Category Archives: Faith

Bl. Emmerich: The Church of Light vs. the Church of Darkness

By Br. Alexis Bugnolo

Pope John Paul II warned us of the present crisis in the Church when he approved the beatification of Anna-Katerina Emmerich, on October 3, 2004, exactly 15 years to the day on which Bergoglio presided over the ceremonies of idolatry in the Vatican Gardens, on Oct. 4, 2019.

Did the Polish Pope know something we did not? — I think the Polish pope had more Catholic sense than 99% of the Clergy today, because 1) he read the prophecies of Bl. Anne Catherine Emmerich, and 2) he put trust in them.  We can see this in that he raised her to the dignity of the Altar, as a woman whose example of Christian virtues was heroic in an exemplary degree.

And not only that, he at least recognized that a papal renunciation could be invalid, and that a Conclave can be illegal (see here for more on this).

As for Bl. Emmerich, on the day of her Beatification, Pope John Paul II said the following (source):

Bl. Anne Catherine Emmerick told of “the sorrowful passion of our Lord Jesus Christ” and lived it in her body. The fact that the daughter of poor peasants who sought tenaciously to be close to God became the well-known “Mystic of the Land of Münster” was a work of divine grace. Her material poverty contrasted with her rich interior life. We are equally impressed by the new Blessed’s patience in putting up with physical weakness and her strong character, as well as her unshakable faith.

She found this strength in the Most Holy Eucharist. Her example opened the hearts of poor and rich alike, of simple and cultured persons, whom she instructed in loving dedication to Jesus Christ.

Still today, she passes on to all the saving message: Through the wounds of Christ we have been saved (cf. I Pt 2: 24).

And if you want to see first hand evidence that the Anti-Church was outraged by her Beatification, go to the Vatican Website through the link I just gave you, and click on the name of the Blessed and you will be taken to a biography which tries to make it appear that she was a globalist!

But what interests me today about the Blessed is that her revelations about the Church of Light and the Church of Darkness foretold exactly the spiritual reality of the Crisis of Apostasy in which the Catholic Church is at the present (see her prophecies, published in part, here and here). She speaks of a schism in the Catholic Church between these two Churches.

And indeed, this is exactly what we see today: 2  Churches.

The Church of Light, which is the true Catholic Church as She has ever been: with the same Faith and Sacraments and Canon Law as she had up to Feb 28, 2013. Whose pope, Benedict XVI,  was recognized by all Catholics as the Vicar of Christ.

The Church of Darkness, which is the Church of the Anti-Christ which is turning the Mass into a factory of Sacrilege, by giving the Most Blessed Sacrament to public sinners and by offering the Holy Sacrifice, not in communion with the true Pope, but with the false imposter and usurper, Jorge Mario Bergoglio.

The Pope of the Church of Light is as Bl. Emmerich says, old, weak, with failing voice and paralyzed by inaction. He is surrounded by enemies on all sides and has few to trust in.

The pope of the Church of Darkness, as Bl. Emmerich says, is dark and has a sinister face and is inviting every heretic and apostate to Rome to build up a new church filled with idolatry and every form of immorality and blasphemy and error.

Hidden Truths in Emmerich’s Prophecies

Read carefully what Bl. Anna-Katerina (this is the proper German form of her name) says and think about it.

She says in the part regarding the prayer requested by Our Lady, that the faithful should come to the Basilica of Santa Maria Maggiore and pray for the exorcism of the Church of Darkness. But the doors of the Church are closed. This means, that the Basilica will fall under the power of the false pope, and that his sect will exclude the true faithful from the Church.

And this is exactly what has happened and what is happening. The masses offered in that Basilica are offered for Bergoglio the anti-pope, not for Benedict the true pope. Priests and faithful like Don Minutella are “excommunicated” from the Church of Darkness for warning the faithful about it and its lies.

Notice too, that Our Lady through Bl. Emmerich asks the faithful to pray the Our Father. And precisely this spring, here at Rome, with the publication of a new Italian version of the Roman Missal, will Bergoglio demand that all start saying the false heretical version of the Our Father of his own creation.

Notice too, in her writings, that she say she came to the Basilica accompanied by Saint Francis of Assisi. This saint was seen in a vision on the night of July 16, 1208 by Pope Innocent III, saving the Church of Rome by holding up a corner of the Lateran Basilica on his shoulders, even while it was shaken by threats all around. Pope Innocent III was very devoted to St. Alexius of Rome, whose feast here in the city is on July 17. The Pope rebuilt the Basilica of St. Alexius on the Aventine and consecrated it on the very next day. So this vision of a poor man, on the vigil struck him to the core. The next day, Saint Francis paid him a visit and asked for the approval of his new community, the Friars Minor. The pope granted verbal approval immediately. The Saint’s Order has done more than many others greak works to defend the Church throughout the Centuries, with more Canonized saints than most others, excepting the Benedictines, perhaps.

So Bl. Emmerich is telling us something profound, namely, that the prayers requested are to save the Church of Rome from toppling to the ground. This is also seen in the prayers requested, because in the Rule of Saint Francis those who are not priests are to say 72 Our Fathers each day, in place of the 72 psalms which the priests say. This indicates that the faithful whom Bl. Emmerich sees come to the Basilica in vision, are laypeople not clergy. And this in turn indicates to us that the vision she had was of an apostasy of all the Clergy of Rome from the true Church.

Visions of Hope and Victory

Her visions give us hope, however, since in them she sees the doors of the Basilica open and allow the faithful enter and pray. This means, if we can rally enough faithful to pray each Midnight, whether before the Basilica, or around the world, that Our Lady is promising us the conversion of at least some of the clergy of the Diocese of Rome back to the Church of Light, and thus back into communion with Pope Benedict XVI.

In her visions, Bl. Anna-Katerina Emmerich saw the dark and sinister false pope break the Church in two and take the floor and back wall with him and flee Rome. This means that the Church of Light will have victory in this battle, and regain Rome, and that we should therefore make every sacrifice and effort to win that victory as soon as possible, with the means Our Lady indicated exactly 200 years ago.

_______

CREDITS: The Featured Image is a screen shot of http://annecatherineemmerich.com/which is one of the best sources in English for the writings of Bl. Emmerich. It is used here in accord with fair use standard to draw attention to their website for those who want to learn more about the Blessed.

__________

APPEAL:

Br. Alexis Bugnolo has pledged to lead the prayers at Midnight, here at Rome,
in front of the Basilica of Santa Maria Maggiore. As a Franciscan hermit
in the Diocese of Rome he sees it as his duty before God.
See FromRome.Info’s Youtube Channel for the nightly recordings.
If we can get 1000 persons to sign up for that channel as subscribers
YouTube will allow LIVE BROADCASTS.
So please spread the word, and if you would like
to help Br. Bugnolo get some better equipment, please make a contribution here below.

+ + +

Support FromRome.Info

Help us take on the established Catholic Media who are controlled opposition. They are promoting schism from Pope Benedict, and remain silent at the heresies and schisms of Jorge Mario Bergoglio. We cannot let the St. Gallen Mafia win the information war, which they are presently doing through controlled media. — TO FIGHT THIS WAR we need your generous financial support. — Funds go to Ordo Militaris Inc., and are capital gifts for this Apostolate.

$10.00

 

St. Irenaeus prophesied how Bergoglio will seduce the clergy

by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

Saint Irenaeus of Lyons is one of the great Fathers of the Church of the end of the Second Century. He lived from 130 to 202 A.D., approximately. He was born in Smyrna, in Asia Minor. He studied under Saint Polycarp, one of the most famous disciples of Saint John the Apostle. This makes what he says about themes found in the Book of the Apocalypse, very authoritative.

In his summa against error, entitled, Against Heresies, Book II, Chapter 31, he describes the faction of the Antichrist, when speaking against the heretics of the School of Valentinus and the practitioners of the black arts such as Simon Magus and Carpocrates. See what he says:

. . . these men are in this way undoubtedly proved to be utter aliens from the divine nature, the beneficence of God, and all spiritual excellence. But they are altogether full of deceit of every kind: apostate inspiration, demoniacal working, and the phantasms of idolatry, and are in reality the predecessors of that dragon3265 who, by means of a deception of the same kind, will with his tail cause a third part of the stars to fall from their place, and will cast them down to the earth. It behoves us to flee from them as we would from him; and the greater the display with which they are said to perform [their marvels], the more carefully should we watch them, as having been endowed with a greater spirit of wickedness. If any one will consider the prophecy referred to, and the daily practices of these men, he will find that 408 their manner of acting is one and the same with the demons.

Here, Saint Irenaeus makes a direct reference to Apocalypse chapter 12, verse 14. And since it appears we may be living in the very age of that great apostasy, we should pay close attention to the words of this Father of the Church.

Notice he explicitly identifies the means whereby the Dragon of the Apocalypse will cast down a third of the clergy in the final age: through apostate inspiration, through demoniacal working and through the phantasms of idolatry.

Apostate inspiration, is the claim to be inspired when teaching things which amount to apostasy from Christ.

Demoniacal working, is the action of demons, who are fathers of lies and murderers from he beginning.

Phantasms of idolatry, is the appearance and manifestation of acts of idolatry.

You could not describe Jorge Mario Bergoglio and his closest followers better than this. Indeed, the mere fact that the clergy justify adhesion to Bergoglio is a demoniacal working, the deceit of the big lie, because they claim Pope Benedict resigned, when he did no such thing.

They ignored that Bergoglio is an apostate when he appeals to inspiration from  the god of surprises, which is not a name of the One True God ever given in Scripture or in the writings of the Saints, but is rather the name fit for a trickster spirit, the god of this world, Lucifer.

And finally it is undeniable that Bergoglio is promoting the propagation and worship of images of idols, and thus is involved in the phantasms of idolatry.

These three means are the exact methods Bergoglio is using to seduce the clergy, by promising them surprises in heretical novelty, by speaking like a demon on a daily basis and by employing the phantasms of idolatry as the litmus test of communion with himself!

In short, Saint Ireneaus has prophetically identified the servant of the Dragon and the party of the Dragon at the end of time, 1800 years before their appearance. Moreover, at the end of the section, just quoted, he makes it clear that Apocalypse Chapter 12 is a prophecy of things to come, not, as has been said by Modernists for 60 years since Vatican II, only a book written to encourage Christians in the First Century. They had to deny it, because it speaks of them!

___________

CREDITS:   The text of Saint Irenaeus is taken from the Christian Classics Ethereal Library, here: with the sole addition of bold face text and the alteration of a comma to a colon, after the words, of every kind, to correspond to the rules of punctuation in English.

+ + +

Support FromRome.Info

Help us take on the established Catholic Media who are controlled opposition. They are promoting schism from Pope Benedict, and remain silent at the heresies and schisms of Jorge Mario Bergoglio. We cannot let the St. Gallen Mafia win the information war, which they are presently doing through controlled media. — TO FIGHT THIS WAR we need your generous financial support. — Funds go to Ordo Militaris Inc., and are capital gifts for this Apostolate.

$10.00

 

You have a right to question your priest

by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

It is a principle of natural law, that anyone who presents himself as anything, has the duty to give reasons which justify his claims in public. This in past ages has never been much of an issue with regard to Catholic priests or Bishops. It was sufficient to know that he was a priest or a Bishop.

But with the planned and organized and generation-long effort by Masons in and outside the Church to corrupt the priesthood of Jesus Christ in the Church, it is no longer always and everywhere safe to presume the priest you know is Catholic, that is correct in doctrine, even when he is a Catholic priest.

So you should ask your local priest questions and not merely act as dumb sheep, if he appears to deviate from right doctrine or orthodox practice.

And no, I am not talking about him mistakenly leaving the cruets on the Altar rather than on the credence table. I am talking about issues which regard whether he has accepted the religion of Globalism or whether he is a Catholic.

If he says in a homily, that Greta Thurnburg is a Saint. Then you do not need to discuss anything with him, you need to denounce him as a heretic to your Bishop. I counseled one laymen on this matter recently, and after writing his bishop, the priest was removed as pastor from his parish.

No, I am speaking about ambiguous speech.  If a priest says we must be accepting to habitual sinners and goes on and on about this, then you should question him, because he may be a habitual sinner himself with intentions of corruption your sons and/or daughters.

