Next Article >        < Prev Article

Sun, 31 Mar 2019 | Cover | Page 01

From the Editor's Desk...

By Michael J. Matt

Catholic Identity Conference 2019

This past week I had the pleasure of sitting for an online interview with Dr. Taylor Marshall, one of the rising Catholic YouTube stars. Dr. Marshall is a former Anglican priest who, along with his wife and now eight children, converted to Catholicism under the reign of Pope Benedict XVI. To say that Dr.

Marshall has grown disillusioned with the present pontificate would be quite the understatement.

Quite frankly, I was favorably impressed with this genuine Catholic convert who, despite obvious fidelity to his new spiritual home, has nevertheless begun to recognize that something is terribly wrong with the human element of the Catholic Church. He’s one of tens of thousands, in other words, who’ve abandoned the sinking Novus ship and is now helping to establish a veritable flotilla of lifeboats in Catholic Tradition.

He and those like him provide the old traditionalist guard with ample reason for hope and confidence that God has not abandoned His Church. Many are seeing the light of Catholic restoration, counterrevolution and sacred Tradition as the only way out of the post-conciliar darkness.

The case of Dr. Taylor Marshall also helps us further explain the point and purpose of the Catholic Identity Conference in Pittsburgh, PA. Precisely because the Modernist Revolution in the Church is collapsing under the reign of Pope Francis and driving many good men in the direction of holy Tradition, the time is now to "unite the

~ See Editor's Desk/ Page 2

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2019 Remnant Press 03/31/2019

Next Article >        < Prev Article

Sun, 31 Mar 2019 | Cover | Page 01

A Letter from Rome...

The Miracle of the Palazzo Massimo, Then and Now

By Roberto de Mattei

Remnant Columnist | Rome

Editor’s Introduction: During The Remnant’s recent visit to Rome we had the opportunity to collaborate with the Rome-based Lepanto Foundation’s Professor Roberto de Mattei in a dramatic demonstration, just two days before the Vatican’s sham summit meeting on clerical sexual abuse (see reports in The Remnant 2/28/19 edition). During that visit, I also had the opportunity to interview Professor de Mattei for Remnant TV (https://www.

youtube.com/watch?v=3zj8Z3aUYeQ).

I have been acquainted with Professor de Mattei’s work for many years and, to be quite honest, was honored to stand with him in Rome. He is a firstrate Catholic historian and directs the magazine Radici Cristiane and the Corrispondenza Romana News Agency.

After our interview, it occurred to me that it makes no sense for The Remnant not to be collaborating with Roberto De Mattei on a more regular basis, and so I asked him if he’d consider becoming a contributor to these columns. It is indeed a pleasure to announce the good news that he has graciously accepted my invitation. Moving forward, Roberto

~ See Miracle of Massimo/ Page 6

The Miracle of the Palazzo Massimo, Then and Now

R. De Mattei/ Continued from Page 1

de Mattei’s "Letter from Rome" will be a regular feature here in The Remnant, and I’d like to warmly welcome him, formally introduce him to our readers, and ask God to bless our alliance with many years of fruitful collaboration in the service of His Church. Welcome aboard, Roberto de Mattei!

MJM

Among the ancient Roman palaces, the Palazzo Massimo alle Colonne is one of the the most impressive and evocative.

The "Colonne" or columns are part of the portico which faces the Corso Vittorio Emanuele, at the point at which the "Papal Way" which runs from the Quirinale to the Vatican curves toward Piazza San Pantaleo before resuming its straight route. The six pairs of travertine columns delimit the Odeon, or music hall, of Emperor Domitian, on which the palace was built by Baldassarre Peruzzi between 1532 and 1536, after the destruction of the domus antiqua in the Sack of Rome in 1527.

In that terrible event, the Massimo family was struck particularly hard.

The palace was set on fire, the rich collection of antiquities was dispersed, the daughters of Prince Domenico were violated and his son Giuliano died fighting against the Landsknechte, the German mercenary soldiers who sacked the city. During those tragic days the religious symbols of the city of Rome and its most sacred memories were defiled. Pope Clement VII commissioned Michelangelo to paint the Last Judgment in the Sistine Chapel as if to immortalize the drama, which everyone considered as a chastisement from Heaven against the corruption of society and the men of the Church.

After its reconstruction, the Massimo family lived in this house, a Roman family whose documented origins go back to the Middle Ages, but which tradition traces back to the Roman consul Fabius Maximus, known as "The Time Buyer" for the strategy with which he opposed Hannibal in the Italian wars.

In 1797, when Napoloeon Bonaparte asked the Marquis Camillo Massimo, ambassador of Pope Pius VI at the Peace Treaty of Tolentino, if this ancestry was true, the Marquis replied, " I don’t know, but it is a story that has been handed down in the family for at least 1200 years." The motto of the dynasty is Cunctando restituiti, "Buying Time Restoring [Liberty to the Roman Republic]." In the atrium, the family crest is supported by a boy who is choking two snakes – an allusion to Hercules, the legendary father of Fabius Maximus. The palace was built during the Renaissance, but the atmosphere that one breathes when crossing the courtyards and climbing the staircases rich with basrelief sculptures and ancient statues is that of the Counter Reformation, due to a certain austerity which distinguishes it from other Roman palaces.

The entrance hall is one of the few in which 18thcentury taste has not entered to modify its severity and the "Chapel of the Miracle" on the second floor infuses a sacred spirit into the house. In the last two centuries the Casa Massimo was related to the royal houses of Savoy and the Bourbons.

Before Pope Paul VI abolished the papal court, the family held the position of "General Superintendent of the Papal Post Office." It was Pope Gregory XVI who nominated Prince Camillo Massimo as "Postmaster General" with the duty of preparing Papal journeys, arranging the itinerary, the change of horses, the lodgings during the trip and extraordinary couriers. Although it was not a hereditary office, the post remained in the family into the 20th century.

Each year on March 16, the miracle of Saint Philip Neri (1515-1595) is commemorated in this palace, who in 1583 restored to life the young Paolo Massimo, son of Prince Fabrizio (15561633). If the Massimo family is a Roman family par excellence, Saint Philip Neri is equally Roman, although he was born in Florence. He carried out his apostolate in the heart of Rome at the churches of San Girolamo della Carità, San Giovanni dei Fiorentini, and Santa Maria in Vallicella, the home of the Congregation of the Oratory which he founded.

The conversion of the Florentine noble Giovanni Battista Salviati, husband of Porzia Massimo, had contributed to Philip Neri receiving widespread support from the Roman aristocracy. After the death of her husband, Porzia founded the Dominican monastery of SS. Domenico e Sisto in Rome, while Prince Fabrizio and his wife Lavinia de’Rustici belonged to the close circle of disciples of the Roman saint whom they often welcomed at their palace and in their fief at Arsoli.

On January 1, 1583, their 14-year-old son Paolo came down with a fever, which lasted for 65 days and brought him close to death. Philip, who visited Paolo every day, told the family to call him when Paolo’s final moments drew near. He was about to celebrate Mass at San Girolamo della Carità, when the messenger from Casa Massimo arrived

In the Spanish Civil

War the anarchist-communist Revolution showed its bloody face, which it had already shown in Russia and

Mexico.

Continued Next Page

St. Philip Neri

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2019 Remnant Press 03/31/2019

Next Article >        < Prev Article

Sun, 31 Mar 2019 | Cover | Page 01

Thank God for Francis!

(What We Have Learned from Jorge Mario Bergoglio)

By Christopher A. Ferrara

Remnant Columnist | Virginia

Whether the Catholic Church is the one true Church of Christ depends entirely upon her infallibility as an organ of truth, for if she were not such then she would not be indefectible, Christ’s promise of indefectibility (cf. Matt. 28:20) would be void and He himself could not, therefore, be what he claimed to be: the God who can neither deceive nor be deceived.

Infallibility of teaching on faith and morals is intrinsic to the divine commission, for without it the Church could not make of all nations disciples of Christ but only disciples of human teaching which may or may not correspond to the revealed truth of the Gospel. This was the lot of the nations that became disciples of Luther and his progeny before any form of the Christian religion was finally banished from all nations by

~ See Thank God for Francis/ Page 8

Thank God for Francis!

C. Ferrara/ Continued from Page 1

the terminal secularism of political modernity.

As Cardinal Newman put it: "If Christianity is both social and dogmatic, and intended for all ages, it must humanly speaking have an infallible expounder." [ An Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine, II.13] But who or what in the Church is the infallible expounder?

It can only be the Church as a whole, whose supreme leader on earth is indeed the Pope, but whose head is Christ and Him alone.

The infallible expounder cannot be the Pope alone, even if his authority is supreme, universal and direct as to every member of the Church, for it is not the Pope alone who received the divine commission. And while Our Lord said to Peter "thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church (Matt 16:18)," He also said to him almost immediately thereafter, when Peter balked at the Passion: "Go behind me, Satan, thou art a scandal unto me: because thou savourest not the things that are of God, but the things that are of men (Matt. 16:23)."

This would be followed, on the night of the Last Supper, by the prophecy that Peter would deny Him thrice and by the admonition applicable not only to Peter but to all his successors: "Simon, Simon, behold Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat: But I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not: and thou, being once converted, confirm thy brethren (Lk 22:31-32)."

Our Lord’s promise of divine assistance to the papacy is not a divine guarantee of inerrant Popes. The Pope is, after all, a man, and a man is always subject to human frailty and the possibility of error that comes with every exercise of free will, which is not lost upon election to the papacy.

Hence Saint Paul’s famous rebuke of the first Pope at Antioch on account of his cowardly feigned adherence to Jewish dietary laws, which threatened the entire mission of the Church to the Gentiles by suggesting that they ought to follow the Mosaic law:

But when Cephas was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed.

For before that some came from James, he did eat with the Gentiles: but when they were come, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing them who were of the circumcision.

And to his dissimulation the rest of the Jews consented, so that Barnabas also was led by them into that dissimulation.

But when I saw that they walked not uprightly unto

the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas before them all: If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of the Gentiles, and not as the Jews do, how dost thou compel the Gentiles to live as do the Jews? [2 Gal 1 114]

The Church, however, is not a man or even a mere collective of men, but the Mystical Body of Christ whose subsistence cannot be destroyed by any human error. Lost in the current mania of hyper-papalism is the infallibility of the Church as a corporate whole, extending even to the faithful as a body, which obeys what has always been taught by the Church as a whole and rejects what is foreign to that teaching. As Ludwig Ott explains:

One may distinguish an active and a passive infallibility. The former belongs to the pastors of the Church in the exercise of their teaching office (infallibilitas in docendo), the latter to the faithful as a whole in its assent to the message of faith (infallibilitas in credendo) Active and passive are related as cause and effect.

During the Arian crisis this "passive" infallibility of the faithful was crucial to the Church’s survival—that is, to the maintenance of her indefectibility. As Cardinal Newman famously explains, the laity were more faithful than their teachers to what their teachers had always taught them in the light of Revelation:

[I]n that time of immense confusion … the body of the episcopate was unfaithful to its commission, while the body of the laity was faithful to its baptism;… at one time the Pope, at other times the patriarchal, metropolitan, and other great sees, at other times general councils, said what they should not have said, or did what obscured and compromised revealed truth; while, on the other hand, it was the Christian people who, under Providence, were the ecclesiastical strength of Athanasius, Hilary, Eusebius of Vercellae, and other great solitary confessors, who would have failed without them. [On Consulting the Faithful in Matters of Doctrine (1859)]

So, the Church’s infallibility pertains to the whole of her divine constitution: both the hierarchy and the laity which together comprise the Mystical Body.

And there are times—our time is one of them—when at least a remnant of the laity keeps the faith they were taught even though the hierarchy has generally failed in its commission to defend and protect it. This is not to deny that there are still many among the hierarchs who believe what they were taught. To quote Newman again apropos the Arian crisis:

… I am not denying that the great body of the Bishops were in their internal belief orthodox; nor that there were numbers of clergy who stood by the laity, and acted as their centres and guides; nor that the laity actually received their faith, in the first instance, from the Bishops and clergy; nor that some portions of the laity were ignorant, and other portions at length corrupted by the Arian teachers … but I mean still, that in that time of immense confusion the divine dogma of our Lord’s divinity was proclaimed, enforced, maintained, and (humanly speaking) preserved, far more by the "Ecclesia docta" than by the "Ecclesia docens"…

What is "the faith" the faithful remnant are preserving far more than the generality of the hierarchy in our current "time of immense confusion"? It is nothing other than the total ensemble of doctrines the Church as a whole has taught and believed since apostolic times, otherwise known as the deposit of faith, developed and applied to particular circumstances as necessary but never contradicted.

Too little attention has been paid in our day to the one criterion by which the validity of all Church teaching is judged: the constancy of what she has handed down in her corporate function as teacher versus the novelty of some particular pronouncement extrinsic to the depositum fidei. Blessed Pius IX, the very Pope who narrowly defined papal infallibility by approving the Vatican I decree, was at pains to make clear in answer to Johannes Dollinger, before Dollinger’s apostasy and ultimate excommunication, that the teaching Church as a whole is infallible, not only as to "dogmas expressly defined by the Church" but also when it comes to "matters transmitted as divinely revealed by the ordinary Magisterium of the whole Church dispersed throughout the world and, for that reason, held by the universal consensus of Catholic theologians as belonging to the faith."

