined by God?   Wait 'till you can't even claim that you are truly Catholic!

OREMUS.+

Pray for the Pope.
+