If he says he hates honest politicians like Donald Trump or Matteo Salvini, you should question him about his politics. Because if he is a Marxist he is an apostate on account of this, that he rejects the entire soteriology of the Church.  Soteriology is the theology of salvation. Salvation consists in our supernatural conformity, body and soul, to the will of God, through the Sacraments, with the merit of eternal life in Heaven. It does not consist in fulfilling the political platform of the local left wing party.

In fact, if your priest admits he votes for the Left, you should question him, because with a few questions you will be able to reveal that he is either a heretic or an apostate, and then you can denounce him to your Bishop and leave the parish for another one.

If he preaches against the prolife movement, against those who want right doctrine or praxis, if he says that truth does not matter or says things which are confused, you should question him. I remember years ago, I was visiting a Church on Holy Trinity Sunday, and the priest said: At the baptism of Jesus a voice was heard, the voice of the Holy Spirit saying, “This is my beloved son, listen to him”.  In charity I assumed the priest was drunk on some physical liquid, and so I denounced him by letter to his bishop. In a week or two he was removed from the parish.

I know of a real case, in the Diocese of Worcester, Massachusetts, where a priest spoke in favor of contraception and abortion during a homily. The whole parish rose up and physically ran him out of the parish. The Bishop graciously responded by removing the priest as pastor. They questioned him before the ran him out, but they did the right and Catholic thing. God bless both them and their Bishop.

So it is important to speak with your priest, when he starts acting strange. Because if you don’t, it will lead to more serious scandals and the lost of faith of your brother and sisters in Christ. And do not hesitate to denounce bad priests, because this is a blessing for all: for by denouncing bad priests, you make the life of every other good priest in the Diocese easier, by removing a stain, a cross and a plague on the local Church.

If you have a question about the strange behavior of a priest, and seek advice, publish your story in a comment, but remove all identifying information as to place and person, so as to protect the reputations of all involved.

__________

CREDITS: The featured image is of Fra Angelico’s,  The arrest of Christ, and is in the public domain, being a faithful reproduction of an original work of art which is mroe than 200 years old.

+ + +

Support FromRome.Info

Help us take on the established Catholic Media who are controlled opposition. They are promoting schism from Pope Benedict, and remain silent at the heresies and schisms of Jorge Mario Bergoglio. We cannot let the St. Gallen Mafia win the information war, which they are presently doing through controlled media. — TO FIGHT THIS WAR we need your generous financial support. — Funds go to Ordo Militaris Inc., and are capital gifts for this Apostolate.

$10.00

How to discern when ‘Catholic’ media is Catholic?

by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

On line media is in constant competition for viewership. Catholic online media is the same. That is simply a fact of the medium.

But what most Catholics perhaps are not sensitive too, is that when seeking information about the Catholic Faith or the Catholic Church the verity of the source of the information is just as important as the information. Some websites and Media operations are just not worthy of trust. Many use the name ‘Catholic’ but are not worthy of it.

What does “Catholic” mean?

As a word, “catholic” is derived from the Greek adjective meaning universal, that is, that which pertains to everywhere, every place.  It was in the second century, A. D., at Antioch, in the Roman Province of Syria, where this Greek word was first used in reference to the Church founded by Jesus Christ. The meaning of the term in reference to the Church has always been the same: the institution which wherever it is in the world, holds the same faith of Christ. (“Faith of Christ”‘ is the traditional term for the Catholic Faith; in which ”of” does not refer to the faith of the person but the Faith taught by the person).

But today I am going to use the term “‘Catholic” in a slightly different sense, because online “Catholic’ media are not part of the Catholic Church, though some of these outlets are official works or apostolates of certain Dioceses of the Catholic Church.

Instead, here I will use the term “Catholic”‘ in the common and popular sense used in American English, to refer to the orthodoxy of the information presented. Here I used the term “orthodoxy” not in reference to the Greek schismatics, but in its proper etymological sense of ‘right teaching’.

To be Catholic a Media site has to meet certain criteria

First, a Catholic site must meet certain criteria to be worthy of being judged “Catholic”.  As I just said, I am not using the term, “Catholic”, in reference to whether the website is sponsored or approved by an ecclesiastical institution or diocese. I am using it in reference to right teaching in matters of faith or morals etc.

By “criteria”, which is the plural of “criterion”, I mean rules or principles by which a thing is judged to be what it is or claims to be. It is only sane an rational, that if something is to be judged it be judged by objective norms, not by opinion, not by claims, not by emotions etc.. Is the website or journalist you read for information about the Catholic Faith or the Catholic Church (here I used “Catholic” in the original sense at it was used at Antioch in Syrian in the second century A. D.) truly Catholic (here I use “Catholic” in the sense of conforming to right teaching or orthodoxy)?

Because if it is not truly Catholic, but is seeking your attention and or financial support, then you are being defrauded. Now, no one can insist you not let yourself be defrauded, but common sense tells us that we should not let ourselves be defrauded, because self-preservation, the fundamental moral principle of all human action, demands that we protect ourselves from fraud and from being defrauded.

This consideration is raised to the level of the infinite, when we consider that if we let ourselves be defrauded or mislead in regard to the Catholic Faith or to what the Church teaches or as regards how as Catholics we should act in regard to God, His Church, or any other matter, then we risk consenting to our eternal damnation by accepting lies in place of truth, lies which turn us away from saving truth, lies which confirm us in error and vice, lies which, when accepted, merit for us eternal damnation, because it is a mortal sin to knowingly accept a lie, and it is a mortal sin of imprudence to put yourself in constant danger of accepting lies.

There is a moral obligation then, to use discernment

Discernment is the act whereby we apply what we know is true or just to a matter which needs to be judged as to whether it conforms to the proper truth or justice to be had in a particular matter or affair.

For example: at the supermarket, you discern whether to buy a product or not based on its apparent quality and whether the price is proportionate to that and your need for the product. Yes, there are individuals who go to the supermarket and just buy anything they see for no reason at all. They have no discernment, and some of them have a psychological disorder known as the compulsive buyer.

I suppose there may be a disorder called the compulsive reader or listener syndrome, but I have never heard of it.  Reading and listening should be an activity which employs more discernment than shopping for food. Not only because the act itself must be undertaken with understanding, which is an act of the intellect, the power of judging, but also because what is read or listened to — here I am not speaking of music or simply video per se — should be the truth or at least a true criticism of error or a true presentation of facts.

Just as one may be occasionally fooled by street corner hustlers, who say one thing, simply to get something from us, and what they say is nearly always entirely a lie, so we should be cautious in matters of our Catholic Faith, because we live in an age of hucksters and false apostles and calculated and contrived deceit of the most nefarious kind.

So if you are to protect yourself, you need to use discernment. And if you have any true charity for those in your family or who know you and might follow your example in anything, then keeping yourself free from error, by not allowing yourself to be deceived, is essential to protecting them too from error and lies which could lead them astray.

A Reputation is founded upon facts and deeds

Here we must keep in mind that it is one thing to make a claim and another to exhibit the comportment or behavior which is consonant with that claim. Many websites do not actually claim to be “catholic’ in any sense of the word, but nevertheless constantly publish information about the Catholic Faith or the Catholic Church.

Before Vatican II, it was the Catholic Clergy who directed or ran nearly all Catholic media. That is what it meant for it to be Catholic. Being trained in institutions which were Catholic in both senses of the word, the clergy who ran them were competent to execute the duty entrusted to them.

Nowadays, however, very few media outlets are run by clergy. Moreover, since Vatican II, the anti-Church forces in the Church have nearly entirely destroyed the formation process of the Catholic clergy, to such an extent that it is a rare priest and bishop who knows the Catholic Faith well enough to be even able to speak as a Catholic at all times, let alone think as one, or run a Catholic media outlet.

Having self-proclaimed Catholic journalists or apostolates take over what these Catholic  Clergy used to accomplish is obviously not the best solution nor even a solution. It puts the important apostolate of spreading the truth of the Gospel in the hands of men who were never trained or examined or proven to be worthy of that trust. And it makes the Catholic Faith appear to be something like the Anglican church, that is, a collection opinions which are up for grabs.

There is also a lot of deep pride and egoism in men and women who were never in a formation program and never learned what it means to mortify your ego and live for Christ Christ and obey His Church in the proper sense of those words. And not a few websites exhibit this. Egoism is a form of idolatry, so everyone needs to beware of this disorder, since it makes a person subject to being taunted this way or that, as the Devil may want them to do, to achieve his greater plans against souls and the Church.

So you should pay attention to what is being said and whether it conforms to the Catholic Faith. And when a source of information habitually deviates from the Catholic Faith on any point, you need to take care not to be led astray.  Some Catholics have the intellectual gifts and preparation that they can discern this and avoid the error while plucking a few grapes of truth from a source of information which is thus vitiated. But most Catholics do not have this ability. We need to be honest and confess this.

This is even more true, when we recognize that as human beings, we are wont to trust in others, and that in the present crisis in the Church our habit of trusting in others can be and is being abused by unscrupulous men, clergy and lay alike.

The duty of Catholics who publish

Catholic websites and media outlets have a graver duty to publish the truth than anyone else, because to publish a lie which is read by thousands is to commit a mortal sin in regard to each and every person who reads what is published. Catholic journalism and Catholic social media apostolates, therefore, are a fast track to hell if run by those without discernment and zeal for the truth. This is why not a few of them are patently diabolic, because while they are capable of knowing the truth, and have been presented with the truth, they fail to publish it or even worse attack it.

The Devil in Social Media…

I recall the example of a Catholic Diocesan Newspaper which was asked by a humanitarian organization to run an advertisement on behalf of defending and helping Catholics being persecuted in the Mid-East by ISIS.  The director of advertising refused, because he said it would create confusion about the Gospel message of forgiveness. A more diabolically contrived response was never had.

You see, there is a global effort now underway to undermine everyone’s grasp on reality and on real religion, because reality itself is seen as the enemy of the agenda which needs to be pushed. The ones pushing such a diabolic conspiracy have oodles of money and are willing to spend it to control Catholic Social Media sites, so they print and publish lies and stop printing and publishing the truth.

Catholic media which are run by organizations or corporations are directly vulnerable, because it is sufficient that the enemies of the Faith gain control of the organization or corporation to direct or control the information they put out. EWTN is a classic example. Before Mother Angelica had her stroke, the station was solidly catholic. After she had her stroke, laymen took control and these laymen were then suborned by unfaithful Bishops to alter the kind of information put out.  EWTN then began to purchase other Catholic media outlets and the same kind of control of information spread. When asked in 2016 to run advertisements to help persecuted Christians, EWTN refused because they said it would have disastrous consequences to their apostolate world wide.  I guess they mean by apostolate, their sources of funding or control.

Catholic media which are run by individuals are vulnerable inasmuch as the funding they seek or receive is controlled or not by those who want error promoted and truth suppressed.

You can easily know if a source of information about the Church or the Faith is compromised by simply compare what they are saying with the documents which are published by the Church or in ages past.

A classic example of fraud, today, is that which is perpetrated by those who promote the opinion of universal acceptance of a papal election. They boldly share images of the text in question, of the Thomistic author they cite as an authority, which text clearly uses the word “canonically” in reference to elected, and then proceed to apply the principle to the case of the present crisis in the Church as if the word “canonically” was not in the text.

When confronted with the documents of the Church which say that a pope resigns when he renounces his munus, they ignore the word munus, and place a X in its place, which they will replace with whatever word they like as it suits them for that day, and claim that a resignation is valid, whenever a pope says the word “renounce” X.

These are just two current examples of fraud which show clearly that such individuals or sites are not Catholic and that in reading them you are being defrauded of the truth and led astray. It is not just a question of intellectual dishonestly, it is dishonesty which intentionally misrepresents the truth of Church teaching or history. And as a Franciscan hermit, I can tell you that such a habitual practice of deceiving in matters of religion is no small vice. It is deeply evil, and there is something behind it more than just egoism.

So I exhort one and all, use discernment when you go online to learn more about the Catholic Faith or the Catholic Church. Look for sites which quote documents and are faithful in their reading and application of the truth which the Church has always taught.

___________

CREDITS: The Featured Image is a photo taken by Br. Bugnolo of the Papal Throne at the Basilica of Saint Lawrence, Rome. Just as the throne is at the center of the Sanctuary, so should we put the truth at the center of our minds and love of it at the center of our hearts.