[DZ 2879] It is of decisive importance in our current circumstances to recall how Vatican I’s definition of papal (versus ecclesial corporate) infallibility was strictly limited to the rarity of singular and solemn papal pronouncements commanding universal assent on a matter of faith and morals. The Council’s conditions for papal infallibility are that the Pope: (1) "when he speaks ex cathedra, that is, when, acting in the exercise of his office as shepherd and teacher of all Christians," (2) "defines, by virtue of his supreme apostolic authority," (3) "a doctrine concerning faith or morals to be held by the whole church…" [DZ 3074] Only then, the Council declared, can it be said that the Pope in his singular definitions "possesses, by the divine assistance promised to him in blessed Peter, that infallibility which the divine Redeemer willed his church to enjoy in defining doctrine concerning faith or morals." But even in the exercise of this extraordinary Magisterium, the Pope can do nothing but define solemnly as dogma matters already "transmitted as divinely revealed by the ordinary Magisterium of the whole Church dispersed throughout the world"—including, of course, Popes and Councils presided over by Popes and the body of bishops as a diachronic moral totality. (The body of bishops does not mean episcopal conferences in particular countries, which are no part of the divine constitution of the Church and were not even given formal juridical status until the Second Vatican Council’s decree Christus Dominus, which Paul VI implemented in 1966 with his motu proprio Ecclesiae sanctae— one of his many prudential blunders.) In short, the Pope has absolutely no power to define a novel doctrine that was never a part of the Church’s

"

In short, the Pope has absolutely no power to define a novel doctrine that was never a part of the Church’s Magisterium, either ordinary or extraordinary.'

"

To deny that a given Pope can ever depart from orthodoxy by proclaiming his own ideas is to argue implicitly that every utterance of a true Pope touching on faith and morals must be accepted

without question.'

"

No Catholic is obliged to believe in ecumenism, dialogue, interreligious dialogue or collegiality, whatever these notions might mean, for the simple reason that the Church had never heard of them

before 1962.'

Continued Next Page

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2019 Remnant Press 03/31/2019

Next Article >        < Prev Article

Sun, 31 Mar 2019 | Cover | Page 01

Learning to Pray with Tears

by Hilary White

Remnant Columnist | Perugia, Italy

Part II

(Continued from Last Issue)

Why do it the hard way?

Peter Owen Jones is an Anglican minister who moonlights as a "presenter" on BBC television programmes about religion and the spiritual life. Or at least, about the Anglican/BBC version of them. Mr. Jones did a series in which he investigated "extreme" asceticism in various "faith traditions" including visits to Hindu and Buddhist ascetics. His final experiment was a visit to St. Anthony’s mountain in Egypt, where he spent three weeks praying the Jesus Prayer under the guidance of a Coptic Orthodox monk, Fr. Lazarus El Anthony.

1 https://www. youtube.com/watch?v=9VjU_505i6E At the end of the one-hour segment, Mr. Jones, though he acknowledges its greatness, rejects the ascetic way of the saints of ancient Christianity as a kind of masochistic madness, as though he thinks there is another, easier way. He finds an excuse by an evasion that is perhaps semi-deliberate, by a twist of Scripture:

"I’m taking solace in the fact that Christ said some wonderful words which were ‘In my father’s house there are many rooms,’ and to a certain extent I think we choose the rooms that we inhabit. The mistake is

1 Fr. Lazarus, an Australian convert from Marxist atheism, is a popular figure among Egypt’s Coptic Orthodox people.

Apart from his faulty ecclesiology, his devotion to prayer and the ascetic life is inspirational, and his video interviews – available on YouTube – are well worth listening to, particularly the story of his conversion through a mystical experience with Our Lady.

~ See Hilary/ Page 4

How to Pray with Tears

H. White/ Continued From Page 1

to assume that all rooms should either be like that or all rooms are like that."

"The room that St. Anthony chose to inhabit is really a very fearful place that very, very few of us would choose to go into knowingly. And it speaks immensely of his bravery and his faith that he was able to endure it..."

But, no thanks.

Thus speaks the modern man. The Anglican dilletante, the syncretist, who clings desperately to the notion that God Himself has no particular preference about how we spend our lives, and that there are no stark choices that we must make, and that whatever "room" we happen to prefer is good enough. A man who likes his religion easy and his grace cheap.

To modern man, including modern, novusordoist Catholic man, such holiness is wholly separate from the experience of the "average Christian2."

A man like Anthony is some different kind of man, almost a different species who, specially gifted with holiness, can safely be kept on a special shelf of icons and ignored. His is not an example to be followed, but a kind of religious freak of nature. We are in awe of his choice to "inhabit a fearful place," and thank God that we are under no obligation to be like him, a terrifying and impossible suggestion.

It is true, as St. Philip Neri said, that not all are called to the rigors of religious life – still less to the desert life on an Egyptian mountain. But it is unequivocally true that all – not merely all Catholics or all Christians, but all people – are called to a life of intimate union with God, to the exclusion of all other things, and that there is only one way to that union. And Philip, following all the other saints from St.

Anthony of the Desert, understood that the Purgative Way, the embrace of a life of penance and mortification, is not an optional step. It is not a "room" that one can choose to take or leave. It is the only door to life, and the one who refuses it, and "fears going down to hell in his lifetime, runs a great risk of going there when he dies."

It’s not hard to imagine that this is the normal reaction of most of us when we first hear the command of Christ, "Be perfect, therefore, as the Father in heaven is perfect." It seems so impossible as to be insane, and we

2 …as Cardinal Kasper called him while denying the "universal call to holiness."

would be tempted to think it so if it came from any other source. But the Lord who never lies later clarified when His own disciples were aghast at this, asking how it is possible that anyone is saved: "With men this is impossible." He agreed. "But with God all things are possible."

No, St. Anthony and the Desert Fathers were not strange, otherworldly, angelic beings of a different species of men.

They simply didn’t rely upon their own strength and powers.

The Fathers of the Church – the earliest writers on the life of the Spirit, never had the idea we have now, that mere membership in the Body of Christ, merely being baptised and passively receiving the Blessed Sacrament at Mass could possibly suffice for our sanctification. Even the sanctifying grace of the Sacraments cannot take root if there are no dispositions in the soul to receive it. Until our own time it was understood by all generations of Christians that we must be radically changed. As St. Paul put it, that we must put off the Old Man – the self that desires only fleshly, creaturely comforts and satisfactions – and put on the New Man, that is, put on Christ Himself. And this is no easy or brief task.

The poverty of the Protestant ideology, that has sunk deeply into the Catholic Church since the 1960s, was to deny that we could be radically changed, sanctified, by the life of the Holy Ghost within us, or that God ever intended this for us. The new doctrine holds that that we are only "covered" like snow over a dunghill, by grace, as though the Lord had said nothing to the contrary. We Catholics have followed this depressing and hopeless, worldly, Protestant path and consequently forgotten what the spiritual life is, and what it is for. This tendency to passivity has been present in the Church from the earliest ages. St.

Basil of Caesarea, in his treatise De Spiritu Sancto, gently chides us for thinking we "pick up" holiness merely by osmosis, by being in the right Church, or that the path to God can be followed while keeping our comforts.

"Now the Spirit

isn’t brought into intimate association with the soul by local approximation. How indeed could there be a corporeal approach to the incorporeal?"

Basil puts paid to our easy-going notion that we don’t really have to do much; as the popular expression has it: that "God loves us as we are" or "meets us were we’re at." It is as if the Lord had said nothing about it, and we are left believing there is no hope. If we cannot become "perfect as the Father in heaven is perfect" what hope is there for us?

Protestantism, and the New Paradigm of post-conciliar Catholicism that follows it, says only that we, in effect, sneak into heaven like thieves still carrying our Egyptian swag, with our baggage of depravities intact. But this is unthinkable, unbearable; it puts the lie to the promise of the Lord Himself.

No. The truth is something much larger, much more extraordinary and astonishing: He doesn’t come to us "where we’re at." We are to go to Him where He dwells in glory forever. But this change doesn’t come for nothing.

There’s work to be done, and that is the work of purification, that was in later centuries to be called the "Purgative Way," the first stage of the Way of Perfection.

St. Basil writes:

"This association [of the soul to God] results from the

withdrawal of the passions which, coming afterwards gradually on the soul from its friendship to the flesh, have alienated it from its close relationship with God."

By our sins, by our "friendship with the flesh," by allowing the passions to govern us according to the rule of the flesh, we have alienated ourselves from our original purpose, that is, from union with God. Basil sets forth here the inescapable choice before the soul; God or the World, God or the flesh, eternal life or everlasting death. The Israelites took the gold of Egypt with them, as if a golden idol or even a single gold coin could be useful in the desert, where no one bought or sold and what water and food there was came directly from God Himself. And slowly, with many notable failures along the way, they let the worthless idols fall from their hands.

This is the basic principle of the spiritual life that was laid down all the way back in Deuteronomy, that we should not follow the ways of the Egyptians – the ways of the flesh and the world that are the ways of death – but come out, leave the trinkets of the world behind in the desert like worthless things.

God "knows you’re going through this great wilderness; these forty years the Lord your God has been with you; you have lacked nothing.

3" But Israel had to be cleansed as a people: "Not one of these men of this evil generation shall

3 Deut 2:7

see the good land which I swore to give to your fathers.

4" So Israel wandered in the wilderness, "until the entire generation, that is, the men of war had perished from the camp, as the Lord had sworn to them. 5"

All those who had known the life of the flesh in Egypt had to die, and only the generation of the desert, who depended not on gold or on their own works but on God alone, would see the end. Only "your little ones…who this day have no knowledge of good and evil," that is, who were below the age of reason, were to see the promised land. There can be no divided hearts, no imperfection, in heaven.

The Fathers of the Church tell us that there is not only a historical reality in this story – the events of the time of Moses – but a spiritual reality applicable directly to us as individuals in every age. The people of Israel, the chosen people of God, is likened to the soul on its journey out of sin back to Him. The soul begins to hate its bondage, to chafe at its slavery to sin but is immersed still in the "fleshpots of Egypt."

But the soul in reality is not a slave, but the chosen one, the beloved-butadulterous bride of Hosea, who must be "lured out" or even driven out of the bondage of Egypt, into the radical freedom of the desert. And she must dwell there homeless and dependent until every desire for the old life – the "men of war" – has died out and the soul is left entirely dependent upon and reoriented to her love only of God.

Hosea describes Israel as the adulterous bride, the harlot people who turned away from Him and worshiped the idols of the gentiles. At first she is repudiated and punished by the Lord, the husband, who says, "Therefore I will hedge up her way with thorns; and I will build a wall against her, so that she cannot find her paths. She shall pursue her lovers but not overtake them; and she shall seek them but shall not find them6… And I will lay waste her vines and her fig trees…And I

4 Deut 1:35 5 Deut 2:14 6 Hosea 2:6-13

"

Until our own time it was understood by all generations of Christians that we must be radically changed.

As St.

Paul put it, that we must put off the Old Man – the self that desires only fleshly, creaturely comforts and satisfactions...

"

Continued Next Page

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2019 Remnant Press 03/31/2019

Next Article >        < Prev Article

Sun, 31 Mar 2019 | Cover | Page 02

Editor's Desk, Continued...

clans," which is why this year we— Eric Frankovitch, Todd Wilson and our team here at The Remnant—began preparations for the event earlier than ever.

In anticipation of a record-setting turnout, we’ve moved to a larger venue, a Pittsburgh airport hotel, and we’ve already locked in Bishop Athanasius Schneider, Chorbishop Anthony Spinosa, LifeSite’s Rome reporter, Diane Montagna, as well as our priestly brother in arms, Father Gregory Pendergraft as speakers. (The full roster for the CIC 2019— TRADITIONAL CATHOLIC RESTORATION: The World’s Last Chance— will be announced in the next issue of The Remnant.) In the meantime, mark your calendars for the weekend of November 1, 2019. For more information, or to register online, visit www.

CatholicIdentityConference.org

Destroying the Church on Purpose

So, what is happening to the Church of Vatican II? This month, George Cardinal Pell was convicted of sexual abuse of a minor and sentenced to six years in jail.

Regardless of what you think of Pell, his kangaroo-court trial should put fear in the hearts of Catholics everywhere.

A new Reign of Terror seems imminent.

Last week, it was Cardinal Philippe Barbarin who was convicted of failing to report allegations of sexual abuse of minors by a priest in Lyon, France (his conviction is now under appeal, so shaky was the evidence against him).

Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano is still in hiding after his attempt to expose the corruption that goes all the way to the top.

The day before the Vatican’s recent sham-summit on clerical sexual abuse, Cardinals Burke and Brandmuller issued an eleventh-hour intervention, begging the Pope and the Bishops to address the fundamental cause of crisis in the priesthood—rampant homosexuality.

They were ignored, exactly as their request for clarification on the errors of Amoris Laetitia was ignored over two years ago.

A sort of ecclesial mafia seems to be running the Vatican just now.

I wonder how much more criminal and immoral behavior must transpire before even Novus Ordo Catholics begin to realize what’s going on here. This is not just the takeover of the Church by wayward Modernists. This is becoming an organized cartel set on accelerating what Pope Paul VI called the "autodemolition of the Catholic Church."

This is Satan at work. The Modernist takeover was never about merely "updating the Church" to fit in with the modern world. It was never about mere "liturgical preferences." It was about silencing the Church, imprisoning her, crucifying her—while convincing good Catholics—the so-called Neo-Catholics—that God wills this, the shepherds ordered this, and the sheep must obey.

Persecution was always inevitable so long as the Catholic Church continued to bow and scrape to the modern world, change her liturgy so as not to upset the Protestants, alter her scriptures so as to accommodate the anti-Christians, and deny creation ex nihilo in order to appear sophisticated to the pagans.