CLAIMER: Here at FromRome.Info we are dedicated to always presenting the truth and the facts. If you notice any error whatsoever, please leave a comment and call us to correct it. What we say is not important. The truth is what matters.

Support FromRome.Info

Help us take on the established Catholic Media who are controlled opposition. They are promoting schism from Pope Benedict, and remain silent at the heresies and schisms of Jorge Mario Bergoglio. We cannot let the St. Gallen Mafia win the information war, which they are presently doing through controlled media. — TO FIGHT THIS WAR we need your generous financial support. — Funds go to Ordo Militaris Inc., and are capital gifts for this Apostolate.

$10.00

 

Heresy, Heretics and Imperfect Councils

by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

A good number of laymen who never studied theology, or studied it at B rated institutions are at it again on social media, over the question of whether a heretical pope is still the pope.

So let us make some distinctions, so as not to get lost in the fog of controversy.

Saint Robert Bellarmine classifies the true and Catholic position as the 5th opinion, namely that a formal heretic loses all office in the Church ipso facto, that is, by the very adhesion to heresy. This is the position of all the ancient Fathers. And it is the only Catholic position. It is enshrined in Canon 1364 of Pope John Paul II’s Code of Canon Law of 1983.

Remember, heresy is both a false proposition in of itself, an erroneous judgement in the mind and a deviant profession of the mouth.

  • It is a false proposition, whether written down or comprehended in the mind. And example of this is:  Jesus Christ is not God.
  • It is an erroneous judgment of the mind as if when you were to think: I judge that Jesus Christ is not God.
  • It is a deviant profession of the mouth, as if you were to write or say aloud:  Jesus Christ is not God.

As a canonical crime, however, one deals only with the external profession. Thus no one can be judged by the Church to be a heretic without an external profession of heresy. The profession must be witnessed or recorded on paper or other medium.

If you know anything about Church History, however, you know that very few men have been condemned by name as heretics in the entire history of the Church. Why is this? Because the Church, which was founded to save souls, recognizes that every deviant profession might not come forth from a mind which adheres to error. It might come forth from a mind which is ignorant, or from a will which wants to offend others. So not every deviant profession represents formal heresy (of the kind which is a sin, though canon law presumes that such deviant profession is presumed to be imputable, until proven otherwise in a due process). Nor does every deviant profession represent pertinacity. Pertinacity is the quality of adhesion to the error such that even when shown that it contradicts revealed truth, the one holding the error remains steadfast in its profession.

Pertinacity is determined canonically after 3 reproofs before witnesses. In the great Councils of the Church even notorious public and certainly pertinacious heretics were asked 3 times to recant.

But if the Church has a process for deposing heretics from their offices, does not that mean that St. Robert Bellarmine was wrong when he said the 5th opinion was the true thesis?

Here we must remember that there is a distinction between what is true in itself and what is true inasmuch as the Church can know it. As soon as one commits the sin of heresy, even in secret, you lose the gift of faith and commit a mortal sin. You are separted from God. This is true whether any man ever knows of your sin or not, before the General Judgement on the Last Day.

However, in the Church, since some men have a better ability and some a worse ability to detect heresy, there has to be a public process for determining who is a formal pertinacious heretic, so as to officially deprive them from office. For otherwise, there would be chaos in the Church. Here the Church has recourse to the teaching of Jesus about fraternal correction, first in private, then with witnesses, and finally before the whole Church. This also confirms the principles of the cessation of power is not presumed. You cannot therefor presume a heretic has lost his office on the basis of your personal discernment. You are not infallible and you cannot know hearts.

In the case of notorious professions, which are made in public and spread on social media, every Catholic has the right to condemn the profession as heretical. You need not go to the person in private or correspond with him in private. His Bishop should and his superiors should. But not everyone has to. Because the common good requires that every public heretical profession be immediately confuted by a public orthodox profession.

At the same time, none of this denies that by the Catholic Faith each of us is capable of discerning heresy which is formal, even if in the person it may not be pertinacious. This ability is simply the application of comparing revealed truth with the perverse profession to manifest that it is perverse and deviant.

Likewise, since the salvation of souls is the greatest law, every Catholic has the right to separate himself from heretics, whether by avoiding them at all times or avoiding them in their Churches. So no one can be forced to receive the Sacraments from someone they know has made a deviant profession. And in this, the individual cannot be coerced, and the Church has never coerced them in such matters, because it has happened that heretics have  been men who once occupied offices of power in the Church before.

Nor are you obliged to obey your superior in anything when his heretical spirit becomes manifest. Canon 41 gives you this right broadly. So the right to resist illegitimate commands is sufficient, in the law, to defend the rights of the faithful from a superior, who is heretical, before he is condemned as such by the Church and declared to have lost his office.

For this reason, IT IS THE GRAVE DUTY OF EVERY CATHOLIC to publicly denounce deviant professions, whether they be made by laymen, clergy or even those they think are the pope. Without the public denunciation, the faith is not guarded, the consciences of the faithful are not stirred to action, and souls are put in danger, because without the true Faith it is impossible for anyone to be saved — though admittedly God requires the faith that is willing to believe Him in everything (the perfect kind formally), more than the faith which knows every revealed truth and accepts all of them (the perfect kind formally and materially)

Therefore, there is an absolute necessity to call Synods and Councils to condemn the most notorious heretics and heresies. And if the man whom you think is the pope is one whom you consider a heretic, then you should not be silent, you should urge a council. And a council of Bishops, anywhere on the planet, has the Apostolic right and duty to hear the case, because if he is a heretic, he is no longer the pope, but it remains the duty of Bishops to discern and judge that fact.

Finally, if you take pleasure condemning others for heresy, because it suits your fancy, you probably do not have right discernment and you surely risk damnation for risking the mortal sin of falsely or rashly judging others, not to mention damaging or destroying their reputations. Likewise, if you know a man is a heretic and refuse to correct him, when he shows an ability to be corrected, you sin against charity. If he is harming souls and you remain silent, then you are complicit in that harm. And if you think you do not have to seek a canonical condemnation of a heretic, because you judge all in authority heretics, then you might be committing all those sins I just mentioned. This is what distinguishes Catholics from sedevacantists. We believe that the Church will never be overcome by any single or by every heresy together, because there will always be at lest one Bishop willing to condemn them. And to him we turn for their condemnation.

__________

CREDITS: The Featured Image is of an ancient Greek Icon, depicting the Saints who defended the Creed of Nicaea, which is written in Greek on the scroll they are holding in hand.

+ + +

Support FromRome.Info

Help us take on the established Catholic Media who are controlled opposition. They are promoting schism from Pope Benedict, and remain silent at the heresies and schisms of Jorge Mario Bergoglio. We cannot let the St. Gallen Mafia win the information war, which they are presently doing through controlled media. — TO FIGHT THIS WAR we need your generous financial support. — Funds go to Ordo Militaris Inc., and are capital gifts for this Apostolate.

$10.00

 

A public thanks to St. Raymond of Penyafort, O.P.

By Br. Alexis Bugnolo

A simple faith will have its reward, and a simple prayer is not forgotten.

Years ago, when I was a student at the University of Florida, my brother and I and our good Cuban friend, Carlos Perez decided to spend a month in Spain, after the Spring semester ended. We had many adventures and Carlos did the translating.

I remember our visit to the Cathedral of  Barcelona. I was amazed, that as you entered, on the right, was a little shop, which sold wax candles. You could buy a candle and place it in any side altar. My catholic devotion was amazed, so I bought the biggest one possible. My intention was to place it in front of the Altar of the Immaculate Virgin.

But as I walked to that Altar, I came upon the altar of St. Raymond Penyafort:

551px-Barcelona_Cathedral_Interior_-_Capella_de_Sant_Ramon_de_Penyafort

Having grown up in the United States, I had never seen an Altar like this one. It had a real canonized saint buried right under it! I was fascinated. And asked Carlos to explain to me who this was, from the description written on the panel for tourists.

As I continued to the altar of the Virgin, which was covered with candles, I could not think of how disgraceful it was, that no one had placed even a single candle before Saint Raymond. At the Altar of our Lady I resolved to return and remedy that in justice. And so there, I left the biggest candle that probably was ever put on his altar. And I prayed, that if I ever needed to understand Canon Law, that Saint Raymond would help me. I knew that as his mortal remains where there, right in front of me, that he would smile down upon me from heaven and see my gift and prayer.

As many hasty prayers are, you forget you make them. But the Saints do not!

Today is the Feast of Saint Raymond, established in 1671, on January 23. Let us make Saint Raymond the patron of all who need light and grace and understanding, so that they too might see that Pope Benedict XVI never renounced anything in accord with Canon Law, and for that reason remains the one and only true Pope of the Catholic Church!

You can read more about this great Saint and son of Saint Dominic, at the Catholic Encyclopedia and at Wikipedia.

Saint Raymond of Penyafort, please pray for Pope Benedict,  and for the Cardinals, the Bishops, the clergy and all canon lawyers, to have the courage and light to do the right thing: speak the truth about the failed resignation and restore Pope Benedict to the Apostolic Throne!

________

CREDITS: The image of Saint Raymond’s Altar is by Didier Descouens, and is copyright, released for use according to the terms of the license listed here. The Featured Image is of Saint Raymond sailing miraculously back to Barcelona on his cloak, in one of his most astounding miracles, which he worked to convert his monarch from a life of fornication. It is in the public domain and is found in in the Dominican Church at Krakow, Poland. For more more information, see here.

Bishop Gracida and the Magisterium of the Church on Patients’ rights to food and hydration

By Br. Alexis Bugnolo

Many Catholics in the Church, right now, are extremely worried and upset at the ongoing apostasy and silence of nearly the entire Catholic Hierarchy. Many believe that we have entered the Great Apostasy, foretold by Saint John the Apostle in the Book of the Apocalypse.

GracidaBut there is one Bishop who gives the faithful hope, by his words and example: the Most Rev. René Henry Gracida, Bishop Emeritus of Corpus Christi. This is because, since February 2013, he has been an outspoken critique of the Resignation of Pope Benedict, the election of Jorge Bergoglio and the consistent heretical and erratic behavior of that man. You can read his writings and musings at his blog, Abyssum.org.

Narrative controlled Catholic Media have concealed from nearly the entire Church the strong Catholic stance of Bishop Gracida, who has not only written many Cardinals and Bishops urging a canonical investigation into the election irregularities perpetrated before and during the Conclave of 2013, but has publicly supported calls for an Imperfect Synod, publicly condemned Bergoglio for his idolatry in the Vatican Gardens, and holds that Bergoglio should be tried for heresy.

FromRome.Info as a truly Catholic Media Outlet praises Bishop Gracida for acting as all Bishops and Cardinals should act, and urges all Cardinals and Bishops to do the same! We should constantly encourage and reprove Bishops who are not doing their duty in this most urgent crisis in the Church, in which the Catholic party should prove itself by at least doing what Bishop Gracida has done.

But since Bishop Gracida is not so well known, let me first relate a little of his personal history, and then explain how the teaching of the Church on Patients’ Rights, as regards nutrition and hydration, was formulated thanks to Bishop Gracida’s defense of the Deposit of the Faith on the Fifth Commandment of the Decalogue: Thou shalt not kill.

It all began in Louisiana

René Henry Gracida was born on June 9, 1923, nearly a 100 years ago, in New Orleans. His father was an engineer and architect of Mexican descent, and his mother a 5th generation Cajun lass. His great uncle was a vicar general of a diocese in Mexico and rather well know for his strictness in matters of religion.

In 1942, he went to college at Rice University, in Houston, and signed up with the U.S. Army Corp Air Reserve, to anticipate being drafted. He was called to active duty in the Summer of 1943.

303ebombgroup-emblem
303 Air Expeditionary Bomber Group Emblem

The future Bishop became a tail gunner in the 303 Hell’s Angels Air Expeditionary Bomber Group, the most active Bomber Group in the US Military during the war. It became active in February 1942, and flew more than 75 combat missions.

If you know anything about Areal Warfare during the Second World War, then you know how horrific, harrowing, and down right terrifying it was for men to fly Bomber missions through enemy territory and relatively undefended from German Fighter plans and Flak attacks. Each mission was a possible no return.

After the War, he studied at  the University of Fribourg, in Switzerland, and the University of Houston, where he earned a degree in Architecture.

Under the Rule of Saint Benedict of Nursia . . .

Then the grace of God hit him. — Having read the lives of the Jesuit Martyrs as a youth, and familiarized himself with the life of Saint Benedict of Nursia, he decided to become a monk and dedicate himself to the divine service of God. — So you can imagine how his father, who disliked his own uncle for that reason, reacted when his son revealed he wanted to follow Saint Benedict and become a Monk!

He entered the Benedictine Order in 1951, and went on to study at St. Vincent’s College and St Vincent Seminary, in Latrobe, PA, where he earned a Masters in Divinity. He took solemn vows in 1956 and became a Deacon in 1958.

He was ordained a Priest on May 23, 1959, at the age of 36, just before the Second Vatican Council opened.

Following reprisals for a sincere critique of his Abbots plan for a new Monastery, he separated from the Benedictine Order and was accepted as a priest in the Diocese of Miami, which had need of an Architect. He was incardinated there in 1961, and on account of his faithful service to the Church was nominated by Pope Paul VI, on Dec. 6, 1971, as Auxiliary of the Diocese.

In the footsteps of the Apostles . . .

He was consecrated Bishop, on January 25, 1972. — That means, in just 2 days, he will celebrate the 48th anniversary of his episcopal consecration!

On account of his being consecrated by Archbishop Dearden, he traces his episcopal lineage back to Saint Pius X, and then to Popes Clement XIII, Benedict XIV and Benedict XIII.

Gracida as bishopHe was so highly respected as an administrator of God’s House that Pope Paul VI promoted him to the Bishopric of Pensacola-Talahasse in 1975. Pope John Paul II, in 1983, then promoted him again to the Bishopric of Corpus Christi, Texas, where he served until his retirement for reasons of health at nearly 74 years of age, in 1997.

As Bishop of Corpus Christi he was known for his refusal of communion to public sinners. He also published a pastoral letter rebuking all the other Bishops of Texas for their official public statement on Patient’s Rights, in which they taught that food and water could in some circumstances be denied patients.

In response, Bishop Gracida, in full fidelity to his duty as a Successor of the Apostles, published a public Letter correcting the errors of his brother Bishops, on May 25, 1990.

The doctrine he handed down would be taken up by Pope John Paul II in 2004 and affirmed as the official position of the Catholic Church on the right of patients to food and hydration.

For your edification, I share here, with the permission of His Excellency, the text of his Pastoral Letter of 1990.

A Dissent From the ‘Interim Pastoral Statement on Artificial Nutrition and Hydration’

Authored By: Bishop Gracida

INTERIM PASTORAL STATEMENT ON ARTIFICIAL NUTRITION AND HYDRATION

Bishop Rene H. Gracida

A Dissent From The “Interim Pastoral Statement On Artificial Nutrition And Hydration” Issued By The Texas Conference Of Catholic Health Facilities And Some Of The Bishops Of Texas

Recently the Texas Catholic Conference in Austin released the final text of the document approved by the Texas Catholic Conference of Health Facilities and sixteen of the twenty-one Bishops of Texas. I had declined to sign the document because I consider it to be seriously flawed.

It seems to me that the document gives a higher priority to efforts to relieve the burden caused by a serious illness rather than efforts to protect the sick person’s right to life. The document deals with the withdrawal of nutrition and hydration from a seriously ill patient.

This whole matter is one which is being debated by the legal and medical professions as well as by theologians and ethicists. The Holy See has this whole controversial area of morality under review and will undoubtedly issue a major declaration on the subject sometime in the next year or two.

In the meantime, I would have preferred to see my fellow Bishops of Texas issue a document which would have made a stronger statement in support of the sick person’s right to receive food and drink as the basic necessities of life.

My specific objections to the text of the statement which was recently made public, are:

1. In the title and throughout the text, the phrase “artificial nutrition and hydration” is used. This is inaccurate: the food and water used are not artificial. It is medically appropriate to speak of “artificially assisted nutrition and hydration.” It is the mode of assistance that is artificial.

2. Under “Basic Moral Principles” the Declaration on Euthanasia is used selectively. As the title of that document indicates, one must begin with a rejection of euthanasia—defined by the Declaration as “an action or an order that all suffering may in this way be eliminated.”

Only “after” one has established that an omission of care or treatment is not directly intended to bring about death should one turn to the complex task of assessing benefits and burdens. The question of intention is central here: If the removal of a life-sustaining procedure is intended to avoid an unreasonable burden of the procedure, so that a quicker death is only an unintended side-effect of the decision, it is not a case of euthanasia.

3. Also not treated here is the question whether artificially assisted feeding may be classified as “normal care” rather than “treatment.” The “Declaration” says normal care must be provided even when one has removed “forms of treatment that would only secure a precarious and burdensome prolongation of life” for an imminently dying patient.

Whether tube feeding may constitute “normal care” is not currently resolved by the magisterium; three non-magisterial bodies (Pontifical Council Cor Unum, editorial board of La Civilta Cattolica, and a working group of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences) have issued statements answering the question in the affirmative. If tube feeding has some aspects of “normal care,” this would strengthen the presumption in favor of providing it in most cases.

4. The inclusion of burdens on “others—family, care provider, or community”—is more broadly stated than in existing Church documents. The Declaration on Euthanasia speaks of the “patient himself” validly making a self-sacrificing decision not to burden other: when those “others” are the agents making the decision, other factors (including the Golden Rule) come into play.

“All” long-term care for seriously impaired patients is a “burden” on the community, but it may be a burden that has to be willingly shouldered: “The respect, the dedication, the time and means required for the care of handicapped persons, even of those whose mental faculties are gravely affected, is the price that a society should generously pay in order to remain truly human” (Document of the Holy See for the International Year of Disabled Persons, 1981.)

5. The phrase about “investment in medical technology and personnel disproportionate to the expected results” is taken from a paragraph in the Declaration on Euthanasia that concerns “the most advanced medical techniques,” especially those “at the experimental stage.” This document applies the phrases to life-supporting means generally.

6. I know of no Church document that says treatment is disproportionate when it involves “inequitable resource allocation.” This could be a broad loophole for communities saying that severely impaired persons are not worth the money. The phrase should be clarified or deleted.

7. The restrictive statement that “maintenance of life” is a benefit only when it involves reasonable hop of recovery” could ground discriminatory withholding of life preserving means from people with incurable disabilities.

It vitiates the principle that everyone has the same basic “right to life” regardless of age or condition, which in Catholic social teaching means that every person has the same basic right to the necessities that sustain life. Life is “always a good.” How can it be a good without being a benefit?

8. The equation between “foregoing” and “withdrawing” is an oversimplification. What of cases where initiation of tube feeding entails the transient risks and burdens of minor surgery under general or local anesthesia, but its maintenance does not involve these burdens? Must this change in the burden/benefit calculus be ignored?

9. The claim that the NCCB Pro-Life Committee came to the “same conclusion” is overstated. The Committee’s chief message was rejection of any efforts at “intentionally hastening the deaths of vulnerable patients by starvation or dehydration”; as was said in point #2 above, the text under consideration does not have this focus.

Also, the Pro-Life Committee document clearly supports tube feeding that can “effectively preserve ‘life’ without involving too grave a burden”; the present draft, as noted above, judges effectiveness in terms of preserving “life with reasonable hope of recovery,” which is a different standard.

10. The question of “cause of death” is a major open question in the current debate. This text overstates the importance of that question, because traditional moral teaching puts great weight on “intention.”

It also understates the causal role of an omission of nutrition and hydration in hastening death, in cases where a patient could have survived in a medically stable condition for years with continued feeding. The phrase “proximate physical means” is obscure, and should have been replaced by “proximate physical cause of death.” One can recognize that the omission is the proximate cause leading to death, while reaffirming that the hastening of death is “praeter intentionem” in some cases.

11. The claim that all these decisions are made “by the patients themselves and by no one else” is not supported in the Church documents. The Declaration says “account will have to be taken of the ‘reasonable’ wishes of the wishes of the patient ‘and the patient’s family,’ as also of ‘the advice of the doctors’ who are specially competent in the matter.”

In cases of doubt “it pertains to the conscience either of the sick person, ‘or’ of the doctors, to decide, in the light of moral obligations and of the various aspects of the case.” In the Declaration a major “moral obligation” binding on “all” decision makers is the rejection of euthanasia by action or omission. Theses qualifications are all absent from (even explicitly rejected by) the document.

12. To say the “morally appropriate” withdrawal of tubal feeding is not “abandoning the person” is a truism. It is equally true to say: “The morally inappropriate withdrawal of tube feeding ‘is’ abandonment of the person.”

This leaves us nowhere, because the text gives no guidelines on when the burdens of artificially assisted feeding are grave enough to render this means optional (except for the overboard standard cited above that whatever the patient says is right).

13. The statement that the patient should not be impeded from “taking the final step” has an ominous sound to it; it might give the impression that hastening death can be directly intended. A phrase like “accepting the inevitability of death ” would have been better.

14. The phrase “threat ‘of’ life” on page 5, line 19 is, I hope, a misprint for “threat ‘to’ life.” The presumption seems to be that death from a life-threatening condition is the “normal consequence” that should occur, and one needs a special reason to “impede” this “normal” state of affairs.

The burden of proof should go the other way: We have a “prima facie” obligation to save someone’s life unless there is a special reason (e.g., ineffectiveness, grave burdensomeness) not to do so. One senses here a very passive model for human action in the world in cases of preventable death—one that does not comport well with the stated “presumption” in favor of averting death.

15. The document as a whole should have distinguished more clearly between two classes of patients: Those who are dying soon no matter what we do for them (e.g., terminal cancer patient), and those who are medically stable and are “not” dying if provided with continued nutrients and fluids.

A much more permissive standard is possible for the former class of patients, for whom continued feeding may become strictly useless in prolonging life. A strong presumption could be established in favor of life-sustaining feeding for the latter class, rebuttable in cases of excessive burden.

A strong presumption here is especially important because, in some celebrated cases, tube feeding has apparently been withdrawn from the latter class of patients precisely because they are “not” dying and someone wants death to occur (see ACLU brief in the Hector Rodas case, cautionary statements by ethicist Daniel Callahan, and concurring opinion by Judge Lynn Compton in the Elizabeth Bouvia case).

This statement was published in the May 25, 1990 edition of the Corpus Christi “Diocesan Press.”

Here follows the teaching of Pope John Paul II, on the same issue:

 

ADDRESS OF JOHN PAUL II
TO THE PARTICIPANTS IN THE INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS
ON “LIFE-SUSTAINING TREATMENTS AND VEGETATIVE STATE:
SCIENTIFIC ADVANCES AND ETHICAL DILEMMAS” 

Saturday, 20 March 2004

Distinguished Ladies and Gentlemen,

1. I cordially greet all of you who took part in the International Congress: “Life-Sustaining Treatments and Vegetative State: Scientific Advances and Ethical Dilemmas”. I wish to extend a special greeting to Bishop Elio Sgreccia, Vice-President of the Pontifical Academy for Life, and to Prof. Gian Luigi Gigli, President of the International Federation of Catholic Medical Associations and selfless champion of the fundamental value of life, who has kindly expressed your shared feelings.

This important Congress, organized jointly by the Pontifical Academy for Life and the International Federation of Catholic Medical Associations, is dealing with a very significant issue: the clinical condition called the “vegetative state”. The complex scientific, ethical, social and pastoral implications of such a condition require in-depth reflections and a fruitful interdisciplinary dialogue, as evidenced by the intense and carefully structured programme of your work sessions.

2. With deep esteem and sincere hope, the Church encourages the efforts of men and women of science who, sometimes at great sacrifice, daily dedicate their task of study and research to the improvement of the diagnostic, therapeutic, prognostic and rehabilitative possibilities confronting those patients who rely completely on those who care for and assist them. The person in a vegetative state, in fact, shows no evident sign of self-awareness or of awareness of the environment, and seems unable to interact with others or to react to specific stimuli.

Scientists and researchers realize that one must, first of all, arrive at a correct diagnosis, which usually requires prolonged and careful observation in specialized centres, given also the high number of diagnostic errors reported in the literature. Moreover, not a few of these persons, with appropriate treatment and with specific rehabilitation programmes, have been able to emerge from a vegetative state. On the contrary, many others unfortunately remain prisoners of their condition even for long stretches of time and without needing technological support.