And today, just 54 years after the close of the Second Vatican Council—and 50 years this month since the introduction of the New Mass—the Catholic Church has become a ship lost at sea, a church without a mission, a priest without an altar, and a people without faith.

Some would have us believe that it was always like this, that the Church was always corrupt, that the priesthood was always full of pedophiles. But even the pre-Vatican II Hollywood movie record dispels that black legend. Why turn to infamous Hollywood? Because if any industry in the world would have seized on the "truth" of a pedophiliac priesthood, it would have been the reliably anti-Catholic movie industry.

But what do see instead?

Just a few years before Vatican II landed, powerhouse leading Hollywood actors such as Spencer Tracy were playing Catholic priests saving small armies of little boys.

I’m not a big fan of the movie Boys Town, but the film makes one thing crystal clear: Nobody associated priests with pedophiles back in those days.

Father Flanagan was real, and so was the great Father Nelson Henry Baker — hero Catholic priest who, at the time of his death in 1936, had developed a "city of charity" under the patronage of Our Lady of Victory in Lackawanna, New York that had rescued thousands of boys—orphans called "Baker’s Boys"— from the streets of America.

Before he’d gone on to his eternal reward, Father Baker had established an infant home, a home for unwed mothers, a boys’ orphanage, a boys’ protectory, a hospital, a nursing home, and a grade and high school, to say nothing of the monumental basilica of Our Lady of Victory. And Pope Francis would have us believe that it was only under this pontificate that the Church finally began to care for the poor and afflicted—something of a laugher since, even statistically, it can be proven that the Catholic Church was the most charitable and non-racist organization in human history. The Church invented the orphanage, the hospital, soup kitchens, the homes for unwed mothers.

Father Baker was a hero, yes, but hardly an anomaly. He was part of a long line of priests such as Bosco, de Paul and de Sales whose lives were like something "right out of the movies" …well, the old movies, anyhow. And so, it’s no wonder that even Hollywood had to sit up and take notice when this was still going on well into the 20th Century.

Boys Town and Angels with Dirty Faces were movies about real-life Catholic heroes who lived and breathed and dedicated their lives to the poor and underprivileged all over the world for a couple of thousand years.

Hollywood had to bow to the mighty Catholic priesthood. The Catholic orphanage. The Catholic School— before Modernism began dismantling it all—brick by brick, priest by priest, school by school. The venerable institution that had built history’s greatest civilization had to be destroyed—the Church that had developed the most advanced system of education on the face of the earth, the greatest cities of the world, played patron to the most celebrated artisans, architects and musicians in history, produced the greatest scientific minds, poets, musicians of all time. Such as?

There are far too many in the mold of Michelangelo, Palestrina, Copernicus and Dante to list here. Let it suffice to say the obvious: The Catholic Church built Western Civilization.

And now look at her—a den of iniquity where children are not safe, her princes cover for child predators and her popes prattle on about climate change and straws in the oceans rather than the Four Last Things.

The Church is living a "mystery of treason," a "mystery of Judas," Curia Cardinal Robert Sarah writes in his new book "Le soir approche et déjà le jour baisse" (Fayard). "The Church is dying because the shepherds are afraid of speaking with truth and clarity."

"We are afraid of the media" and, as a consequence, the Catholics are "confused."

Robert Cardinal Sarah says the Church has become a "den of darkness" and a "cave of thieves."

What happened? Modernism happened.

Vatican II happened. The New Mass happened. And they did it all quite methodically. They did it all on purpose.

They wrecked the old Church in order to make room for the International Brotherhood of Man. That’s why our Mass had to become so vapid and shallow that millions simply walked away. (Do you blame them?) That’s why churches are closing by the hundreds, our priesthood has become a gay profession, our bishops are going to jail, and our pope thinks his job is to save the planet from rising temperatures.

So, what are we going to do about it?

Stop defending it, first of all. Open your eyes and start admitting the truth— Modernists took over our Church, and now they intend to sit back and let the State crush what’s left of it to make room for a New World Order.

But we don’t have to let that happen.

History is full of examples of God offering his people the chance to change the future—whether it’s the ten good men of Sodom, the Consecration of France to the Sacred heart of Jesus, the Rosary and the first Saturdays called for by Our Lady of Fatima, to countless other examples of heaven begging the children of God to come back to the faith before it’s too late. We need to answer that call in our own lives, our own homes, our own parishes. We the laity must do what we can to restore the covenant with God that’s been broken by diabolically disoriented shepherds.

We need to go back to the practice of the old Faith, back to Tradition. We need to leave our modernist parishes. Don’t give them another dime. Go back to the Latin Mass.

Why? Because the gates of hell will absolutely prevail against the Church of Vatican II. It’s happening already.

Why? Because we are Catholic. We were born into this Faith of Jesus Christ and we must resolve now to die with it.

Nothing will change that, please God, nothing.

Message to Pope Francis: We pray for you every night, but until you become Catholic again and defend the Bride of Christ, we will—before God, we must— resist you to your face. ■

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2019 Remnant Press 03/31/2019

Next Article >        < Prev Article

Sun, 31 Mar 2019 | Cover | Page 03

The Remnant Speaks

Letters to the Editor: The Remnant Speaks P.O. Box 1117, Forest Lake, MN 55025 ~ Editor@RemnantNewspaper.com

Appeal from a SSPX School

Editor, The Remnant: I am grateful for any space you might give to this request for prayers. Having experienced the wonderful dynamic of the Traditional Catholic Movement in America, I am nostalgic of the freedom allowed to parents and to educational institutions in the United States.

Freedom? Indeed, relative though it may be, and fast disappearing too.

Here in the U.K., socialism has long cuddled and cudgelled the population.

Satiated with welfare and entertainment, we have now entered the final stages of George Orwell’s dystopia.

Stonewall has been hard at work in the back rooms of Westminster. All children will now be called to recognize, honour and promote immorality. From September 2020, relationships and sex education will become statutory in all secondary schools in England. Independent schools (those who receive no state funding) are independent no longer. We must preach the secular creed.

"Relationships and sex education" expounds the delights of Sodom and the exciting wonders of gender identity and exploration. Parents still retain the right to withdraw their children from some of the classes, but only with school approval.

Few schools will be able to withstand the pressure of routine and rigorous government inspections and endless reams of red tape. California is nothing in comparison to our poor island. The past 15 months have been tough.

This latest governmental challenge illustrates well the plight of Catholic families in the U.K. It is incredibly difficult to find a suitable school. It is only a matter of time before the ongoing government debate around home-schooling ends in new laws that further curtail parental rights. I write in the hope that Remnant Readers will pray for the only school left in England where parents can entrust their children knowing that they will come to no harm. St. Michael’s School has now been in existence for thirty years and it is the only Traditional Catholic School in the land. As the battle intensifies, we are looking for spiritual support and financial help to keep up the good fight and to form tomorrow’s Catholic leaders. Who knows?

The good Lord may inspire a reader to inquire further and reach out. Meanwhile, although thousands of miles away, please pray for us here in England, that we can continue to help preserve our children’s innocence.

Fr. John Brucciani Headmaster, St. Michael’s School Burghclere, U.K.

Should I Convert?

Editor, The Remnant: I’m not a Catholic but I pray the rosary every night and always wear the miraculous medal.

Both give me great peace during a very horrible time in my life. I’ve thought about converting for a number of years but just can’t pull the trigger because the Church hierarchy (including the Pope) seems to have completely gone of the rails.There are no traditional Catholic churches near me and because of medical issues driving long distances is not possible. Should I continue doing what I’m doing now or hold my nose and convert?

Anonymous Email Correspondent

Editor's Reply: Hold your nose and convert, please. The Church is under assault right now because she is the true Church, she is the only light in the darkness, despite the sinfulness and the diabolical disorientation of so many of her leaders. You have your eyes open, and the Church needs people like you to join her ranks. Maybe you will be the victim soul that will bring grace to a shepherd or two, and prompt him to do the right thing.

You've been given a great grace. Have the courage to respond to it.

MJM The Taylor Marshall 'Unite the Clans' Interview of Michael J. Matt Editor, The Remnant: Michael Matt is such a great Catholic Apologist and journalist.

He has worked with so many terrific Catholic thinkers of the second half of the past century. As a 30-year subscriber to the Remnant, I appreciate his appearance on Dr. Marshall’s podcast. He is a defender of Catholicism and the Mass; and not of the "catholicism" and "mass" of the counter-cultural, revolutionary Church of the 1970’s. He defends the Church that made real saints, celebrated real liturgies, and confected real sacraments. If anyone can rally the Clans together, he can! I’m so glad that he accepted Dr. Marshall’s invitation. Also, I was glad that Mr. Matt made the point that Francis is nothing special--just one of a long list of "usual suspects."

GeofferyN Online Editor, The Remnant: I like that Michael Matt is one of the few out there who says that no matter where you sit in the internal politics of all this, all Catholics of good will must band together to fight.

We have many faithful Catholics out there who are scattered all over. NO, Diocesan TLMs, FSSP/ICKSP, SSPX, sedevacantists. People who love the Church and love Christ. Everyone seems to think they’re in the right and each of these groups have the extremists who are so sure of how right they are and how wrong everyone else is that they act like Gnostics. It’s time to stop the bickering, we live in a confusing time and we are all doing the best we can in good conscience in order to follow Our Lord.

Any Catholic restoration will look like a return to tradition of some sort, even NO Catholics will eventually come to see that.

In the meantime, we need to work together with all Catholics who have realized that things are wrong and truly love our Lord in order to stay strong, rise up, and defeat the evil that has infested the Church.

Traditionalist23 Online

Note: Taylor Marshall Interview:

https://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=RcMdpdBY2YQ

Remnant TV in Rome

Editor, The Remnant: I recently found your podcast on your recent trip to Rome.

I found your commentary compelling, put into words many of my current feelings about the Church.

I recently started attending the Latin Mass here in St. Louis -- after flirting with Greek Orthodox -- I decided to remain RC and glad that I did. Thank you. Sincerely, Terry Conway

Note: RTV's Rome Coverage: https:// remnantnewspaper.com/web/index.php/ remnant-television/rtv-covers-vatican-sexabuse- summit-in-rome ■

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2019 Remnant Press 03/31/2019

Next Article >        < Prev Article

Sun, 31 Mar 2019 | Cover | Page 05

The Unsustainable Papacy

by Elizabeth Yore

Remnant Columnist | Chicago "Nature, not human activity rules the climate." - Dr. S. Fred Singer From the outset, the renowned think tank, Heartland Institute spotted the potted papal plant in the climate change hoax of the Francis papacy. As the world was mesmerized with the merciful and humble green Pope, Heartland recognized a flawed and unreliable model, devoid of science, reason, and flush with politics.

In April of 2015, the Heartland Delegation went to Rome to attempt a dialogue with the Pope about his dangerous and incomprehensible partnership with the UN sustainable development climate change globalists.

Yet, the dialoguer in chief was not interested in dialoguing with the foremost climate scientific experts from Heartland, among them a NASA scientist from the lunar program. Rather, Francis chose his poison by dialoguing with the radical environmental socialists, assorted globalists, and Soros acolytes, like Ban Ki Moon, Joseph Stiglitz, Jeffrey Sachs, Hans Joachim Schellnhuber, to name just a few.

Call it climate gentrification. It was bound to happen. Bergoglio’s ceremonial term as Vicar of the Sustainable Development Goals appears to be ending, but not for lack of trying; Francis desperately sought to be the modern, hip, relevant, and the moral climate change protagonist. He even launched a new sin- an ecological sin!

Francis certainly gave it the old papal try. He surrounded himself with the leading Soros greenie globalist, UN Sustainable Development chief, Jeffrey Sachs. At latest count, Sachs has spoken at least 25 times at the Vatican as an honored expert and guest during the Francis papacy. This population control globalist even drafted papal documents, causing Vaticanistas to speculate that Sachs might receive a green zucchetto from the Pope.

During the last 6 years, the incessant papal eco conferences, resembled a Socialist Who’s Who featuring the hideous likes of Bernie Sanders, Joseph Stiglitz, Bolivian President Evo Morales, Gov. Jerry Brown, Naomi Klein, Population Bomb’s Paul Ehrlich. Francis threw his papal weight behind the Paris Climate Change Treaty, lobbied for support of the UN Sustainable Development Goals, penned an Apostolic Eco Exhortation on the climate, and even demanded ecological conversion from the faithful. Whatever that is.

Francis rolled out his Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences as the green platform to wage his climate change one world religion. Even the President of the Pontifical Academy, Bishop Sanchez Sorondo, elevated "climate change to Church magisterium," deserving of a papal imprimatur and Vatican endorsement of the globalists’ precious Paris Climate Treaty. Francis joined the globalist tyrannical chorus of the "science is settled." His global warming architect, Argentine Bishop Sanchez Sorondo mocked the global warming doubters saying that "we need to rely on coal and oil is like saying that the earth is not round. It is an absurdity dictated by the need to make money." Sorondo also repeated the lame globalist slam that the deniers are funded by the oil industry.

Despite plummeting popularity, Francis continues his eco jig with his global partners. This past month, Jeffrey Sachs (the green gift that keeps giving) was featured prominently at yet another Vatican conference on March 4-5, 2019!

This latest Vatican/Sachs’ eco conference was immediately followed by the March 8, 2019 Eco Wingding with all the global heads of religions, entitled, (you guessed

Continued on Page 6

Unsustainable Papacy

L. Yore/ Continued from Page 5

it) "Religions and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs): Listening to the Cry of the Earth and of the Poor."