In particular, the term permanent vegetative state has been coined to indicate the condition of those patients whose “vegetative state” continues for over a year. Actually, there is no different diagnosis that corresponds to such a definition, but only a conventional prognostic judgment, relative to the fact that the recovery of patients, statistically speaking, is ever more difficult as the condition of vegetative state is prolonged in time.

However, we must neither forget nor underestimate that there are well-documented cases of at least partial recovery even after many years; we can thus state that medical science, up until now, is still unable to predict with certainty who among patients in this condition will recover and who will not.

3. Faced with patients in similar clinical conditions, there are some who cast doubt on the persistence of the “human quality” itself, almost as if the adjective “vegetative” (whose use is now solidly established), which symbolically describes a clinical state, could or should be instead applied to the sick as such, actually demeaning their value and personal dignity. In this sense, it must be noted that this term, even when confined to the clinical context, is certainly not the most felicitous when applied to human beings.

In opposition to such trends of thought, I feel the duty to reaffirm strongly that the intrinsic value and personal dignity of every human being do not change, no matter what the concrete circumstances of his or her life. A man, even if seriously ill or disabled in the exercise of his highest functions, is and always will be a man, and he will never become a “vegetable” or an “animal”.

Even our brothers and sisters who find themselves in the clinical condition of a “vegetative state” retain their human dignity in all its fullness. The loving gaze of God the Father continues to fall upon them, acknowledging them as his sons and daughters, especially in need of help.

4. Medical doctors and health-care personnel, society and the Church have moral duties toward these persons from which they cannot exempt themselves without lessening the demands both of professional ethics and human and Christian solidarity.

The sick person in a vegetative state, awaiting recovery or a natural end, still has the right to basic health care (nutrition, hydration, cleanliness, warmth, etc.), and to the prevention of complications related to his confinement to bed. He also has the right to appropriate rehabilitative care and to be monitored for clinical signs of eventual recovery.

I should like particularly to underline how the administration of water and food, even when provided by artificial means, always represents a natural means of preserving life, not a medical act. Its use, furthermore, should be considered, in principle, ordinary and proportionate, and as such morally obligatory, insofar as and until it is seen to have attained its proper finality, which in the present case consists in providing nourishment to the patient and alleviation of his suffering.

The obligation to provide the “normal care due to the sick in such cases” (Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Iura et Bona, p. IV) includes, in fact, the use of nutrition and hydration (cf. Pontifical Council “Cor Unum”, Dans le Cadre, 2, 4, 4; Pontifical Council for Pastoral Assistance to Health Care Workers, Charter of Health Care Workers, n. 120). The evaluation of probabilities, founded on waning hopes for recovery when the vegetative state is prolonged beyond a year, cannot ethically justify the cessation or interruption of minimal care for the patient, including nutrition and hydration. Death by starvation or dehydration is, in fact, the only possible outcome as a result of their withdrawal. In this sense it ends up becoming, if done knowingly and willingly, true and proper euthanasia by omission.

In this regard, I recall what I wrote in the Encyclical Evangelium Vitae, making it clear that “by euthanasia in the true and proper sense must be understood an action or omission which by its very nature and intention brings about death, with the purpose of eliminating all pain”; such an act is always “a serious violation of the law of God, since it is the deliberate and morally unacceptable killing of a human person” (n. 65).

Besides, the moral principle is well known, according to which even the simple doubt of being in the presence of a living person already imposes the obligation of full respect and of abstaining from any act that aims at anticipating the person’s death.

5. Considerations about the “quality of life”, often actually dictated by psychological, social and economic pressures, cannot take precedence over general principles.

First of all, no evaluation of costs can outweigh the value of the fundamental good which we are trying to protect, that of human life. Moreover, to admit that decisions regarding man’s life can be based on the external acknowledgment of its quality, is the same as acknowledging that increasing and decreasing levels of quality of life, and therefore of human dignity, can be attributed from an external perspective to any subject, thus introducing into social relations a discriminatory and eugenic principle.

Moreover, it is not possible to rule out a priori that the withdrawal of nutrition and hydration, as reported by authoritative studies, is the source of considerable suffering for the sick person, even if we can see only the reactions at the level of the autonomic nervous system or of gestures. Modern clinical neurophysiology and neuro-imaging techniques, in fact, seem to point to the lasting quality in these patients of elementary forms of communication and analysis of stimuli.

6. However, it is not enough to reaffirm the general principle according to which the value of a man’s life cannot be made subordinate to any judgment of its quality expressed by other men; it is necessary to promote the taking of positive actions as a stand against pressures to withdraw hydration and nutrition as a way to put an end to the lives of these patients.

It is necessary, above all, to support those families who have had one of their loved ones struck down by this terrible clinical condition. They cannot be left alone with their heavy human, psychological and financial burden. Although the care for these patients is not, in general, particularly costly, society must allot sufficient resources for the care of this sort of frailty, by way of bringing about appropriate, concrete initiatives such as, for example, the creation of a network of awakening centres with specialized treatment and rehabilitation programmes; financial support and home assistance for families when patients are moved back home at the end of intensive rehabilitation programmes; the establishment of facilities which can accommodate those cases in which there is no family able to deal with the problem or to provide “breaks” for those families who are at risk of psychological and moral burn-out.

Proper care for these patients and their families should, moreover, include the presence and the witness of a medical doctor and an entire team, who are asked to help the family understand that they are there as allies who are in this struggle with them. The participation of volunteers represents a basic support to enable the family to break out of its isolation and to help it to realize that it is a precious and not a forsaken part of the social fabric.

In these situations, then, spiritual counselling and pastoral aid are particularly important as help for recovering the deepest meaning of an apparently desperate condition.

7. Distinguished Ladies and Gentlemen, in conclusion I exhort you, as men and women of science responsible for the dignity of the medical profession, to guard jealously the principle according to which the true task of medicine is “to cure if possible, always to care”.

As a pledge and support of this, your authentic humanitarian mission to give comfort and support to your suffering brothers and sisters, I remind you of the words of Jesus: “Amen, I say to you, whatever you did for one of these least brothers of mine, you did for me” (Mt 25: 40).

In this light, I invoke upon you the assistance of him, whom a meaningful saying of the Church Fathers describes as Christus medicus, and in entrusting your work to the protection of Mary, Consoler of the sick and Comforter of the dying, I lovingly bestow on all of you a special Apostolic Blessing.

 

Thus, Pope John Paul II.

I think that what Bishop Gracida did for the weak and suffering and elderly has the blessing of God. For in the Old Testament, the care of the elderly has a blessing: Honor thy father and thy mother, and thou shalt have a long life on the land.  Bishop Gracida is nearly 97 years of age, and is still a staunch defender of the Holy Catholic Faith. We owe him our support.

_________

CREDITS: The Featured Image is of Bishop Gracida and Pope John Paul II during a meeting in Poland. The text of John Paul II’s Address is from the Vatican Website. The Text of the Bishops Pastoral Letter can today be found on the website of EWTN. The Image of the Bomber Group Logo is in the public domain.

+ + +

Support FromRome.Info

Help us take on the established Catholic Media who are controlled opposition. They are promoting schism from Pope Benedict, and remain silent at the heresies and schisms of Jorge Mario Bergoglio. We cannot let the St. Gallen Mafia win the information war, which they are presently doing through controlled media. — TO FIGHT THIS WAR we need your generous financial support. — Funds go to Ordo Militaris Inc., and are capital gifts for this Apostolate.

$10.00

 

How Bergoglio’s permanence means the apostasy of the Flock

From Rome has been ahead of many issues way before the general public confronted them. One of these regards the problem of having a man whom you think is the Pope be a man whom you know is a heretic.

From Rome answered this in an editorial of May 12, 2016, nearly 3 and a half years ago. Back then nearly no one took notice. It was too politically incorrect. But now many, having seen the unending monstrosity of Bergoglio who is willing to publicly slap and excoriate with the most foul language a woman merely for pleading for the help of fellow Catholics who were being persecuted by his Marxist allies in China, and his total lack of insouciance at the publication of a book by Pope Benedict on Celibacy, the barriers of non-think have, are or about to fall in the minds of the general populace.

Some readers have remarked that From Rome does not speak so much about the heresies or errors of Bergoglio anymore, but this is not because he has stopped, or that this publication finds them tolerable, but because the solution to the problem of Bergoglio is simple: Restore Benedict XVI because he was robbed of the Papacy, and we were robbed of his Pontificate!

In this editorial, written when the pretensions to the Papacy of Bergoglio were still commonly held, hope was held out for his repentance. But now after nearly 4 years, that is clearly never going to come about. Those still hoping for it, are deceiving the faithful.

Nevertheless, we share with our readers now in January of 2020, what we published in May of 2016, for your edification and thought, and to share with your fellow Catholics who are still struggling to understand Bergoglio and why the clergy are obsessed with remaining in communion with him.

How Bergoglio’s Permanence means the apostasy of the Flock

Rome, May 12, 2016 A.D:  There is no greater and more radical challenge for the Christian believer than to take another as his Master.

Indeed, Christians are recognized by the fact that they regard Jesus Christ, and Him alone, as their Master, in accord with the scripture verse, in which Christ condemned the religious leaders of ancient Israel, Matthew 23:10 ff:

10 Neither be ye called masters; for one is you master, Christ. 11 He that is the greatest among you shall be your servant. 12 And whosoever shall exalt himself shall be humbled: and he that shall humble himself shall be exalted.

Indeed, its very tempting, in today’s world in which truth is up for grabs and violent political clashes are being waged on all sides, for the Christian to take an “I’m ok, you’re ok” view, that is, a “get along with everyone” kind of attitude, in which truth does not matter, only co-existence.

The Loadstone of Hope

The only problem is, that there is a vast difference between the man who thinks Christ is a religious teacher and the man who is loyal to Christ no matter what.  First first regards Him as one might regard a philosopher:  taking the man’s teachings here and there, according to his personal tastes and likes, but not as a rule of life.

The second regards Him as the Incarnate Son of God, apart from Whose teaching No man on Earth can escape eternal and perpetual damnation in the fires of Hell.

As St. Augustine said, “If you believe what you like in the Gospel, and reject what you don’t like, it is not the Gospel you believe, but yourself.”

Indeed, what distinguishes the Christian from all other men is Hope.

Hope is that theological virtue least spoke of today, because in modern times a proper understanding and appreciation of it has been so attacked in the minds of men, that nearly nobody appears to have it or cultivate it or use it.

Hope is that theological virtue which puts full faith and confidence in the promises of God for those who keep them.  Its the most essential and key Christian virtue, given to us in Baptism, but cultivated only with good works.  If you do not really hope that God will reward you for fidelity to Christ, then obviously you will not be faithful to Him.  Likewise, if you think that you can manage for yourself the rules by which you will get into Heaven, there is no need for you to have hope in God’s promises, you can presume for yourself — a presumption which is both your ultimate self-deceit and the absolute guarantee of your own damnation.

All of this has an ecclesiological impact, that is, all of this effects the Church, what She is and your place in or outside of Her, who alone is the ark of Salvation, the Pillar of the truth, apart from AND outside of which no man woman or child can be saved.

The Temptation of Bergoglio

The great temptation presented by the election and presence of Bergoglio on the Apostolic Throne, then, is precisely this: the offer of a Church, of a Christianity, in which Christ is no longer The master, but merely a guide post from which one can wander here or there and remain a “christian” without fidelity and without the need to practice hope.

This temptation is offered the Cardinals, the Bishops, the priests, the religious and the laity, is offered thus to the whole Church, because in Bergoglio they have, without any shadow of a doubt, a man who does not believe in Christ as his Sole Master, who does not love or tolerate the Church as Christ founded it or gave it, does not suffer the rules the Apostles, the Faithful Disciples of the Lord handed down to us, and is filled with compassion and love for the traitor who sold Christ for 30 shekels of silver.

To have a public manifest heretic on the throne of the Apostle Peter, and tolerate him, presents for every true Christian, the opportunity of pretense, to keep the name “Christian” or “Catholic” without any more obligation to Christ.  Its the ultimate game-plan of Lucifer.

Either Bergoglio must Change or the Church has changed

Finally, if one were to accept this situation and the principles which erroneously lead to it, as have been briefly described here, it would be enough to end this article with the usual lament.  Because with faith it is possible to lament these things, but with hope it is not possible to tolerate them.  Nearly every author on the Internet today, and as far as we know, all the Cardinals and Bishops of the Catholic Church since April 8, 2016, the date on which “Amoris Laetitia” what released, do not have or are not acting faithfully to Christian Hope.