Not surprisingly, Francis does not mention Jesus Christ in his latest rambling and incoherent talk to the religious leaders, fearful of offending nonbelievers. True to form, Francis engaged in his personal rewriting of Catholicism, with green tropes like, "The key principle of all religions is the love of neighbor and the care of creation." Francis makes it up as he goes along. Never mind that care of creation isn’t found in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, nor in the 10 Commandments. Francis, the Vicar of SDGs is tasked with forming a new one world religion based on the UN Sustainable Development Goals, driven by the evil of climate change. Gaia has now replaced Jesus Christ. Sins are now calculated by carbon footprints.

‘Bless me Father, I forgot to recycle and I turned on the air conditioner.

For your penance, your carbon tax will be doubled. Now, go green and go in peace.’ Francis deftly rode the climate wave for 6 years. Reveling in the media fawning, magazine covers, and globalist adulation, the climate change movement found its long-lost moral voice in, none other than, the Vicar of Christ. How masterful and cunning of them to secure such a powerful advocate. As if on cue, Francis obediently moved the needle to ensure the Paris Climate Treaty was signed and SDGs overwhelmingly passed at the UN within just two years of his elevation to the papacy.

Yet, as they say, the climate suddenly changed. Francis and his global planners were trumped and stumped.

Along came Donald Trump, who put the brakes on the global deal making of Obama and Francis, followed quickly by a tsunami (extreme weather event-noted) of clergy sex scandals raining down on Francis.

Francis is clearly annoyed that the world’s Catholics are more concerned about zero tolerance of clergy abuse, than a zero-carbon foot print.

The shocking scandal of the papal rehabilitation of the notorious serial predator Cardinal Theodore McCarrick, who Francis sent on multiple diplomatic junkets, shocked the world. The Vatican’s continual stonewalling on the McCarrick fiasco further enrages Catholics. Additionally, Francis faced cascading personal scandals of his own with papal cover ups of sexual predator priests and bishops in Chile, Argentina, Italy, and in America.

His popularity is cooling faster than the polar ice cap while the Catholic faithful are steaming over his cavalier attitude and laissez faire environment toward sexual predator priests and bishops.

Suddenly, the green Pope has blood red on his hands. An important moral lesson is unfolding in this papacy.

Mega stardom and popularity are unsustainable. Ask Michael Jackson, Bill Cosby, Jimmy Savile, and Harvey Weinstein. Popularity, like pollution, obscures reality, smothers humanity, and poisons the environment.

Francis desperately wants to change the subject from the scandal of clergy sex abuse to sustainable development. It won’t happen.

Instead of "Listening to the Cry of the Earth and of the Poor," he should have listened to the cry of those children abused by clergy. ■ Elizabeth Yore is an international child protection attorney. She was a member of the Heartland 7 delegation that traveled to Rome in April 2015.

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2019 Remnant Press 03/31/2019

Next Article >        < Prev Article

Sun, 31 Mar 2019 | Cover | Page 05

How to Pray With Tears,

Concluded

will punish her for the feast days of the Ba’als when she burned incense to them and decked herself with her ring and jewelry, and went after her lovers and forgot me, says the Lord."

Then the reform comes, but only when all these things of the flesh, which were given by God but misused, are taken away and the soul is taken out into the empty desert to be brought back to her senses and remember for Whom she was made. "Therefore, behold, I will allure her, and bring her into the wilderness, and speak tenderly to her…For I will remove the names of the Ba’als from her mouth, and they shall be mentioned by name no more… And I will betroth you to me forever; I will betroth you to me in righteousness and in justice, in steadfast love and in mercy. I will betroth you to me in faithfulness; and you shall know the Lord.

7"

Once purified, all things will be given to the soul again: "And there I will give her the vineyards and make the Valley of Achor a door of hope. And there she shall answer as in the days of her youth, as at the time when she came out of the land of Egypt.

8"

"And everyone who has left houses or

7 Hosea 2:16-20 8 Hosea 2:15

brothers or sisters or father or mother or children or lands for my name’s sake, will receive a hundredfold and inherit eternal life. 9"

Until this larger context of the danger of the flesh, the gravity of sin, is understood, St. Basil’s language can be a little obscure, but if we allow the greater meaning to sink in, the real nature of the soul’s relationship with God, we come to see that he is talking about a royal road to nothing less than utter purification. This purgation is undertaken in preparation for what they still call in the Eastern Church, "divinisation," the entire remaking of ourselves into the New Man. We are purified by our willingness to leave behind the temptations of Egypt, of the flesh. The next step, once the soul has been emptied and cleaned, is receiving the new life:

"Only then after a man is purified from the shame whose stain he took through his wickedness, and has come back again to his natural beauty, and as it were cleaning the Royal Image and restoring its ancient form, only thus is it possible for him to draw near to the Paraclete. And He, like the sun, will by the aid of your purified eye

show you in Himself the image 9 Matt.19:29

of the invisible, and in the blessed spectacle of the image

you shall behold the unspeakable beauty of the archetype."

That is, the model of the new you, God Himself. This is no mere "covering" of our sins, leaving us in our condition of wretchedness and slavery and hopeless separation from God. This is something entirely, incomparably different.

Through His aid hearts are lifted up, the weak are held by the hand and they who are advancing are brought to perfection. Shining upon

those that are cleansed from every spot, He makes them spiritual by fellowship with Himself. Just as when a sunbeam falls on bright and transparent bodies,

they themselves become brilliant too, and shed for a fresh brightness from themselves, so souls wherein the Spirit dwells, illuminated by the Spirit, themselves become spiritual, and send forth their grace to others.

It is from this process, the "Way of Perfection" that must, that can only begin with the purification of the Purgative Way, that sanctity comes. This is where we see the extraordinary graces of the saints. It answers the old question, "How could the martyrs have sung the praises of God while they were being slaughtered?" How is such superhuman heroism possible? "With men this is impossible. But with God all things are possible."

Basil tells us plainly that this is the source of the extraordinary graces that fascinate us about the stories of the saints. He dares even to say, we are "made God."

"Hence comes foreknowledge of the future, understanding of mysteries, apprehension of what is hidden, distribution of good gifts, the heavenly citizenship, a place in the chorus of angels, joy without end, abiding in God, the being made like to God, and,

highest of all, the being made God."

This is the secret, the extraordinary goal, of the saints that makes our modernist aim, "living a good life" or "becoming a better person," some kind of mere naturalistic "self-improvement," look as silly and worthless as a child’s game. As useless as a gold coin in a vast desert. Those pursuing this Way of Perfection don’t want to "become their own best selves" – as the trendy neo-catholic gurus would have it. They aim at something higher than man could possibly achieve on his own: divinisation. ■

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2019 Remnant Press 03/31/2019

Next Article >        < Prev Article

Sun, 31 Mar 2019 | Cover | Page 07

R. de Mattei/Continued...

Paolo! Paolo!"

The youth reopened his eyes and said, "

and announced the imminent death of the youth. Meanwhile, Paolo, after receiving Extreme Unction from the parish priest of the nearby church of San Pantaleo, breathed his last.

Philip arrived half an hour after he had died. Prince Fabrizio told him from the staircase that it was all over. The saint, making his way through the weeping relatives, approached the lifeless body of the young man, pressed it to himself, prayed intensely for seven or eight minutes with the palpitations of the heart and the trembling of the body which was typical of him, and then sprinkled the body with holy water. Then he blew on the boy’s face and called out in a loud voice: "

Father, I forgot to mention one sin, I would like to go to confession."

The saint, asking those present to leave, gave the youth a crucifix to hold, listened to his confession, and absolved him. Then, when everyone had returned to the room, he asked the youth whether he preferred to die so as to go to heaven.

Paolo nodded. Philip asked him a second time, and Paolo responded " Yes, gladly, especially so I can see my mother and sister in Paradise."

Saint Philip replied as he blessed him, "

Go, so that you may be blessed, and pray to God for me." And according to the witnesses, Paolo " immediately returned to death again" with a peaceful face (Giacomo Bacci,

Vita di San Filippo Neri,

Tip. B. Olivieri, Roma 1831, pp.

100-101).

The resurrection was apparent to all who witnessed it, and in his treatise on the canonization and beatification of the Servants of God, Pope Benedict XIV refers to this episode when he speaks of the miracles of the resurrection of the body, in order to explain that it is also possible to die a short time after having obtained the grace of resurrection ( De servorum Dei beatificatione et beatorum canonisatione, Liber IV, pars I, cap.

XXI, n. 30).

In September 1595, when he was well over 80 years old, Prince Fabrizio Massimo had the joy of testifying at the canonization process of Philip Neri, who died on May 26 of that year. In 1602 the remains of the founder of the Oratory were placed in an urn at Santa Maria in Vallicella, with the face covered by a silver mask. Philip Neri was canonized on March 12, 1622, by Pope Gregory XV, together with Teresa of Avila and Ignatius of Loyola.

On March 16, 1839, Pope Gregory XVI visited the chapel in the Casa Massimo and raised it to the rank of a church.

Pope Pius IX declared it the "

chiesa domestica,"

and, while he was staying at the Casa Massimo on March 16, 1847, he granted it the right to have the celebration of Mass each year on the anniversary of the miracle.

Since then, every March 16 the people of Rome are able to visit the Casa Massimo. The six columns of the portico are decorated with red damasks and whoever wants to may enter the magnificent halls, decorated with the frescoes by Daniele da Volterra on the life of Quinto Fabio Massimo, the frieze of the Aeneid by Perin del Vaga and one of the "Foundation of Rome" by Giulio Romano.

Holy Masses are celebrated throughout the day, almost all according to the Ancient Roman Rite, in the noble chapel. Inside the high altar of the "domestic church" two important relics of Saint Philip are preserved: his eyeglasses and his rosary.

His Eminence Cardinal Raymond Leo Burke is one of the regular guests of the Massimo nobility. The wife of Carlo Massimo, Princess Elisa, a Spanish aristocrat belonging to the Osorio family of Moscoso, is especially devoted to the Tradition of the Church. Her father is the Duke of Montemar, Pedro Osorio de Moscos, the nephew of three martyrs for the faith of the Spanish Civil War, the brothers Gerardo, Francisco Javier, and Ramon. These men were respectively 33, 31, and 26 years old when they were killed on November 28, 1936, by the communist militia of the Frente Popular in Paracuellos del Jarama. The victims of what is considered the worst carnage of the Spanish Civil War belonged mostly to the Catholic ruling class, such as the Spanish playwright Pedro Munoz Seca, who said, " They accuse me of being a monarchist because I carried the mantle of the Virgin of Pilar to Rome on behalf of Alfonso XIII. With this mantle I also go to die."

In the Spanish Civil War the anarchistcommunist Revolution showed its bloody face, which it had already shown in Russia and Mexico. Over the years, the masks worn by the Revolution change, but the anti-Christian essence of the revolutionary process does not change. Its goal is the destruction of the Church and Christian civilization. It is good to recall this during a time when a new persecution of Catholics seems to be knocking at the door. Casa Massimo has also undergone difficult trials over the course of history. The Jacobin invasion of 1799, when in Papal Rome the Cross was replaced with "trees of liberty," was just as disastrous for the Massimo family as the Sack of Rome in 1527: all of the family property was confiscated, its members were sent into exile, the palace was sacked. But Saint Philip Neri had predicted to Prince Fabrizio that his family line would not be extinguished nor would it lack bread.

Philip Neri had power from God to bring the dead to life, but also to bring death to the living.

One day, after he had visited and comforted a noblewoman of Rome who was gravely ill, he left her to return to his house at Santa Maria in Vallicella.

But after he had walked part of the way back, he stopped and said to his companions, " I feel obligated to return to that lady on the point of death." He found her in the same condition as before, but the doctors thought that she would be able to hold out until the next day.

Philip placed his hands on her head and blew on her face once or twice. He prayed zealously, then he fixed his gaze on her and said in a loud voice, so that several people heard it, " I command you, O Soul, I order you, on behalf of God, come out of this body." At that moment she died. Philip then said to those present that if the woman had remained in agony for too long, she would have run the risk of giving into temptations, and for this reason he had prayed to God that he would hasten her death (Giacomo Bacci, Vita di San Filippo Neri, cit, p.

101).

These episodes remind us of the reality of miracles, extraordinary interventions of God which St. Thomas defines as follows: " A miracle is that which is done by God outside the order of all created nature" ( Summa Teologica, I, q. 110, a.

4). The characteristic of miracles is to overcome the forces of nature, without contradicting it, thus demonstrating the absolute dominion of God over the things of the world created by Him.

Everything is possible for God, except for what is absurd and sinful. Among all miracles, the most extraordinary are those of resurrection from the dead, and naturally the miracle par excellence is the miracle of the resurrection of Christ, the greatest expression of His power.

God is always the author of miracles, even when he uses human beings as instrumental causes. Many saints, from Saint Francis to Saint Dominic, from Saint Anthony to Saint Francesco di Paola, received from God the power to raise the dead.

In 1524 in Barcelona, Saint Ignatius raised from the dead a man who had been hanged and heard his confession, and then allowed to die once again (Father Albert J. Hebert, SM. True Stories of 400 Resurrection Miracles.

Saints Who Raised the Dead, Tan Books, 2004).

Today we are living in a world immersed in secularism that is impermeable to the supernatural. The progressive nouvelle théologie contributed to this secularism, with its lack of any distinction between the natural and supernatural order. As a consequence, faith in miracles has been lost, and what is accepted is only what reason can explain. A typical expression of this mentality is the denial of the miraculous translation of the Holy House of Loreto. The very religious who take care of the Holy House and who ought to spread devotion to the miracle deny it, replacing the story of the transfer of the house by the hands of angels to one accomplished by men, something much more difficult to believe.