For the man with Christian hope, would declare and manifestly insist and demand that Bergoglio be canonically reprimanded, and if refusing 3x, be declared to be in open schism with Christ and His Church, and self-deposed by reason of his malice and heresy against Him and His Bride, the Church, whose first duty is to keep herself immaculate and worthy of Him.

Either Bergoglio must change or the Church has in fact changed, because if he repents, the Church is saved in Her fidelity to Christ, and Christ is glorified above all human whim, even the human whims of the Roman Pontiff. But if Bergoglio does not change AND the Church tolerates him, it is the Church which has changed, She has committed adultery with Bergoglio, accepting him rather than Jesus Christ as Her spouse, the God above all other gods…

__________

CREDITS: The featured image is of the Medieval Manuscript depicting The False Shepherd, a detail of the illumination from the mss. Douce 266 in the Bodleian Library. As a faithful reproduction of a work of art produced more than 200 years ago, it is in the public domain.

+ + +

Support FromRome.Info

Help us take on the established Catholic Media who are controlled opposition. They are promoting schism from Pope Benedict, and remain silent at the heresies and schisms of Jorge Mario Bergoglio. We cannot let the St. Gallen Mafia win the information war, which they are presently doing through controlled media. — TO FIGHT THIS WAR we need your generous financial support. — Funds go to Ordo Militaris Inc., and are capital gifts for this Apostolate.

$10.00

Marks of the Beast: Solidarity in Dissent

By Br. Alexis Bugnolo

I have previously written an extensive description of how the horrible sin of pride is the hallmark of wicked men in the Church since the time of Vatican II, in my article on The Downfall of Luciferian Pride.

Today, I want to focus on one of the outstanding characteristics of the unfaithful who are members of the Church of the Antichrist, though they may not realize it or admit it. I want to do this because it is very easy to fall into the camp of Lucifer without realizing it, because, as I said in the previous article, the vice and sins of pride, being the most evil, are the hardest to discern and recognize, because they are full of the deprivation of the being that should be in an act of virtue. And that makes them spiritually invisible, except to the very humble who desire to glory solely in the Divine Majesty of God.

Ann Barnhardt’s Righteous Indignation

I am continually impressed by the righteous indignation of many devout Catholics on social media. Righteous indignation is the sense of disgust and anger which rises in the heart of someone who loves God and puts God first, and this kind of indignation is expressed solely because the rights of God are being transgressed.

As you may know, in recent years, months and weeks certain clergy, religious and laymen, who insist Bergoglio is the pope, because they refuse to doubt for a moment that Cardinals and Bishops are infallible, have begun to fault Our Lord Jesus Christ, in His promises to Peter, the teaching of Vatican I on Papal Authority and Infallibility, and the credulity of the Saints in regard to the Roman Pontiff’s authority and magisterium.

A recent example is the declaration of the Hermits of Westray, Scotland. Who know well what the arguments for Benedict still being the pope are, but refuse to harken to them, because they prefer to deny the indefectibility of the Catholic Church or the infallibility of the Roman Pontiff which they cannot reconcile with their more cherished “belief” that Bergoglio is the Pope.

One of the more shocking and sustained attacks came recently from Dr. Peter Kwasniewski, in his blog post entitled, How Francis may be vindicating the “inopportunists” of the First Vatican Council, published by Lifesite News, run by the Campaign for Life Coalition, a political organization out of Toronto, Canada, whose editor is a Mr. John-Henry Westen, co-founder of Lifesite and of the Voice of the Family Coalition, one of the leading “Bergoglio is certainly the pope” politicians-journalists.

Ann Barnhardt rightly unloaded a cartload of righteous indignation on Dr. Kwasniewski’s attempt to undermine the infallible teaching of Vatican I, in her recent post, entitled, Hey! Here’s a wacky idea. Instead of assuming that God is incompetent and Vatican I and the declaration of the infallible dogma of Papal Infallibility was all a big mistake…

I will quote the key passage, which I want to focus on, as a preamble to a discussion of the Marks of the Beast.  Ann Barnhardt, addressing the problem many Catholics are having, from Cardinal Burke down to the last man in the pew, to understand how a man like Bergoglio could be the pope, says decisively:

Maybe if people would attack this controversy from the base assumption that GOD ALMIGHTY is THE PERFECT ONE as manifested in His Spotless and Indefectible Bride the Church, in His Angels, and in His Saints, and that THEY THEMSELVES are deeply fallible and so very capable of error, INSTEAD OF THE EXACT OPPOSITE,  there might be a bit more clarity of thought round about.

(Bold Face in the original)

What Ann Barnhardt is addressing is PRIDE. And a particularly diabolic kind of pride, which holds that the unholy fallible trinity of “I, me, and myself,” knows better than the Holy Infallible Trinity of God the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.

No use talking about modern errors, if you embrace them without so much as a wink of the eye

What is so ironic about her observation is that it is valid against a good number of popular writers and speakers and YouTube personalities, who either ascribe to or have been leading members of the so-called “Traditional Movement” in the Catholic Church since the time of the Second Vatican Council. A group which has made it a point and raison d’entre to fault the errors of modernity.

These errors consist in Modernism, Neo-Modernism, Relativism, Individualism, Secularism, Humanism, Marxism, Socialism, Communism, Liberalism, Progressivism, Hedonism…  Have I left any out? Probably.

However, when it comes to the controversy of how a man like Bergoglio can be thought to be the Vicar of Christ and act more heretical than any lay leader of one of the main line Protestant “churches”, then their opposition to certain modern errors is cast to the wind and instead some of these errors are readily embraced.

First of which is Modernism, which holds that that which validates religious belief is interior religious sentiments, not objective revelation. For the Modernist, Papal Infallibility is not a gift from God, but the habit of mind of believers to take whatever a Pope says or does and regard it as a religious doctrine. For that reason, there is nothing wrong in criticizing Catholics throughout history who had this sentiment.

Second of which is Neo-Modernism, which holds that there is no unchanging eternal truth revealed by God, but that religious truth consists in conformity of the mind to modern life. Neo-Modernists think that the Church is dead unless She is in the process of continual aggiornamento, that clergy are not properly formed unless they are undertaking continuous formation, etc. etc. For them no event can be condemned by religious doctrine because events themselves are the goal posts of truth and the sacred. They worship history, but not as something that once was, but which is always changing. Hence, papal infallibility must also now be reconsidered and redefined in light of Bergoglio’s way of acting.

The Third of which is Relativism, which holds that there are no absolute moral truths implicit in human nature or in an eternal unchanging law. Truth is found in the right relation of things and actions in the here and now. And right, here, means what is suitable to me. Relativism in turn gives birth or opens the door to Hedonism and Individualism, the definitions of which are well known. Hence, what papal infallibility should mean today is not limited to what it meant before. And what I think it should mean is more important than what any Saint, Doctor of the Church, or previous Pope said it meant, because what is most important is that I have a pleasant experience of Catholicism.

Bergoglio is certainly the Pope, because …

Many Catholics unwittingly have adopted the errors which I just mentioned in a very imprudent attempt to rationally explain why they hold the position that Bergoglio is certainly the pope.

None actually confront the historical facts, which are as follows:

  1. Pope Benedict, as the man who is the pope, renounced the ministerium in his declaration of Feb. 11, 2013.
  2. Canon 332 §2 says a Roman Pontiff renounces when he renounces the munus.
  3. Canon 17 says that Canon 332 § must be read in accord with the Code of Canon Law’s usage of terms, canonical tradition, and the mind of its legislator, Pope John Paul II.
  4. Benedict behavior after Feb. 28, 2013, shows that he retains the papal dignity in all respects.
  5. The idea that Benedict’s renunciation of ministerium means a renunciation of the papacy comes from a tweet by Giovanna Chirri, an ANSA reporter, minutes following the Consistory of Feb. 11, 2013.
  6. No meeting of canonists was called to examine the act of the Renunciation to determine if it was valid or not.
  7. The Vatican has never officially claimed that the renunciation was valid.
  8. The Cardinals have never claimed that they did anything to verify that the See was Vacant before meeting in the Conclave of 2013 to elect Jorge Mario Bergoglio.
  9. Jorge Mario Bergoglio is a public manifest and pertinacious heretic, idolater and fomenter of schisms, who by divine right cannot be a member of the Catholic Church, let alone hold any office in Her.
  10. The Church has NEVER taught that the Cardinals or Bishops or even all the clergy are infallible in matters of canonical interpretations or knowledge of historical facts.

Instead, these “Bergoglio is certainly the pope” Catholics take another route.  They hold that the solidarity of opinion of the vast majority, who say Bergoglio is the pope, is more authoritative than:

  1. God who is infallible by nature.
  2. Christ Jesus who created the office of Saint Peter and promised it infallibility.
  3. Christ Jesus’ Prayer for the person of the Pope that his faith may NEVER fail.
  4. The First Vatican Council in its decree, Pastor Aeternus.
  5. The Code of Canon Law of 1983 promulgated by the Vicar of Jesus Christ, Pope John Paul II.
  6. The words of Pope Benedict himself during and after the Renunciation of Feb. 11, 2013.

Solidarity in Dissent, is a Mark of the Diabolic

The essence of pride, the vice, is dissent. This is because pride as the worst of all vices is directed more principally against the truth and against knowing the truth, than all other vices.  Pride is a spiritual vice and since the intellect is the most spiritual of all the powers of the soul, pride takes root first of all in it.

We can see this in Scripture, where, from the name of Saint Michael, who according to Saint John the Apostle, in his Book of the Apocalypse, was the first Holy Angel to act out of holy indignation and take up arms to fight against Lucifer and his angels, that the sin of Lucifer was pride.  For Saint Michael’s name means, Who is like unto God? A name, which, according to the Fathers of the Church, he merited for repelling the evil suggestions of Lucifer who suborned and seduced a third of the Angels of God with a sin of pride.  Lucifer then was probably saying something like, Worship me, because I am like unto God!

But this is also the sin of all prideful men.  When you by any act of mind or will or body or soul do something which presupposes any affirmation that you have the merit, right, worthiness, power, protection, etc.. that only God has by Nature, then you are committing a sin of pride. This is so, because you are acting as if you were like unto God in such a way as to fail to distinguish that you are much more unlike God than like Him, and that you fail in being like Him in 3 principle characteristics:  You are not omniscent, You are not omnipotent, You are not infallible.

Omniscent means all knowing. Omnipotent means able to do all things by your own power or ability. Infallible means able not to err.  I could add impeccable, which means unable to sin, but since a proud man is already entirely oblivious to his ability to sin, I will omit that here.

It follows, then, that since Lucifer seduced the Angels of God by pride, and that those who fell with him and were cast out of Heaven by the Divine Power and Saint Michael and his Angels, that one of the marks of the diabolic community is their solidarity in pride. And that means solidarity in the misuse of their intellects in dissenting from the truth.

Dissent, which merely means disagreement, can be good or evil. But when it disagrees with objective reality or revealed truth or even a truth which we know is true on account of other truths, natural or revealed, then it is evil, a mortal sin. This is the dissent of which I speak in this article.

Our Lord points this out for our observation, when He calls Lucifer a liar and a murderer from the beginningBecause a liar attacks a truth because he disagrees with it. And a murders kills a living thing, because he disagrees that it should be allowed to live.

Solidarity in Dissent is, therefore, the Mark of the Beast

Solidarity in dissent, therefore, must be the chief mark of the Beast, that is, the chief distinguishing characteristic of all the members of the Church of the Anti-Christ, the Mystical Body of Satan.

Saint John the Apostle indicates this symbolically in his Apocalypse, when he says that in the days of the Antichrist no one will be able to buy or sell anything without having the mark of the beast inscribed upon their right hand.  According to the Fathers of the Church this is a symbolic expression, chiefly, for the conspiracy of the wicked in acting on principle out of falsehood. The biblical number, often translated as 666 is actually in the Greek text written very similar to sss, three Snake like symbols which were used in Asia Minor, in the time of Saint John, as the symbol for the number 6, which in the bible indicates the fullness of imperfection.  And since pride is the fullness of all vice, and vice is the moral habitual failing which leads to imperfection and wickedness, 666 is a pre-eminent symbol for pride and dissent.

Whether the number 666 means more than this, is another consideration. I am here giving a mystagogic reading of the text, that is, a reading which applies to the moral or spiritual life and how we should or should not be living our lives today.

But the “Bergoglio is certainly the Pope” people are doing just this. They are acting out of a spirit of solidarity in dissent from the 10 truths which I listed above.  They ignore all arguments, refuse all reflections and reasons, even conversations, which would lead them to confront the fact of what they are doing. They have willfully blinded themselves to the truth and they show absolutely no worry whatsoever of what might or will befall them for denying and dissenting from truth. They do this because they do not want to separate themselves from the massa (damnata)* who define themselves as dissenters from these truths. They do not want to disagree with the Cardinals and Bishops who reject these truths or close their eyes to them. They are literally willing to risk their eternal salvation on the basis of this solidarity in dissent.

And it is true dissent, because they do not even attempt to give reasons for what they are doing. They only lash out with insults or vicious punishments, calumnies etc..

These catholics are profoundly confused. The unanimous or near unanimous opinion of men might be truth in the political order, but it is not the criterion of truth in matters of canon law. That many of these Catholics are very political people might indeed explain why they cannot understand that in the Church democracy or politics means nothing. Truth means everything.

Indeed, it is the teaching of Christ, Scripture, the Apostles, the Fathers of the Church, the Doctors of the Church, the Saints and the Magisterium throughout the ages, that to deny even one truth is a mortal sin meriting eternal damnation. But a godless politician will never accept or understand this.

This is why solidarity in dissent is the preeminent spiritual mark of the beast. If you have this mark, then you are a member of the Church of the Anti-Christ, no matter what religion you practice, what mass you attend, what Cardinal you follow, or what you otherwise might think of yourself, as holy or impious.

Solidarity in dissent can last a long time. It is what destroyed and is destroying the Protestant Churches, who agreed in the Reformation to deny certain Catholic truths, and in that tradition, from which they refuse to break, they ran into the necessity of denying other truths. — This follows the spiritual law of moral degradation, namely, that if you deny one moral truth with unbending firmness and fidelity, then you will be forced to sacrifice your adhesion to other moral truths, until you become utterly depraved and ultimately are driven insane. This is why among men, insanity is a hallmark of the diabolic. — And this is why Protestant Churches, or any group which practices solidarity in dissent, such as those who deny the 10 truths above, cannot be saved: they are doomed by that solidarity to fall into continually worse and more diverse errors and vices.

So I warn all: solidarity in dissent is a mark of the Beast and so long as you are marked with that mark, you belong to that Beast.

________

* “Massa damanata” is a Latin phrase used by Saint Augustine of Hippo to name the collectivity of all the damned souls. Massa in Latin means mass, damnata, means damned.

 

Dear Hermits in Christ

Saint Jerome, patron of hermits, in his hermitage at Bethlehem

An Open Letter to the Scottish Hermits
“excommunicated” on Christmas Day

I have eaten lunch with one of the signers of your letter, if you remember, in the Piazza Navona, back in 2016. So I consider myself obligated in Christ to say something to you, as a fellow hermit.

Your recent letter denouncing Bergoglio was correct in everything but the most important point. You have presumed that Pope Benedict’s renunciation of Feb. 11, 2013 was in accord with canon 332 §2, when I informed you in my last email, before I lost your email when my old computer fried up, that you should read the information about ppbxvi.org.

I cannot find it easy to understand your position, which basically holds that what a single tweet by the ANSA reporter, Giovanna Chirri, said on that fateful day, is more certain than what Christ promised Saint Peter and what the Church taught infallibly at Vatican I on the infallibility of the Roman Pontiff, or even than the certitude of God’s will in adhering to the LETTER of Canon Law, which no one has the right to interpret in any other sense than the letter.

You have instead preferred to break from the See of Rome on account of a man who was never the Roman Pontiff, is a usurper and is rightfully called an Antipope.

Ann Barnhardt does a line by line critique of your letter, and this mind boggling stubbornness of yours, to hold political correctness or human opinion above divine faith.  I personally would never have written so strongly as she has, but having read what she has said, I must say I agree 100% because it is entirely rational, entirely based on the Divine Faith, and entirely in harmony with both Vatican I and the Code of Canon Law.

I humbly suggest, therefore, that you read it.

https://www.barnhardt.biz/2019/12/26/this-is-what-happens-when-you-hold-a-false-base-premise-ignorant-scottish-hermits-sever-communion-with-the-holy-see/

Because outside of the communion and submission to the Apostolic See there is no salvation.

I understand that you may hold fast to the rumor put out by Chirri and all the evil lies of the Revolutionaries who want that tweet to be true, but if you consider men friends who insist Bergoglio is the pope or that a heretic can be the pope, then you need to separate yourselves from their counsel, because it is evil counsel.

In fact, when you take as your truth, not the Gospel nor the laws of the Church, but the statements and assertions of journalists and political correctness, then what you are is not a Catholic, but a modernist, who believes truth changes with the times, and who refuses to apply unchanging principles to judge all things, even alleged papal renunciations.

Sincerely in Saint Francis, a fellow hermit:

 

Br. Alexis Bugnolo
Rome, Italy
Feast of Saint John the Apostle

 

P.S. If any reader can send this letter to the HERMITS please do so.  They know I have good will for them, from my past attempts to help them in other affairs.

POSTSCRIPT: Subsequently, the Hermits published statements on radio which so discord with the Catholic Faith, that I have to say that I honestly think they are professing heresy, because they seem to exalt the rights of conscience so much as they deny without shame the indefectibility of the Church and the papacy from which that grace comes, simply because they willfully and without cause refuse to accept the terms of Canon 332 §2 according to the norm of canon 17.  They actually want Bergoglio to be a legitimate pope so they can justify separation. I get the impression that they want to be Greek Orthodox Schismatics, which is very fashionable in the United Kingdom, but at the same time pretend they are Catholics. Let us pray for their souls, because in their present state I cannot see how they can save their souls. The greatest danger of the eremitical life has always been pride, thinking that you are the source of grace apart from the institutional Church. This is a prime example, sadly.

El Derecho Divino y Apostólico toma precedencia en Estado de Emergencia

Como San José, los obispos están llamados a defender la Iglesia con sus propias vidas.

Por el hno. Alexis Bugnolo

Vivimos en una era extraña cuando chismosos profesionales (conocidos como periodistas) son titiriteros de las masas porque el 95% de la gente permite que ellos dicten los límites de la realidad, historia, moralidad y religión. Y hasta que algún periodista destacado utilice la palabra “Herejía”, “Cismático”, o “Apóstata” en referencia a alguien que amerita el termino/s, entonces nadie con uso de razón acusaría a un compañero católico de tan horrible ofensa por juicio propio porque como como ellos dicen: “Todo mundo sabe que es cismático rechazar la comunión a un compañero católico de buen estado. ¡Y buen estado significa que aún no ha sido condenado oficialmente por la Iglesia!”

Esto es “gaslighting” (en inglés), por supuesto. Gas-lighting es un término con el cual todos deberían de familiarizarse. Es la táctica de aquellos practicados en la manipulación psicológica utilizada para ganar clientes, sujetos, inferiores, a negar la realidad que conocen y ven, y aceptar que la realidad es lo que el manipulador dice ser.

En cuanto fue elegido Bergoglio (como supuesto papa), comenzó el “gaslighting”. Estas viendo cosas, Él es el papa, no puedes hablar así del papa. Disentir es pecado mortal. Si no lo aceptas como papa estas fuera de la Iglesia. ¡No eres católico!

Últimamente, a medida que las herejías y la malevolencia de Bergoglio explotan fuera de todas las proporciones que las de cualquier hereje anterior en la historia de la Iglesia, algunos católicos que anteriormente eran famosos por su ortodoxia doctrinal y moral experimentan ataques apopléticos en sus intentos de sofocar el reconocimiento de la realidad. “Reconocer y resistir” es su mantra. Están empeñados, literalmente, en permanecer en comunión con Bergoglio, luego, no se atrevan a llover sobre sus fantasías mostrándoles hechos de Ley Canónica (cánones números 1364, 1329, etc.) que demuestran que, por derecho divino, los herejes están fuera de la Iglesia, apenas profieren herejía.

Éstos apologetas de la revolución están tan empeñados en negar la realidad de la renuncia fallida del Papa Benedicto (cf  ppbxvi.org para información completa). Se descomponen y arremeten. Muestran que su apego al “Papa Francisco” no es ni racional ni razonable, es visceral. Cuán visceral depende, supongo, de si observan los mandamientos sexto o noveno. Este completo colapso psicológico, intelectual y espiritual es el resultado de lo que yo llamo el acertijo de Iscariote. Uso “Iscariote” aquí en el sentido de la palabra aramea para un hombre del mismo pueblo que el falso apóstol, Judas Iscariote. Desde entonces como él, han vendido al verdadero Cristo por las 30 piezas de plata que es reconocimiento público por parte de los Cardenales como “católico fiel”.* Y como lo hicieron por razones puramente egoístas, sentimentales, no racionales y no legales o no dogmáticas, explotan de emoción cuanto más les señalas que han construido su casa sobre una premisa falsa. Entonces, arremeten cada vez más y pierden todos los rastros de aquel excelente personaje que alguna vez exhibieron, convirtiéndose en el proceso, irónicamente, la misma semejanza del diálogo que Bergoglio es, un Troll  repugnante y que avienta adjetivos.

Un Estado de Emergencia

Nadie menos que él obispo Gänswein, el secretario personal del Papa Benedicto XVI y cabeza de la Casa Pontificia (que solo tiene un huésped CLAVE CLAVE) dijo que lo que Benedicto hizo en Febrero de 2013 fue a cuenta de un estado de emergencia.

Sus palabras y opiniones se debaten en cuanto a lo que significan, pero sería absurdo negar la realidad que es visible para todo el mundo, a saber, que LA SEDE APOSTÓLICA ESTÁ IMPEDIDA.

Decir que la Sede Apostólica está impedida, significa que el Papa no puede actuar como Papa por alguna razón, ya sea por coacción externa, o porque no hay Papa, o el Papa se niega a actuar por alguna convicción irracional o racional. Éste “ser impedido” provoca un estado de necesidad, porque la cabeza visible de la Iglesia visible, para todos los efectos prácticos, no está en función. El estado de necesidad es una necesidad del tipo que se requiere para el funcionamiento continuo de la Iglesia. Dado que el orden normal de gobierno está obstruido, la observancia de leyes meramente positivas en las que se basa, por necesidad, debe omitirse.

Nuestro Señor nos enseña este principio general a pequeña escala, cuando, en una ocasión, Él y Sus Apóstoles cruzaron un campo de trigo durante un tiempo en el que no habían comido nada, y algunos de ellos comieron los granos de trigo que estaban cerca. Al ser cosechados, algunos fariseos se quejaron de que estaban violando las Leyes del Sábado en contra de trabajar durante el sábado. Nuestro Señor señaló que la necesidad de su hambre les permitió no observar la ley sobre la cosecha. Él respondió con una forma semítica contundente, diciendo:  “¡El sábado se hizo para el hombre, no el hombre para el sábado!”

La ley contra la cosecha fue instituida no menos que por Moisés, quien tenía mucha más autoridad en la Antigua Alianza (Moisés básicamente escribió todo, bajo la inspiración y dirección de Dios) que el Papa tiene en la Nueva Alianza (el Papa no puede cambiar el Biblia, ni siquiera el Padre Nuestro, aunque muchos clérigos están confundidos sobre este punto).

Además, está claro, según los principios de la lógica (ex minore),** que si Nuestro Señor dice que es lícito apelar a un estado de necesidad, suspender las leyes del Antiguo Pacto, porque los hombres tienen hambre un sábado por la tarde , entonces, obviamente, es lícito actuar en consecuencia CUANDO LA SALVACIÓN DE TODAS LAS ALMAS EN LA TIERRA HASTA EL FINAL DE LOS TIEMPOS se ponga en peligro grave e inminente. Negar esto sería pura locura.