Our society, from the spiritual point of view, is not in agony but is already dead, and only an extraordinary intervention of grace would be able to restore it to life, permitting it to repent and thus be saved.

To believe in the possibility of miracles is a necessary condition to hope for salvation. There are days and places, like March 16 each year at Palazzo Massimo, in which those who preserve the faith in an era of rampant apostasy pray, asking that God once again, by means of his saints, may manifest his power and his mercy.

On March 16 the Casa Massimo thus becomes a place of the symbolic profession of the Catholic faith. ■

Translated by Giuseppe Pellegrino

"

Our society, from the spiritual point of view, is not in agony but is already dead, and only an extraordinary intervention of grace would be able to restore it to life, permitting it to repent and thus be saved.

"

On March 16 the Casa Massimo thus becomes a place of the symbolic profession of the Catholic faith.

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2019 Remnant Press 03/31/2019

Next Article >        < Prev Article

Sun, 31 Mar 2019 | Cover | Page 09

C.

Ferrara/Contiued...

handed down through the apostles."

Magisterium, either ordinary or extraordinary. As Vatican I declared in the very process of defining and delimiting papal infallibility: "For the Holy Spirit was not promised to the successors of Peter that they might disclose a new doctrine by his revelation, but rather that, with his assistance, they might reverently guard and faithfully explain that revelation or deposition of faith that was

[DZ 3070] Now, none of the novel notions by which Bergoglio has afflicted the Church can be found anywhere in the deposit of faith laid down by the Church as a whole since apostolic times. His authorization of Holy Communion for certain public adulterers, his notion of environmental "sins against the Earth," his absurd attempt to repeal the Church’s bimillenial teaching in defense of capital punishment by calling the purported repeal a "development," his innumerable distortions and misrepresentations of the Gospel to suit his endless philippic against observant Catholics, and so forth, are nothing but his own ideas.

As such, by definition, they cannot belong to

the

Magisterium. Nor, for that matter, can they be considered

Catholic

doctrine at all, as opposed to the doctrine expounded by Jorge Mario Bergoglio yet never imposed on the Catholic conscience by a solemn dogmatic definition, which is impossible given the very novelty of what Bergoglio preaches.

Novel ideas are not Catholic doctrine but rather something else that is literally of no moment for a believing Catholic. And so it is with all of the novel notions and practices that have proliferated in the Church since Vatican II. For example, no Catholic is obliged to believe in ecumenism, dialogue, interreligious dialogue or collegiality, whatever these notions might mean, for the simple reason that the Church had never heard of them before 1962—putting aside the further problem of their virtual meaninglessness as mere conceptual containers for various recklessly imprudent ecclesial activities.

The question that confronts us with Bergoglio, therefore, is simply this: Is it possible for a Pope’s personal teaching to depart from what the Church as a whole has always taught and believed in favor of his own novel ideas? It must be possible, for it were not then there would be no distinction between the extraordinary and the ordinary Magisterium and the Pope would have to be viewed as simply inerrant

tout court.

Pope Benedict XVI certainly recognized the peril of

a Pope who promotes his own ideas when he said the following at the outset of his own pontificate, from which he was driven to pave the way for Bergoglio in a Roman intrigue worthy of the medieval epoch:

The power of teaching in the Church involves a commitment to the service of obedience to the faith.

The Pope is not an absolute monarch whose thoughts and desires are law. On the contrary: The Pope’s ministry is a guarantee of obedience to Christ and to his Word. He must not proclaim his own ideas, but rather constantly bind himself and the Church to obedience to God’s Word, in the face of every attempt to adapt it or water it down, and every form of opportunism.

To deny that a given Pope can ever depart from orthodoxy by proclaiming his own ideas is to argue implicitly that every utterance of a true Pope touching on faith and morals must be accepted without question. And it is precisely this Protestant caricature of the papacy to which the sedevacantists resort in opposition to the traditionalist position that Bergoglio may be resisted in his errors while yet being recognized as Pope. To quote the leading sedevacantist website in this regard:

By saying Francis is Pope but then refusing his magisterium, the would-be traditionalists in the Vatican II Church are doing untold damage to the traditional Catholic doctrine of the Papacy because the papal office was instituted as the sure norm of orthodoxy at every point in time in Church history, guaranteed by Christ Himself. This does not mean that every papal magisterial act is infallible, but it does mean that every papal magisterial act is authoritative, thus binding on consciences and, by the providence of Almighty God, always safe to follow.

This means that souls cannot be led astray by any pernicious error if they follow the teaching of the Pope. That safety is guaranteed and caused by Christ Himself. [emphasis added]

So, according to the sedevacantists, while not every magisterial act by a true Pope is infallible, his every magisterial act is authoritative, binding on conscience, safe to follow and free from pernicious error. This laughable self-contradiction is at the heart of the sedevacantist polemic. And so it must be. For if the sedevacantists were to admit that a Pope is capable of erring in his ordinary day-to-day teaching even once, then their position would collapse into a vain argument over a matter of degree: How much error must a Pope manifest before it can be concluded that he has un-Poped himself or that he never was Pope in the first place? Would only one error suffice? If not one, then how many?

There is no escaping this fatal flaw in the sedevacantist position: they must hold that any Pope who errs in any matter of faith and morals by proclaiming some novelty, such as Bergoglio’s opinion (contrary to divine revelation) that capital punishment is an attack on human dignity, cannot be a true Pope. That necessitarian logic means that they must also hold that we have had no Pope since Pius XII, given the profusion of doctrinal novelties—or what they would call doctrinal novelties—and novel practices that litter every pontificate following his in this time of immense confusion. Bergoglio has simply made it appear easier to sustain the ludicrous sedevacantist contention that we have had no Pope since 1958.

From our perspective, however, the Bergoglian Debacle is an evil from which God has already drawn a great good. For Bergoglio has demonstrated dramatically, once and for all, that the limitations of the papacy are exceeded whenever a Pope, in the exercise of his free will, fails to correspond to the grace of his state, departs from the path of Tradition and chooses to "proclaim his own ideas" rather than "constantly bind[ing] himself and the Church to obedience to God’s Word, in the face of every attempt to adapt it or water it down, and every form of opportunism."

Bergoglio has dispelled the pious fiction, long promoted by ultramontane theologians, that the faithful are obliged to believe unconditionally that the Holy Ghost infallibly insures the "safety" of every papal teaching and that we must not trouble ourselves with any apparent departure from what the Church has always taught.

Philip Lawler has rightly observed of Bergoglio that "the current Pope’s leadership has become a danger to the faith." That conservative Catholics now recognize what traditionalists have always understood—that a Pope’s leadership

can

be a danger to the faith—is a major step toward the greater recognition that the entire ecclesial crisis of the past half-century has emanated in the first instance from epochal failures of papal governance and that it will end only when a future Pope finds the courage to right the wrongs his predecessors have committed—just as Benedict XVI, at least to some extent, attempted to do before he abdicated the papal throne.

As Bergoglio has said concerning his own conduct of the papacy: "On the other hand, I am by nature oblivious, and so I go ahead." ["D’altra parte, per natura io sono incosciente, e cosi vado avanti."]. Perhaps "oblivious" is too kind a translation of the Italian "incosciente," whose alternate meanings are reckless, thoughtless, irresponsible and imprudent. But then the entire post-conciliar aggiornamento has been reckless, thoughtless, irresponsible and imprudent. The Bergoglian pontificate is but a logical continuation of the same ruinous pursuit of vain novelty.

Surely that must now be obvious to anyone who still cares about the faith of our fathers. This is what Jorge Mario Bergoglio has shown to those who still did not know. ■

"

Now, none of the novel notions by which Bergoglio has afflicted the Church can be found anywhere in the deposit of faith laid down by the Church as a

whole since apostolic times.'

"

And there are times—our time is one of them— when at least a remnant of the laity keeps the faith they were taught even though the hierarchy has generally failed in its commission to defend and

protect it.'

Remnant Meme

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2019 Remnant Press 03/31/2019

Next Article >        < Prev Article

Sun, 31 Mar 2019 | Cover | Page 10

A Letter from Romania

Catholic, Martyr, Aristocrat:

Monsignor Vladimir Ghika (1873 - 1954)

by Robert Lazu

Remnant Columnist | Romania

Editor’s Note: As The Remnant’s stable of writers continues to expand under the disastrous reign of Pope Francis, it occurred to me that it might be possible to have a member of the worldwide remnant in many different countries begin to contribute articles from their respective homelands, in the spirit of the great Michael Davies whose "Letter from London" appeared in these columns for thirty years. At this point, we have a number of promising leads, not the least of which is Dr.

Robert Lazu (PhD, Philosophy). Dr.

Lazu is a philosopher and writer born in Romania. He is descended from Polish and Ukrainian ancestors and is married to Laura. As is the case with your editor, Dr. and Mrs. Lazu have seven children. As a professional writer, Robert Lazu is author of Farmecul discret al teologiei [ The Discreet Charm of Theology], 2001, Exerciţii hermeneutice [ Hermeneutical Exercises], 2002, Lecturi catolice [ Catholical Lectures], 2004, Lumea lui Tolkien [ Tolkien’s World], 2004 and co-editor of J.R.R. Tolkien.

Credinţă şi imaginaţie [ J.R.R. Tolkien.

Faith and Imagination], 2005. He coordinated a massive Encyclopedia of Tolkien’s World (published in 2007). He has written over three hundred essays, articles and reviews published in Second Spring (UK), Radici Cristiane (Italy), Polonia Christiana (Poland), Ignatius Insight (USA), Dilema (Romania), Idei în Dialog (Romania), Adevarul literar si artistic (Romania), Altarul Banatului (Romania), Vatra (Romania), Orizont (Romania), Cultura (Romania), A Treia Europa (Iași-Timișoara), Dialog Teologic (Iași), Cronica (Iași), De West (Romania), Clouds Magazine (USA) etc. I am proud to welcome Dr. Lazu to our stable of writers, and I pray that God will bless our alliance with the Catholic ‘remnant of Romania’ for many years to come. Welcome aboard, Dr. Lazu.

MJM Nobility and Virtue After centuries of revolutionary egalitarian (i.e. Socialist and Communist) propaganda, the common mentality has embraced a completely distorted image of the members of ancient royal and aristocratic houses. Usually, this image – supported by scandals which have involved some of their descendants and, simultaneously, exposed them in many frivolous film adaptations – depicts royalty and aristocracy as being, more or less, synonymous with a decadent life, lived under the sign of the sweet poison of hedonism and perpetual power games. Even in the cases when a contemporary has a more favorable perspective on the aristocracy, they still fall in the trap summarized by Morton C. Blackwell as "most Americans are uncomfortable with the whole idea of nobility." Definitively, this is a truth which can be applied not just to Americans, but to every (post) modern citizen of the contemporary, democratic society.

The profound notion implied by the word "aristocracy" (from Ancient Greek aristokratia) is rarely grasped by our minds – involuntarily infected by historical revisionism – in its authentic, original meaning. Strictly etymologically speaking, the valence of this word is crystal clear and highly significant: "the power of the virtuous", "the power of the good". In other words, an aristocrat is a person who lives a virtuous life. This ideal is clearly expressed in both pagan – especially Greek and Roman – and Judeo-Christian cultures.

But the virtues can be practiced and cultivated in two distinct forms: either the ascetical and contemplative way of life, proper for priests and monks, or the chivalric way of life, specific for heroic knights – remarkable through their deeds of arms. In both cases, the virtuous person is strongly linked to a sort of loyalty that can culminate with self-sacrifice. Personalities like Socrates, John the Baptist, Saint Justin the Martyr and the Philosopher, or kings like Saint Louis IX of France or Blessed Charles I of Austria, are just a few of the innumerable examples that can be invoked. Consequently, we emphasize the fact that just the constant practice of a virtuous life can be considered the distinctive mark of nobility.

Descendant of a noble family who gave many sovereigns of Walachia and Moldavia, the Blessed Vladimir Ghika – who was the grandson of the last ruler of Moldavia, Prince Gregory V Ghika – is one of those exemplary persons who can teach us the true meaning of "aristocracy."

The Story of a Conversion

Born in Constantinople, in 1873, under the Ottoman rule, Vladimir Ghika studied in France, where he attended courses in Medicine, Political Science and "Beaux-Arts", Philosophy and History. From the period of his academic education, between 1890-1900, he read Catholic theology and, in a way similar with famous converts like Blessed John Henry Newman (1801-1890) and Vladimir Solovyov (1853-1900), he converted to Catholicism without being under the direct influence of a Catholic personality. After his public profession of faith, made in 1902 in the presence of Cardinal Frühwirth, Father Lepidi O.P. and Father Emmanuel Bailly, he explained to his relatives and friends that he had chosen to become Catholic just to be "more Orthodox." Guided by his spiritual father, Cardinal Vivès, he studied – between 1898 and 1905 – Philosophy and Theology at Angelicum, in Rome. After he had completed his intellectual training, in 1905 he gained a PhD in Theology.

He was consecrated as a priest on October 7, 1923, by Cardinal Dubois. He received faculties as a bi-ritual priest, which made him able to celebrate both the Tridentine Liturgy and the Eastern Liturgy of Saint John Chrysostom. This was the direct result of the desire expressed by Pope Leo XIII, who was aware that Vladimir Ghika was eager to celebrate the Tridentine mass as a priest. After his consecration, he established the "Association of brothers and sisters of Saint John", devoting himself to serving the poor people from the suburbs of Paris. As a particular note, we have to mention the fact that, in 1903, he created a personal rule of life based on Franciscan and Dominican rules, which he had been familiar with as a tertiary of both mendicant orders.

The Spirituality of a Visionary Man

The conversion of Vladimir Ghika was accompanied by extraordinary gifts. One of these was his unique capacity to "read" a man’s spiritual and moral condition in his eyes. As some of his close disciples confessed, he was often heard murmuring to himself some mysterious utterances like: "This man has good eyes," or "No. That one does not have good eyes." One day, when he was questioned by a close friend about the meaning of such sentences, he answered: "Every time I am with a person in a state of mortal sin I can see – instead of his eyes – two wide black holes. You cannot imagine how painful such an experience is for me. To have right in front of you a soul who, if the man dies the next moment, will be condemned for eternity." Thus, we can discover here the main source of this nobleman’s extraordinary apostolic zeal: his fear of eternal punishment, sustained by a strong belief in "the unseen world" and a profound love for the revealed truths of Christian faith.

Like in the case of all saints – among whom Saint Alphonsus Maria Liguori with his meditations on the "last things" is one of the most prominent – for Vladimir Ghika, the crucial foundation of his apostolic mission was represented by his personal conviction that the spiritual, unseen world is much more real and important than our visible, evanescent, passing world.

Another specific trait of his Catholic spirituality was, undoubtedly, the privileged place granted by him to the theological doctrine of Divine Providence. Without exception,

Continued Next Page

Prince Ghika at Paray-le-Monial, holding up the Sacred Heart banner of Roman Catholicism in Romania (1917)

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2019 Remnant Press 03/31/2019

Next Article >        < Prev Article

Sun, 31 Mar 2019 | Cover | Page 11

R.

Lazu/Continued...

A Martyr in Romania

whenever someone sought advice from him, his answer would point out the crucial importance of our trust in the Holy Divine Providence: "Let’s pray together and ask that the Divine Providence shows us what is right to do, what is good to choose in the current situation." At the same time, he urged his interlocutors to pay maximum attention to the virtue of prudence: "Do not limit yourself to the first answer that you think Providence has given you. Never do that. Be prudent and wait for another clue – because the Providence will complete his answer with other signs." When the talk was about someone’s conversion, he asked, always, for actions without any delay. In these specific cases, he emphasized that such graces could be lost as unexpectedly as they had been received. In such situations any Catholic should strongly encourage the conversion of non-Catholics, without haste, but firmly. Evidently, such an attitude does not have any common point with post-Second Vatican Council ideologies like "ecumenism" and "interculturalism."

The culmination of Monsignor Vladimir Ghika’s life is represented by his death, on May 16, 1954, at the infirmary of the "Jilava" penitentiary. The last episode of his glorious life started with a firm refusal: to leave Romania on the royal train on January 3, 1948. This decision was made after an exchange of letters with Cardinal Jean Verdier, who agreed that the apostolate of the Monsignor would be much more fruitful in Romania under the communist rule. A few years later, in 1952, he was arrested under the accusation of undermining the communist regime. Consequently, he wholeheartedly obeyed Pope Pius XII’s request, who, in his apostolic letter

Veritatem facientes

(March 27, 1952), asked all Romanian Catholics not to betray their faith by breaking the links with the Holy See.

Once at the mercy of the communist authorities, Vladimir Ghika and his brethren of suffering experienced all the tortures imagined in the "red" prisons. As the few survivors confessed, the first step was to deprive the prisoners of the most basic living conditions. Any sort of minimal hygiene was forbidden, such draconic measures being aimed at the complete dehumanization of detainees. No wonder that many prisoners often gave up any form of resistance. Even though he was 79 years old, Vladimir Ghika was beaten without mercy and subjected to the most abominable tortures. After they discovered his fear of hanging, the executioners applied the so-called "electric hanging" on him no fewer than 83 times. The testimonies are unimaginable: "They took the Monsignor to the torture chamber and subjected him to the electric hanging. There were two ring halves that tighten your neck and lifted you up. For the old Monsignor Vladimir Ghika, however, a short circuit was constantly made, each time the rings tightening more and lifting him up. He was convinced that God would not let him die hanged because he had begged the Lord for it." After months of such atrocious tortures, his resolution to accept death from God’s hands became unshakeable. He was ready to accept even death by hanging...

Eager to defeat his moral resistance, the communists staged his execution by shooting – as narrated by the Greek Catholic priest Matei Boilă. But through such measures, the opposite effect was obtained: instead of weakening his spirit, the executioners gave him the opportunity to manifest the undefeated power of his supernatural Christian faith. After such a cruel episode the Monsignor himself said: "Just imagine how ridiculous and how obtuse these people were; they threatened me with the very thing that was my most arduous desire." Based on such serene statements, we can easily understand that, for him, death had ceased to be a terrifying threat, but only a gate to an infinitely better world.

The testimonials about Vladimir Ghika’s profound and divinely infused love are uncountable. Especially one of them reveals his apostolate in prison: "Every day, Monsignor Ghika recited the Holy Rosary together with a group of convicts. Every decade of Rosary was recited after a short meditation delivered by him. On some specific days, he led the way of the Cross. In that context, he expressed his whole tenderness, his deep affection for the Man of Sorrows – Jesus Christ. At the same time, he tried to encourage those who suffered by urging them to bear patiently everything out of love for Christ. The way of the Cross was the devotion which held together almost all the prisoners. On Sundays, he used to say some special prayers and to deliver sermons. (...) One Sunday, he talked about the value of suffering and about the Divine Providence. These are his own words: ‘We have a Father who loves us in Heaven, a Father who takes care of us and who seeks what is right for every one of us. If God has brought us here, that is because he wanted us to repent for our sins and to become holy, in order to emerge from here as better people.’ Everyone listened to him in holy tranquility."

According to the accounts of his last companions, the Monsignor Vladimir Ghika ceased to eat on May 13, 1954, when he also said – animated by the knowledge granted to him through a supernatural private revelation: "I will die in 4 days’ time". It was exactly as he prophesized.

Four days later, wrapped in a blanket, his holy body was taken out of the infirmary. No words could be more appropriate for the conclusion of an article dedicated to the noble and blessed Vladimir Ghika than the words in which all who knew him announced his death: "A saint is dead." ■

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2019 Remnant Press 03/31/2019

Next Article >        < Prev Article

Sun, 31 Mar 2019 | Cover | Page 12

Charity for the Whole Man:

Reflections on the Works of Mercy

By Clare Wilson

Remnant Columnist | Idaho

In my graduate school milieu, I have met so many people of good intention, often filled with a burning drive to fulfill the corporal works of mercy. They do not, of course, refer to their actions and goals in so many words, but if I look at what they want to accomplish for others, the intention is clear. They are concerned with the lot of the marginalized and the minority and the homeless and the refugee and the immigrant; they are enthusiastic about teaching in and volunteering for recovery programs, hospitals, and prisons; they mourn pointless deaths by mass shooting or mental-illness-induced suicide and campaign for political movements which they hope will lower such death tolls.

In many ways, they are more generous with their time and energy than the Catholics whom I know. Moreover, their actions are clearly mandated under these Catholic guidelines: feed the hungry; give drink to the thirsty; clothe the naked; shelter the homeless; visit the sick; visit the imprisoned; bury the dead.

I admire my classmates’ commitment to good works. Many of the women in my graduate program are or have been activists for various social causes. A few are recovered addicts who now work selflessly with addiction recovery programs. A few more spent several years working in AmeriCorps or the Jesuit Volunteer Corps to bring physical and psychological care to people to underserved rural areas of the United States. Some campaign for more ethical treatment of prisoners. Several are qualified to teach English as a second language, as a form of support they can offer to struggling immigrants. All of them express real concern and devotion for these various causes.

At the same time, however, when I talk to them about their motivations, I often end up saddened. For most of them, these charitable endeavors emerge solely from a humanitarian and humanist concern—and one that usually only acknowledges the importance of physical needs and material welfare.

In conversations with each other and with me, they often express frustration and even rage at the fact that others don’t share their exact views of what constitutes human worth and advancement. Quite often, the slightest mention of a conservative politician (or other global figure—for some Pope Francis himself is too conservative!) provokes a burst of ferocious, selfrighteous indignation.

People who do not agree with their views on civil rights (especially for women and individuals who have embraced the LGBTQ+ community) are mentioned as if they are the basest scum. These acquaintances of mine discuss family members who do not embrace their world view as if their own relatives are cretins without the capacity for rational thought. Their condescension and anger are enormous, practically palpable in the atmosphere around them when they bring up such topics. I do not think they realize how incredibly off-putting and distasteful this attitude is, how it makes them all the less likely to win over conservative opponents to support their (often admirable) causes.

From such reactions, I have realized with absolute clarity how limited is the view that cares only for material intervention in the lots of unfortunate people around the world, and thus how far short a purely human motivation can fall, perhaps inevitably resulting in disillusionment about what good is actually achievable.

My secular friends fervently believe in the necessity of working for the benefit of other human beings, inspired by a respect for the intrinsic worth of humanity, but they fail to acknowledge that "man shall not live on bread alone" (Matthew IV, iv).

What they and the world have forgotten—and this amnesia leads to their violent anger and drastic polarization—is the fact that the truest form of humanitarianism and even humanism can only be found in acknowledgment of the divine. God made man in His image and likeness. It is from this reality, this imprint of the Creator, that men, women, children, rich and poor, sick and well, strong and weak, majority and minority, free and imprisoned, victim and criminal, derive their worth. For Catholic eyes, which see truth if they are well-formed, every single human person is an opportunity to look upon the reflection of God in the physical world and in daily life.

Thus, every single human person also constitutes a summons to charity and to the difficult but beautiful balance between justice and mercy. This summons remains no matter who the other may be or what his or her beliefs and convictions.

When a person’s world view is limited to the purely corporeal existence and wellbeing of others, the various forms of humanitarian aid can only go so far in answering the needs of underprivileged or vulnerable populations.

Of course, it is true that providing food and shelter and care for basic needs are often the first and most necessary forms of charity, because in the extremes of suffering and deprivation, it is hard for a human person to have the energy and leisure to lift his or her thoughts toward higher things. Once these needs are met, however, it is time to remember that each person has a soul which also needs charity and compassion and nourishment. It is never enough to say, "I have provided for your physical, emotional, and psychological health.

That’s enough. Now go be a successful person." Instead, spiritual health must be considered as well.

I find it interesting, from this point of view, that the creators of Alcoholics Anonymous insisted that recovering alcoholics acknowledge their own helplessness in their struggles with addiction and commit themselves to God for His guidance. AA is one of the most successful recovery programs in the world. Atheists and agnostics may complain extensively about its reliance on God as a source of healing and strength against temptation and relapse, but even they have benefitted (and sometimes have been converted to some form of theistic belief) thanks to their participation in its guidelines.

All this goes to show that in order to be truly charitable and truly assist another human being, we must remember his or her soul. Suppose that you are faced with a homeless person and given the task of rehabilitating him for society. Of course, you would begin with the obvious wants: regular meals, clothes, access to baths and laundry, a place to live, medical care, some form of employment, psychological counseling, etc. In the end, however, is any of this going to be helpful if you do not also give him guidelines for practicing virtue and an intellectual justification for maintaining a good life?

Only in the knowledge of God can any of us find a true reason for perfecting ourselves, especially when that labor

Continued Next Page

In India and Nepal, the Catholic Church has had much more success in making converts than other Christian denominations, precisely because Catholic services in these countries still offer basic necessities, healthcare, education, and other temporal goods even when the recipient is non- Catholic and intends to remain so.

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2019 Remnant Press 03/31/2019

Next Article >        < Prev Article

Sun, 31 Mar 2019 | Cover | Page 13

Debating the Relevant Issues

LOOKING DOWN THE ROAD:

How Will This Crisis End?

By Chris Jackson

Part I

Any knowledgeable Catholic recognizes that the Catholic Church is currently in a crisis, the effects of which have been staggering. If one adds up the decline in numbers of baptisms, marriages, and vocations, coupled with the silent apostasy of millions of lapsed and "former" Catholics since the end of Vatican II, the figures would be shocking.

Many words have been written about the causes of the crisis, and volumes published documenting every last detail of the destruction it has caused.

However, to my knowledge, little has been written attempting to explain how the crisis might one day successfully be resolved.

As with most Church crises in the past such as the Arian Crisis and the Great Western Schism, it was hard for Catholics living in those times to envision a way out, and indeed many died not knowing what eventual resolution might take place. History has, of course, shown us how these crises were resolved, but the crisis we face now, like all true crises, is unique and has no exact precedent. Thus, the future is uncertain.

We may be tempted, as Catholics in the past no doubt were, to think that our crisis may become permanent, to think extreme and theologically dangerous measures are needed to resolve it, or to, God forbid, throw up our hands in frustration, believing the Church has somehow failed.

In this two-part article, I will first show why various proposed solutions to the crisis are deficient or unworkable, and then I will attempt to propose what a successful resolution might eventually look like.

The Sedevacantist Solutions

As a general rule, I’ve found sedevacantist leaders and public figures do not spend much time proposing solutions to the crisis. They, are instead, more focused on converting Catholics to the sedevacantist position, which is, essentially, that all Vatican II popes have been invalid and, therefore, not "true popes." Sedevacantist apologists typically deflect the issue of resolving the crisis by arguing that any solutions outside sedevacantism necessarily require the admission of a defected Church, which, of course, is impossible. I will address this argument later. However, the question that these sedevacantist leaders must ask themselves is as follows. Let’s assume a hypothetical situation where sedevacantist apologists are wildly successful and convert 90% of Catholics to their position, what then?

Sedevacantists who attempt to explain the crisis by arguing that every pope and bishop since Vatican II has lost his office for heresy are in a quandary.

This position leaves no way to elect a new pope since there is no longer any College of Cardinals. In fact, this is the very reason why the sedevacantists do not currently elect a new pope themselves. They rightly admit that they have no such authority or designation to do so. So where does this leave the 90% of Catholics who just became convinced of sedevacantism in our hypothetical? It basically leaves them at a dead end.

The Pope in the Woods

Not wanting to give up their thesis, some online sedevacantists have come up with a conspiracy theory that has been referred to as the "pope in the woods" theory. Under this theory, a true pope has secretly existed in exile, unknown to us, perhaps being held captive, and at a future time, will reveal himself. As sedevacantist apologist Mario Derksen explains on his website:

It is possible that there has been and currently is a true Pope in hiding, one who can trace his lineage back to Pope Pius XII. Perhaps the situation will be resolved by this Pope emerging and proving his legitimacy. There is a prophecy to this effect.

Who this individual could possibly be, especially since there are a small, finite, and dwindling number of Catholic priests and bishops who were ordained and consecrated in the old rite, is never speculated upon by Derksen. Mario convincing all of the world’s Catholics to become sedevacantists only to have them wait for the "pope in the woods" with him brings to mind Linus

Continued on Page 14

How Will This Crisis End?

C. Jackson/ Continued from Page 13

convincing Sally to stay up waiting for The Great Pumpkin.

It was Francis all along!

The same type of theory is held by some sedevacantists to get them out of the jurisdiction dilemma. Since sedevacantists consider all current Catholic bishops to have lost their offices (and thus their jurisdiction) due to heresy, and with no Catholic pope to grant any new jurisdiction, some claim that out there somewhere is a true pre-Vatican II Catholic bishop who still has jurisdiction from Pius XII. Who this bishop could possibly be is never revealed.

New Revelation

Other sedevacantists, including Fr.

Anthony Cekada, have theorized that a miraculous event, such as Christ Himself coming down from Heaven and appointing a new pope, or St. Peter or St. Paul doing the same, would solve the problem.

Fr. Cekada: "You have some saints that say that one day a pope will be designated from Heaven by Saints Peter and Paul. That’s, you know, one possibility people have talked about."

Unfortunately for Fr. Cekada, the Church teaches that no public revelation binding on Catholics can occur after the death of the last apostle.

Sedeprivationist Answers

Other sedevacantists, including Bishop Donald Sanborn, hold to a different variation of the sedevacantist thesis called "sedeprivationism."

Sedeprivationism theorizes that the VCII popes were all mere "pope-elects" in that they were legitimately elected and designated to be pope by the Church, but as heretics they were blocked from receiving the authority of the office.

Under the sedeprivationist thesis, the cardinal designation and the ability to elect a pope is somehow still given to bishops that the sedeprivationists see as non-Catholic heretics. In this way, the sedeprivationists claim to have solved the problem of electing a new pope as this thesis keeps apostolic succession and the hierarchy going, albeit in a minimalist and legalistic manner. Their solution to the crisis is that, in the future a "popeelect" could convert to true Catholicism, and in doing so, he would be able to finally receive the authority of the papacy he was previously elected to. The problem for the sedeprivationist is that the future "pope-elect" would need to convert to the "true Catholicism" of sedevacantism. This means that the future hypothetical pope would need to publicly declare every pope since 1958 to have been an anti-pope and would also have to declare that the overwhelming majority of sacraments in the Latin Rite under the Novus Ordo since the mid to late 60’s, including countless priestly ordinations, Episcopal consecrations, Masses, confessions, etc., were all invalid. This would present unintended consequences for the sedeprivationist.

First, under the sedeprivationist hypothetical, Catholics would be led to a position where the visible Church of Christ had disappeared for decades, centuries, or perhaps millennia, depending on how long it took for one of the pope-elects to convert. This would destroy any credibility the Church had.

For what sort of Church founded by Christ could disappear from the earth for decades to millennia, all the while morphing into an evil imposter Church that, according to the sedevacantists, led countless souls to Hell? In addition, how would Catholics know that the new "restored" Church in this scenario wouldn’t simply morph back into an evil church once again? This "solution" would, in effect, make a mockery of Christ’s promises regarding the Church.

Second, why should the Catholic faithful trust the latest pope when he tells them that the previous (10, 20, 30?) popes were all anti-popes? What is to keep the faithful from believing that this new pope is himself an anti-pope for making such a devastating and unprecedented declaration? In addition, what if the next pope after our hypothetical converted pope, comes along and declares that his predecessor was actually an anti-pope and that none of what he said was valid?

We would end up in chaos.

For if the man in white, in the Chair of Peter, can’t be trusted to be the pope when 99.9% of Catholics recognize him to be, then you have an unworkable paradigm. Catholics would simply leave the Church in droves in the sedeprivationist hypothetical as nothing the man who is supposed to be pope says could be trusted. The next man who is supposed to be pope could simply say that the previous man was never the pope to begin with and so on.

Third, if this hypothetical converted "true pope" was later perceived by some sedeprivationist faithful to have publicly contradicted the Faith, the precedent would have already been set for them to consider their new "true pope" a merely "material pope" who had lost the authority of his office.

For the sedeprivationist thesis, like all sedevacantist theses, relies on the private judgment of the individual as to whether or not those in authority over them in the Church possess any real authority whatsoever. As you can see, any Church structure based on this system makes it entirely unworkable.

It’s a Mystery

At the end of the day, Sedevacantists admit they do not know exactly how they will get a new pope under their thesis and fall back on the explanation that it is a mystery. There are certain theological dogmas that we know are true, but, with our limited intellect, cannot fully comprehend, like the Holy Trinity. These are theological mysteries.

The sedevacantist mystery of how the Church will get a pope, however, is a "mystery" of their own making. For it is no mystery how the Church gets a new pope. She elects one at a conclave through those who have been designated with the authority to do so.

For those still trying to figure out the sedevacantist mystery of how they will get a new pope, Mario Derksen offers his advice:

Do not spend too much time trying to figure things out — it can lead to pride, vain curiosity, dangerous ideas, and a misplaced reliance on self rather than on God…

Neo-Catholic "Solutions" What Crisis?

When asked for their solution to the crisis, most Neo-Catholic apologists would simply ask, "What crisis?" As Mark Twain famously said, "Denial ain’t just a river in Egypt." The worst part is that if a Neo-Catholic apologist read my last sentence, he would most likely meticulously correct the quote to read "The Nile is not just a river in Egypt," begin a 3,000-word treatise on whether Mark Twain actually originated the saying, and completely miss the point in the process. Such are the personalities of our friends, the Novus Ordo apologists: humorless, literalist, and largely clueless as to what is happening in their own Church.

Although some Neo-Catholic writers are beginning to see the light under Francis, such as Philip Lawler, a hardcore contingent remains in public denial that any crisis is happening. Sure, these folks may admit to some minor problems here and there where Francis has been "misunderstood," due entirely to mistranslations of course, but on the whole they admit of no pressing "crisis" to be concerned with and scoff at Traditionalist assertions that the Church is in trouble.

This is because, sadly, most Neo-Catholic apologists are eternally stuck in the 1990’s. I must admit I feel badly for them since this was a depressing decade in the Church; but not for the Neo-Catholic. One can only imagine them typing their defenses of Francis’ latest whopper, their faded "World Youth Day: Denver 1993" poster still on the wall, Dana’s "We Are One Body" CD playing in their 5 disc Aiwa bookshelf stereo, George Weigel’s 1056-page JPII biography being used to prop up their one short desk leg, and a signed picture of Christopher West on their nightstand.

For the Neo-Catholic apologists have not changed their approach of defending every papal utterance since the 1990’s despite the fact that Francis makes JPII look like St. Pius X.

What Pope?

A variation of the Neo-Catholic "What crisis?" solution to the crisis is the "What Pope?" solution to the crisis made famous by Michael Voris and his website Church Militant. This solution completely ignores any papal statement, document, act, omission, etc.

that affects any doctrine or discipline of the Church negatively. Instead, the practitioners of this approach routinely and publicly chastise bishops and priests for carrying out the will of the very pope the practitioners ignore. Since the pope in this instance is the problem, this approach is ineffective. In fact, far from being a solution, this approach actually ends up avoiding a solution because of a refusal to confront the real problem. True, Voris did recently speak out against Francis’ approach to handling the sexual abuse crisis. However, Voris limits his criticisms only to personal papal behavior and not to matters of teaching and doctrine and discipline where the roots of the crisis are. Thus, the "What Pope?" strategy is just as ineffective as the "What Crisis?" strategy to resolve the crisis.

Hermeneutic of Continuity

The Neo-Catholic apologist’s first and basically only solution to any "perceived" crisis is the approach made famous by Benedict XVI, the "hermeneutic of continuity." To the extent Neo-Catholic apologists address any problematic elements of the Francis pontificate, they try to force their own private interpretation on his words until they are unrecognizable, but claim that at least the new meaning they have created is, in their own mind (through mental gymnastics), compatible with traditional Catholic teaching.

The Neo-Catholic apologist’s first and basically only solution to any "perceived" crisis is the approach made famous by Benedict XVI, the "hermeneutic of continuity."

Continued Next Page

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2019 Remnant Press 03/31/2019

Next Article >        < Prev Article

Sun, 31 Mar 2019 | Cover | Page 13

Charity for the Whole Man,

Continued...

is so difficult. In order to explain the necessity of virtue, the value of suffering, and the role which each person (including oneself) plays in society, human beings have to find God. In the end, this can only happen through the gateway of the Catholic Church.

It is necessary to emphasize at this point that the administration and practice of the corporal works of mercy cannot be conditional to anyone’s accepting the true Faith. Recently, I was speaking with a Hindu friend who explained that in India and Nepal, the Catholic Church has had much more success in making converts than other Christian denominations, precisely because Catholic services in these countries still offer basic necessities, healthcare, education, and other temporal goods even when the recipient is non-Catholic and intends to remain so. Other Christian Churches are apparently more likely to subvert charity into a form of manipulation, in an attempt to force new converts. Since such behavior is manifestly lacking in respect for each person’s conscience and individual relationship with God, converts have instead gravitated toward the Catholic Church, where charity remains constant no matter the recipient’s attitude.

Achieving a balance in charitable care for both body and soul, then, becomes a matter of great prudence and discernment, upon which many conversions may depend.

I understand why my classmates, with their various activisms and projects for the good of others, tend to focus so much on temporal, social, and physical welfare and ignore souls altogether.

They want to avoid the accusation that they are discriminatory in their service, or that they are offering aid only under the condition of some kind of belief or behavior. As a result of trying to sanitize all spiritual content from charity, however, they become fiercely resentful of religious groups attempting the same, as if offering spiritual instruction in tandem with physical care constituted some violation of human autonomy.

I think, without their realizing it, this attitude makes them accidentally condescend to the very people they want to help, supposing that those souls aren’t intelligent enough to interact with people of faith and make their own decisions.

Based on volunteer experience of my own, however, I know for a fact that even the most abject homeless person has clear opinions on God and religion and is usually quite willing to engage in a bit of theological discussion (and quite stubborn in his or her convictions!).

This is why the Catholic Church balances the corporal works of mercy with the spiritual: instruct the ignorant, counsel the doubtful, comfort the sorrowful. The suffering populations of this world are indeed often ignorant, doubtful, sorrowful—usually through no fault of their own, but only because of their race or social status or disability.

We can offer these children of God the food, clothing, and shelter they need, while also suggesting the best means we know of finding instruction, healing doubts, and alleviating sorrows— namely, the precepts of God and the Church. If someone rails against their hard lot of poverty and discrimination, we can do our best to help them out of such a painful situation, but also reassure them that even in their sufferings they are not alone: God has suffered with them and for them on the cross. This is not a trespass against their human autonomy or their status as images of God. Instead, it is a way to acknowledge the fulness of their humanity, which needs not only bodily aid, but also spiritual nourishment. We cannot presume to know any individual’s relationship with God, but at least we can attempt to open channels for his or her easier interaction with God—perhaps leading to an eventual conversion.

But even after this, supposing that for some obscure reason, known only to the providence of God, these souls do not convert, or even take offense at our attempts to offer spiritual mercy, we can turn to other spiritual works: bearing wrongs, forgiving injuries, praying for the living and the dead.

No matter whether those whom we try to assist are grateful or not, whether they convert or not, whether they take offense or not, we can always offer up the little slights and injuries which inevitably come our way for their salvation. This, in fact, may be the most important work of all: our silent effort before the eyes of God to win souls for Him within the inscrutable operation of His grace. I sometimes think about my own attempts at charity—whether inside the circle of my own acquaintances or in a broader arena—and realize that if it were not for my Catholic Faith, I would put no effort into them at all.

No matter how intensely one embraces humanitarian causes and believes in intrinsic human dignity, it is impossible to ignore the fact that other human beings are difficult creatures. They often hurt us, or disappoint us, or anger us.

Thus, for me, it is almost exclusively my conviction that these human beings are each an image of God which prompts me to continue my efforts to be charitable.

This is why I do truly admire the many people whom I have met in the secular field who are committed to good works: their altruism is so real and so deeply rooted that it motivates them to continue their efforts selflessly and without reward, in spite of the fact that they lack the conviction of a divine imprint to give value to the often stubborn or recalcitrant people they serve. Often they have borne similar sufferings and sympathy provides enough motivation for years of service.

I am humbled by their generosity, at the same time that I am saddened that it is necessarily limited. I often think about what immense good they could do if their own eyes were opened to the truth.

All Catholics should join me in praying that this may happen so we can rejoice to see how far they outstrip us in executing the works of mercy. ■

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2019 Remnant Press 03/31/2019

Next Article >        < Prev Article

Sun, 31 Mar 2019 | Cover | Page 15

FATIMA:

The Message from Heaven that Could Still Save the World

By Paul De Marco

Fatima, Lourdes and Guadalupe are all notable sites of Marian apparitions, with Fatima being the most recent, as Our Lady appeared there just over a hundred years ago. Lucia dos Santos and her cousins Jacinta and Francisco Marto claimed to have seen an apparition of theVirgin Mary on a hillside outside Fatima, and over the course of six visits between 13th May and 13th October 1917, they were given revelations which would have a profound effect on world history. At the time, Europe was gripped by the horror and trauma of World War I. On 13th May, the three children led a few dozen sheep out to pasture before climbing up a hillside to play, when they were suddenly startled by a brilliant flash of light and an apparition of Mary.

This was the first of six apparitions during which Our Lady explained how the sins of mankind were offending God, saying that many souls were going to Hell, and that we should pray for the conversion of sinners.

At her third visit on 13th July 1917, Mary showed the children a terrifying vision of Hell to show them the reality of this state of existence. She gave an assurance that World War I would soon end, but warned that unless mankind stopped sinning then the world would again be punished through a war even worse than the current one.

Mary’s prophecies were highly specific, and she said that this war would break out during the pontificate of Pius XI, and she said that a great sign would be given that this chastisement was imminent, which would be ‘a night illumined by an unknown light.’ She said that the Church would be persecuted and that the Holy Father would have much to suffer, and that Russia would spread her errors throughout the world. To prevent this from happening, and to assure peace in the world, Mary said that she would later return to ask for the consecration of Russia to Her Immaculate Heart, and the establishment of a new devotion – The Communion of Reparation on the Five First Saturdays.

As was the case with Bernadette at Lourdes in 1858, the villagers and clergy refused to believe the children, and so Mary said that she would perform a miracle in October ‘for all to see and believe.’ The greatest miracle in modern history, the "Miracle of the Sun" of 13th October 1917, was witnessed by an enormous crowd estimated at 70,000 people, who saw the sun perform movements in the sky which were impossible in terms of physics or astronomy.

Doctor Almeida Garrett, Professor of Science at Coimbra University, was present that day and this is part of what he wrote to describe the event: "Then, suddenly, one heard a clamour, a cry of anguish breaking from all the people. The sun, whirling wildly, seemed all at once to loosen itself from the firmament and, blood red, advance threateningly upon the earth as if to crush us with its huge and fiery weight. The sensation during those moments was truly terrible. I must declare that never, before or after October 13 (1917), have I observed similar atmospheric or solar phenomena."

Reverend Joaquin Laurenco also gave an account of what he witnessed: "I feel incapable of describing what I saw. I looked fixedly at the sun, which seemed pale and did not hurt my eyes.

Looking like a ball of snow, revolving on itself, it suddenly seemed to come down in a zigzag, menacing the earth. Terrified, I ran and hid myself among the people, who were weeping and expecting the end of the world at any moment."

Doctor Domingos Pinto Coelho wrote an article on the event for the Ordem newspaper: "The sun, at one moment surrounded with scarlet flame, at another aureoled in yellow and deep purple, seemed to be in an exceedingly swift and whirling movement, at times appearing to be loosened from the sky and to be approaching the earth, strongly radiating heat."

Alfredo de Silva Santos was also present that day and he wrote: "I can hardly find words to describe what followed. The sun began to move and at a certain moment appeared to be detached from the sky and about to hurtle on us like a wheel of flame. My wife – we had been married only a short time – fainted. I fell on my knees oblivious of everything and when I got up, I don’t know what I said. I think I began to cry out like the others."

Two of the children died within two years of the last apparition, with Francisco passing away at the age of ten in 1919, and Jacinta dying the following year at the age of nine. Both succumbed to the Spanish Flu Pandemic which claimed at least 50 million lives. Lucia survived and later joined the religious life, and it was while she was at the Dorothean Convent in Pontevedra, Spain that Our Lady appeared to her with the child Jesus on 10th December 1925.

Our Lady said to her: "Look, my daughter, at my Heart, surrounded with thorns with which ungrateful men pierce me at every moment by their blasphemies and ingratitude. You can at least try to console me and say that I promise to assist at the hour of death, with the graces necessary for salvation, all those who, for five consecutive months, shall confess, receive Holy Communion, recite five decades of the Rosary, and keep me company for fifteen minutes while meditating on the fifteen mysteries of the Rosary, with the intention of making reparation to me."

Our Lady once again appeared to Lucia on 13th June 1929, and said to her: "The moment has come in which God asks the Holy Father to make, in union with all the bishops of the world, the consecration of Russia to My Immaculate Heart, promising to save it by this means. So numerous are the souls which the justice of God condemns for sins committed against Me, that I come to ask for reparation.

Sacrifice yourself for this intention and pray."

Lucia appealed many times for the consecration of Russia to be made and for the Five First Saturdays devotion to be practiced, but unfortunately the Church did not make the consecration and the devotion of the First Five Saturdays was largely ignored. The warning that Our Lady made came to pass, and on the 25th January 1938 during the pontificate of Pius XI, the night skies from Europe to California were ablaze in red. Scientists put it down to being the greatestAurora Borealis phenomenon in recorded history.

Hitler invaded Austria just six weeks later and the world was on the path to a war that would claim 80 million lives. Later, Russia did spread her errors throughout the world and persecuted the Church, and the Holy Father also suffered, with Pope John Paul II being shot on 13th May 1981, the anniversary of the first apparition at Fatima! The pope was convinced that Our Lady had intervened to save him, and on 13th May the following year he visited Fatima and consecrated the whole world to the Immaculate Heart of Mary.

There are wonderful benefits to us as individuals and to our world by making the devotion Our Lady called for. To do this, for five consecutive Saturdays we must attend confession, receive Holy Communion, recite five decades of the Rosary, and also spend another fifteen minutes meditating on the fifteen mysteries of the Rosary, with the intention of making reparation to Mary for the sins against her.

These are sins regarding Her Immaculate Conception, Her perpetual virginity, Her Divine Maternity, the sin of sowing in the hearts of children indifference or scorn towards Mary, and blasphemies regarding the treatment of images of her.

Mary has left a wonderful promise for all those who make this devotion, which is that she will assist at the hour of death with the graces required for their salvation. What more could we possibly ask for? ■

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2019 Remnant Press 03/31/2019

Next Article >        < Prev Article

Sun, 31 Mar 2019 | Cover | Page 15

How Will This Crisis End,

Continued...

They then explain away any and all "apparent" contradictions as actually new and insightful "developments" of the Traditional doctrine. The Neo-Catholic apologists are like evolutionists in this regard, as they expect us to believe that one species of thing simply "developed" into another, entirely different, species of thing over time, and that these two entirely different things are really the same. When you ask them where the missing link is that proves their theory, the answer you get sounds like a malfunctioning random word generator of obfuscating jargon.

The irony is that both the Neo-Catholic and the Liberal are fine with the hermeneutic of continuity "solution" to the crisis. For the Liberal keeps changing teaching and discipline on the de facto, practical, every day level while slipping in some wiggle words of plausible deniability on the legal, official documentary level. The Liberal knows exactly what destructive thing he is trying to accomplish with his changes and so does the Traditionalist. But the Neo-Catholic uses the hermeneutic of continuity to unwittingly give the Liberal cover by convincing otherwise conservative Catholic faithful why the documents put out by the Liberal are not problematic at all when understood in the strained orthodox manner the Neo-Catholic interprets it to mean.

This is a symbiotic "win/ win" relationship for the Liberal and the Neo-Catholic, as the Liberal gets to keep undermining the Church through implementing terrible policies, refusing to enforce orthodoxy, and issuing contradictory and confusing statements, while the Neo-Catholic apologists continue to make a living privately interpreting the ambiguous and contradictory Liberal shell game as orthodoxy. The Neo-Catholic apologists then sell their interpretation to the conservative Catholic masses so they will not start becoming irate and demanding changes, as they would if they truly realized what was happening.

To Be Continued Next Issue

So far I have presented what I believe to be the sedevacantist and the Neo-Catholic proposed solutions to the current crisis in the Church and why these solutions are unworkable and do not truly resolve the crisis. In the next installment I will propose what I believe to be the true solution to the crisis, which is consistent with the approach The Remnant has taken all along. ■

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2019 Remnant Press 03/31/2019

Next Article >        < Prev Article

Sun, 31 Mar 2019 | Cover | Page 16

The Last Word

Brer Bergoglio

and the Briar Patch Gospel

By Father Celatus Remnant Columnist

For traditional Catholics there is but one go-to English version of the Bible, namely, the Douay Rheims.

Translated from the ancient Latin Vulgate of the great biblical scholar Saint Jerome, which itself goes back to the late fourth century, the Douay Rheims has served the Church for more than four centuries.

But for non-traditional Catholics and non-Catholics there is a plethora of choices azmong English versions, numbering in the hundreds.

Among these are some that claim that they make the Sacred Scriptures more relevant to our modern time, such as the Cotton Patch Gospel. Written by the Koinonia Farm founder, this version recasts the Gospels into a Deep South setting, geographically and culturally.

For example:

One day John the Baptizer showed up and started preaching in the rural areas of Georgia. "Reshape your lives," he said "because God’s new order of the Spirit is confronting you…This guy John was dressed in blue jeans and a leather jacket, and he was living on corn bread and collard greens. Folks were coming to him from Atlanta and all over north Georgia and the backwater of the Chattahoochee. And as they owned up to their crooked ways he dipped them in the Chattahoochee.

When John noticed a lot of Protestants and Catholics showing up for his dipping, he said to them, "You sons of snakes, who put the heat on you to run from the fury about to break over your heads? You must give some proof that you’ve had a change of heart.

And don’t think that you can feed yourselves that ‘we-good-white-people’ stuff, because I’m tell you that if God wants to he can make white folks out of this pile of rocks. (Matthew 3)

When it comes to English versions of the Bible, clearly the Cotton Patch Gospel is nothing short of an abomination. But so too is the Briar Patch Gospel of Jorge Bergoglio, which includes the Blessed Mother shaking her fist and calling God a liar over the death of her Son, the Sharing of Bread non-miracle in which more than 5,000 people pulled matzah out of their toga pockets, and most recently a new and improved modernist rendition of the Lord’s Prayer. Remember these words of Francis this past Advent:

The French have changed the text and their translation says "don’t let me fall into temptation." It’s me who falls. It’s not Him who pushes me into temptation, as if I fell. A father doesn’t do that. A father helps you to get up right away. The one who leads into temptation is Satan.

Francis was commenting on a change to the official French translation of the Pater Noster prayer. Since then the Italian bishops have similarly changed their official version to read the Italian equivalent of "abandon us not into temptation." Without doubt other conferences of bishops will soon follow suit.

The public response to the comment of Francis was swift and predictable: liberals loved it, neo-Catholics spun it, and traditionalists rejected it. Some regard this as old news now, by modern standards.

But we were reminded of the Bergoglian Briar Patch version of the Pater Noster on the First Sunday of Lent:

At that time, Jesus was led into the desert by the Spirit, to be tempted by the devil. And after fasting forty days and forty nights, He was hungry. And the tempter came and said to Him, If You are the Son of God, command that these stones become loaves of bread.

But He answered and said, It is written, ‘Not by bread alone does man live, but by every word that comes forth from the mouth of God.’ Then the devil took Him into the holy city and set Him on the pinnacle of the temple, and said to Him, If You are the Son of God, throw Yourself down; for it is written, ‘He has given His angels charge concerning You; and upon their hands they shall bear You up, lest You dash Your foot against a stone.’ Jesus said to him, It is written further, ‘You shall not tempt the Lord your God.’ Again, the devil took Him to a very high mountain, and showed Him all the kingdoms of the world and the glory of them. And he said to Him, All these things will I give You, if You will fall down and worship me. Then Jesus said to him, Begone, Satan, for it is written, ‘The Lord your God shall you worship and Him only shall you serve.’ Then the devil left Him; and behold, angels came and ministered to Him.

Notice in the Gospel text of the Mass cited above, accurately rendered in the Douay Rheims version, that Jesus was led into the desert by the Spirit, namely the Holy Spirit of God, to be tempted by the devil. But wait! According to the Bergoglian Briar Patch Gospel, like a good father, God would never lead anyone into temptation. Quite the opposite, the BBP version recasts Satan as the one who leads into temptation. Applying this view to our text, it would follow that it was a Satan, an unclean spirit, not the Holy Spirit, who led Jesus to be tempted by the devil. Uh oh! Another Gospel incident and warning springs to mind:

The Pharisees said: This man casteth not out the devils but by Beelzebub the prince of the devils. And Jesus, knowing their thoughts, said to them: Every kingdom divided against itself shall be made desolate: and every city or house divided against itself shall not stand. And if Satan cast out Satan, he is divided against himself: how then shall his kingdom stand? And if I by Beelzebub cast out devils, by whom do your children cast them out? Therefore they shall be your judges. Therefore I say to you: Every sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven men, but the blasphemy of the Spirit shall not be forgiven.

And whosoever shall speak a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but he that shall speak against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, nor in the world to come. (Matthew 12)

Attributing activity of the Holy Spirit to that of an unclean spirit, Satan himself, is a most serious matter. In light of this we find it appropriate to paraphrase what our Lord said to the tempter: Begone, Bergoglio! ■

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2019 Remnant Press 03/31/2019