Este principio de la suspensión del derecho positivo durante un estado de necesidad es sancionado por nada menos que el Papa Pío VI, en su Bula, Cum nos superiori anno, del 13 de noviembre de 1798, donde concede a los Cardenales el derecho a derogar Todos los aspectos no esenciales de las leyes papales sobre los cónclaves, a causa de la supresión de facto de la Iglesia de Roma por la República romana, dirigida por los revolucionarios franceses. ***

Extendiendo esta lección a los asuntos de la Iglesia, se deduce que, como buenos cristianos, estamos obligados por la fe divina a regresar al principio general que Jesús estableció, a saber, LA SALVACIÓN DE LAS ALMAS ES LA LEY MÁS ALTA. Para la Salvación de las Almas, el Padre Eterno sacrificó a Su propio Hijo, y Su propio Hijo aceptó Su muerte ignominiosa en una Cruz. PARA LA SALVACIÓN DE LAS ALMAS.

Si hay alguien, por lo tanto, en la Iglesia, que sostiene que debemos esperar a que el Papa (Benedicto) haga algo, o algún papa futuro que haga algo, ESTÁN FUERA DE SUS MENTES y más correctamente, SON FARISEOS que elevan las leyes positivas establecidas por la Iglesia (que indican lo que no se puede hacer sin el permiso de los superiores) al nivel de reglas que requerirían que la Iglesia se suicidara esperando algún tipo de intervención divina sin colaboración humana. Una intervención divina sin colaboración humana, en el presente caso de la Sede impedida, NUNCA SE HA PROMETIDO explícitamente. (Entiendo que hay algunas grandes promesas de Nuestro Señor y Nuestra Señora, pero ninguna de ellas se refiere explícitamente a una promesa de resolver este problema).

Derecho Apostólico (ius apostolicum)

El concepto de Derecho Divino (ius divinum) es un concepto de la escolástica tardía clásica, muy popular en la época del Concilio de Trento y posteriormente. Se refiere a cosas que han sido decretadas por Dios. El oficio de Pedro existe por derecho divino, por ejemplo.

El derecho apostólico (ius apostolicum) no está tan reconocido. Se refiere a las decisiones de los Apóstoles para el gobierno de la Iglesia. Es de derecho apostólico que la iglesia en una ciudad pueda ser gobernada por varios sacerdotes, por ejemplo.

Tanto el derecho divino como el derecho apostólico son superiores a la ley canónica. Por otro lado, lo que la mayoría de los católicos no saben es que, durante más de 1000 años, a excepción de los cánones decretados en los Concilios, la Iglesia no tuvo derecho canónico. El derecho canónico no es de institución divina o apostólica, aunque el Primer Concilio de Jerusalén c. El año 45 d. C. transmitió decisiones y es el ejemplo de todos los Concilios y Sínodos en la Iglesia.

El derecho apostólico también incluye algunas cosas que no se observan en el curso normal de los asuntos, porque desde la época de los Apóstoles, la Jerarquía Sagrada, para el buen orden de la Iglesia en circunstancias normales se han establecido cánones o leyes establecidas para conducir los asuntos de La Iglesia de otra manera.

Tomemos, por ejemplo, la elección de los obispos. Los apóstoles nombraron obispos antes de morir. Pero cuando pasaron a la gloria eterna, lo dejaron a cada diócesis por derecho apostólico para elegir su propio obispo. Y por “a cada diócesis”, me refiero a los católicos de cada diócesis, laicos, religiosos y clérigos. Así es como la Iglesia sobrevivió a 10 persecuciones romanas. Nadie estaba escribiendo a Roma para pedir una cita, cuando murió su obispo.

Además, es de derecho apostólico que cada obispo sirva como ordinario de su diócesis hasta la muerte. No había retiro (jubilación). Esa es una novedad creada por Pablo VI para eliminar a católicos del Colegio de Obispos y reemplazarlos por revolucionarios sodomitas. El derecho canónico reconoce implícitamente que este concepto de jubilación obligatoria es contrario al Derecho Apostólico, ya que no requiere que los Obispos renuncien, solo dice que deben presentar una carta de renuncia al cumplir los 75 años.

También es de derecho apostólico que los obispos puedan reunirse en sínodos y concilios. Hasta donde yo sé, no hay evidencia de que cada sínodo en la Historia de la Iglesia, que se considere un verdadero acto jerárquico, haya sido aprobado por el Papa. Las leyes positivas actuales requieren que el Papa consienta, pero el derecho apostólico no requiere eso. El derecho apostólico es más racional, porque cuando no hay papa o cuando el papa está preso, ¿cómo pueden obtener los permisos los obispos?

Pero la razón general para la reactivación del derecho apostólico tiene que ver con el principio inherente de subsidiariedad en una sociedad perfecta. Este principio fue reconocido por el papa León XIII. Sostiene que cuando la autoridad superior en una sociedad perfecta falla, entonces la autoridad inferior tiene el derecho de asumir el deber de la autoridad superior y actuar en la medida en que sea necesario actuar para preservar o defender esa sociedad. Dado que el Colegio de Obispos en su conjunto sucede a los Apóstoles, cuando la Sede de Pedro se ve obstaculizada, cada Obispo tiene el derecho moral y apostólico de ejercer en cierto sentido la autoridad de los Apóstoles para volver a poner a la Iglesia en buen estado de funcionamiento. Esta es una responsabilidad asombrosa reservada a casos extremos de necesidad, como está sucediendo hoy, con un gobierno hereje público del Vaticano y un Papa (Benedicto) que piensa que ya no es su deber gobernar la Iglesia o reivindicar sus propios derechos como Vicario de Cristo

En un estado de emergencia, el derecho apostólico y divino revive en puntos que ahora, en el curso regular de los asuntos de la Iglesia, regulados por la ley canónica, presuponen una Sede Apostólica que no está impedida. Estas leyes positivas de la Iglesia, que, si se observan, conducirían a la destrucción de la Iglesia o la pérdida de almas están suspendidas en vigor. Es decir, ya no es un delito canónico o una falta moral NO observarlos con la debida razón.

Si hay obispos o cardenales católicos en la tierra, deben reconocer esto antes de que sea demasiado tarde, o la desafortunada advertencia de Nuestra Señora de Akita sucederá, que los fieles se vean privados de los sacramentos de la Penitencia y la Eucaristía y Órdenes, porque ningún obispo tuvo la sensatez de ver que tenía el derecho apostólico o divino de actuar para preservar la Sagrada Jerarquía durante un papado impedido.

Esto se debe a que, con los Apóstoles ya no en la Tierra, y la Sede de Pedro en silencio, todos y cada uno de los miembros del Colegio de Obispos que permanecen católicos pueden asumir lícitamente los deberes de los Apóstoles para la propagación y preservación de la Fe.

Algunas de las cosas que cualquier obispo, con o sin jurisdicción, puede hacer, por derecho divino o apostólico, durante un papado impedido son las siguientes:

  1. Llamar y convocar un Sínodo o Concilio para condenar las causas de la Sede impedida, o condenar a quienes la están perpetrando. (El Papa Julio II sanciona esto en principio) ****
  2. Llamar y convocar un Sínodo o Concilio para deponer a los demandantes al papado que no tengan títulos canónicos válidos. (Esto se hizo en Sutri en 1046 y fue sancionado por San Pedro Damián, el Papa San Gregorio VII y el Bl. Papa Víctor III)
  3. Reprobar a un papa por renunciar parcialmente y descuidar sus deberes apostólicos del ministerio. (Esto podría decirse que no es tan extremo como los nn. 1 o 2, por lo tanto, también se aprueba ex maiore)
  4. Condenar a los herejes por su nombre, condenar las herejías. (Todos los obispos tienen este deber y derecho por derecho divino y apostólico)
  5. Llamar y convocar un Sínodo o Concilio para condenar las herejías y perversidades que se están propagando por los Enemigos de la Iglesia, ya sea dentro o fuera de la Iglesia.
  6. Ordenar obispos católicos para las diócesis que hayan sido asumidas por un obispo hereje donde el obispo católico haya declarado herejía o apostasía. (San Atanasio de Alejandría hizo esto en muchas ocasiones durante la crisis arriana)
  7. Ordenar sacerdotes y diáconos católicos para los fieles de cada diócesis que se ven privados de los sacramentos debido al clero herético o cismático en su área. (San Atanasio de Alejandría hizo esto en muchas ocasiones durante la crisis arriana)

De hecho, durante los primeros 1500 años de la Iglesia, vemos a obispos regularmente haciendo muchas, si no todas, estas cosas. Tenían el beneficio de no estar plagados de conciencia por la ley positiva de la Iglesia, pero el sistema funcionó. Ahora que la Sede Apostólica, más aún el Vaticano, está completamente impedida y tomada por los herejes, ¡los obispos deben actuar!

Este no es el caso imaginario de los sedevacantistas a los que no les gusta un Papa ni el caso más sólido de los tradicionalistas que no quieren abandonar las tradiciones litúrgicas de su Rito: este es el caso de un ataque frontal directo a la Nueva Alianza: el Depósito de la Fe, las Escrituras y la Tradición, a través de la negación abierta de dogmas y doctrinas y disciplinas clave que provienen de Jesucristo y sus apóstoles.

Oraciones y Peticiones

Por favor oren por los obispos de la Iglesia, porque si no actúan, toda la riqueza, el poder y el prestigio de la Iglesia serán robados por una secta de sodomitas marxistas y cientos de millones de almas perecerán sin la doctrina y los sacramentos debidos.

Por favor, hable también con su obispo, si parece ser algo católico. Esto es crucial Conozco a católicos que tienen contactos y que están haciendo esto ahora. Pero aún queda mucho por hacer.

Los laicos católicos, debido a la inacción de los obispos, se ven obligados a aceptar sacramentos de los herejes y cismáticos y sodomitas perversos. Tienen el derecho divino de ser atendidos pastoralmente por el clero católico que está en comunión con el verdadero Papa. Y este derecho está siendo TRASGRESIDO DE MANERA DEMONÍACA  Y UNIVERSALMENTE en todas las diócesis del mundo católico en la crisis actual.

Tenemos el derecho divino y apostólico de actuar con insistencia y con plena aprobación de la enseñanza y el ejemplo de Cristo.

__________

GERMAN TRANSLATION: https://beatimundocorde.wordpress.com/2020/01/03/divine-and-apostolic-right-german/

ENGLISH ORIGINAL: https://fromrome.wordpress.com/2019/12/23/divine-and-apostolic-right-takes-precedence-in-a-state-of-emergency/

___________

* Utilizo citas aquí, para señalar lo absurdo que es este enfoque, sin ninguna evaluación razonable de los acontecimientos históricos, porque los Cardenales aceptaron una renuncia inválida y luego eligieron inválidamente a un psicópata arco-hereje, por lo que no es exagerado dudar de que los Cardenales están dispuestos o son capaces de reconocer lo que es un fiel católico

** Ex minore es un término técnico de lógica medieval que se refiere a declaraciones (argumentos) que se basan en apelar a algo que es verdadero en un caso menor, y argumenta a partir de eso, que debe ser cierto en un caso mayor. Nuestro Señor hace esto todo el tiempo, por ejemplo, en Sus parábolas del Rey preparándose para la guerra, el arquitecto preparándose para construir una torre, etc., como ejemplos de cómo si la prudencia es necesaria en las cosas terrenales, es aún más necesaria en cuestiones de salvación eterna.

*** Agostino Paravincii Bagliani & Maria Antonietta Visceglia’s, Il Conclave: continutità e mutamenti dal Medioevo a oggi, Viella Editrice, Roma, 2018, pp. 60-61 and p. 62 in fn. 75.

****Este Derecho Apostólico se incorporó en la Si summus rerum Opifex del Papa Julio II, en el Quinto Concilio de Letrán del 16 de febrero de 1513, que disponía que, si se violaba esta ley sobre los cónclaves papales con respecto a una elección simoniaca, los Cardenales que no participaban en la simonía podrían recurrir a un Sínodo o Consejo para destronar al antipapa elegido de forma no canónica. Bagliani y Visceglia, op. cit, p. 40. Esta ley papal se publicó anteriormente como La Bula, Cum tam divino quam humano iure, 14 de enero de 1505 (ibid., P. 39). Este principio, reconocido por el Papa Julio II y el Quinto Concilio de Letrán, es el que autoriza el llamado de los Sínodos “imperfectos” en tiempos de necesidad, como el nuestro.

 

News and Commentary on the Catholic Church

%d bloggers like this: