Monday, May 6, 2019

Pope Paul VI vs. Bugnini

 
By David Martin

If the engineers of the Neo-Reformation were able to advance their plans and bring forth a new Mass for the Church in defiance of centuries of divine guidance, it means they weren’t being watched too carefully. While John XXIII and his men were busy at work preparing for the Second Vatican Council in the years preceding the Council, there lay hidden in the Vatican a secret cabal of liturgical planners whose work would bring discredit to the Church and to the one appointed to lead it, Pope Paul VI.

At the helm was the infamous Msgr. Annibale Bugnini who had long been suspected of conspiracy. He and his clique formed the eye of this ecclesial hurricane that would later uproot the Faith and blow the Bark of Peter off its course.

Bugnini’s work as a liturgist goes back to 1947 when he began a twenty year period as the director of Ephemerides liturgicae, one of Italy’s best known liturgical publications. He contributed to numerous scholarly publications, wrote articles on the liturgy for various encyclopedias and dictionaries and had a number of books published on the subject. But there was a hidden agenda at work from the beginning that slowly began to reveal his perfidious tracks.

Every indication is that Bugnini was Masonic, but Pope John XXIII obviously wasn’t aware of this he made him Secretary of the Preparatory Commission on the Liturgy for the Second Vatican Council that was formed in June 1960. Cardinal Heenan of Westminster even said in his autobiography that “Pope John did not suspect what was being planned by the liturgical experts.”

Pope Paul’s Interview with Fr. Bouyer

As a little example of Bugnini’s deceptive workings in the Vatican, we cite you this little anecdote from 1974. The Consilium for the Reform of the Liturgy had in its ranks a number of liturgists including a Father Louis Bouyer who was opposed to the changes in the Mass. Bugnini argued his cause with Father Bouyer by telling him that Pope Paul VI wanted new changes in the Mass, and then Bugnini told Pope Paul that Bouyer and the ‘Consilium experts’ had decided in favor of these changes. Obviously, it was Bugnini who wanted the changes and Pope Paul later acknowledged to Fr. Bouyer that Bugnini had deceived both of them. The following is an interview that took place between Pope Paul and Fr. Bouyer in 1974.

(Father Louis Bouyer)—I wrote to the Holy Father, Pope Paul VI, to tender my resignation as member of the Commission charged with the Liturgical Reform. The Holy Father sent for me at once and the following conversation ensued:

Paul VI: Father, you are an unquestionable and unquestioned authority by your deep knowledge of the Church’s liturgy and Tradition, and a specialist in this field. I do not understand why you have sent me your resignation, whilst your presence, is more than precious, it is indispensable!

Father Bouyer: Most Holy Father, if I am a specialist in this field, I tell you very simply that I resign because I do not agree with the reforms you are imposing! Why do you take no notice of the remarks we send you, and why do you do the opposite?

Paul VI: But I don’t understand. I’m not imposing anything. I have never imposed anything in this field. I have complete trust in your competence and your propositions. It is you who are sending me proposals. When Fr. Bugnini comes to see me, he says: “Here is what the experts are asking for.” And as you are an expert in this matter, I accept your judgment.

Father Bouyer: When we have studied a question, and have chosen what we can propose to you, in conscience, Father Bugnini took our text, and, then said to us that, having consulted you: “The Holy Father wants you to introduce these changes into the liturgy.” And since I don’t agree with your propositions, because they break with the Tradition of the Church, then I tender my resignation.

Paul VI: But not at all, Father, believe me, Father Bugnini tells me exactly the contrary: I have never refused a single one of your proposals. Father Bugnini came to find me and said: “The experts of the Commission charged with the Liturgical Reform asked for this and that.” And since I am not a liturgical specialist, I tell you again, I have always accepted your judgment. I never said that to Monsignor Bugnini. I was deceived. Father Bugnini deceived me and deceived you.

Father Bouyer: That is, my dear friends, how the liturgical reform was done! (translated from the original French by Fr. Anthony Chadwick.) http://www.leforumcatholique.org/message.

What is noteworthy is that Pope Paul reposed complete confidence in Fr. Bouyer’s judgment on liturgical matters and was happy to let him exert his influence on the Consilium for the retention of tradition in the Mass. Unfortunately, Fr. Bouyer yielded to pressure from other liturgists and eventually dropped out of the Consilium.


29 comments:

Rescued by Mary said...

The Chair is not empty... The Chair, is not there...



It seems clear to me that the Chair of Peter is the Throne of Infallibility for the Papacy in Rome.

Almighty God made no such promise to always keep aflame the Divine light of Infallibility for all the world to see.

He only promised a continued succession of a Papacy, were it to remain in the world.


This is not heresy, it is the tragic reality that Pope Pius IX warned us of, were we to reject the moral government of God in the Papacy.

The Chair is not empty. The Chair is not there...

Look, Peter was not confirmed in the faith when Christ rebuked him...

The Apostle Paul may have rebuked some fella named Simon, but it was NOT Saint Peter...

Jesus also prayed for Peter that his faith fail not. Now, either His prayer was answered or it wasn’t...!!!

Peter’s faith NEVER FAILED. NEVER..!!!

The Roman’s know full well what real papal infallibility truly is. And they are using it against an ignorant church of people who have no idea that the papacy has been taken away from them...!!!


Henry Cardinal Manning could see the storm coming when he made this description of the
Vatican Council of 1870:

“The Council has thus made provision for the Church in its time of trial, when it may be, not only Ecumenical Councils cannot be held, but even the ordinary administration of ecclesiastical government and consultation may be hardly possible.

“Peters bark is ready for the storm. All that is needful is already on board. Past ages were wild and perilous, but the future bids fair to exceed them in violence, as a hurricane exceeds an ordinary storm. . .

The Church has, therefore, its provision for faith and truth, unity and order. The floods may come, the rain descend, and the winds blow and beat upon it, but it cannot fall because it is founded upon Peter.”

(“The Vatican Council and its definitions”, pages 164-165, 1871 edition)



Behold the words of our humble Angelic Pope:

“We are determined to retain all the dominions of this Holy See and its rights whole, entire, and unviolated, and to transmit them to Our successors. We declare all usurpations to be unjust, violent, null, and void. We announce now that any acts committed by Our enemies and invaders to confirm these usurpations-either at the present time or in the future- are condemned by Us and null and invalid. Furthermore, We protest before God and the whole Catholic world that while detained in such captivity, We are unable to exercise Our supreme pastoral authority safely, expediently, and freely…

We declare openly, mindful of Our office and Our oath, that We will never assent to a conciliation or an agreement which in any way may destroy or diminish Our rights and therefore those of God and the Holy See. In like manner We confess that for the Church of Christ We are prepared, with the help of divine grace, to drink to the dregs that cup which the Lord first deigned to drink for Her. We will never accept and obey unjust demands which are presented to Us.

And indeed as Our predecessor Pius VII said:

“To do violence to this highest power of the Apostolic See, to disjoin its temporal authority and its spiritual power, to disassociate, separate by force and cut off the duties of Pastor and Prince, is nothing less than to overturn and destroy the work of God. It is nothing less than to attempt to inflict the greatest damage on religion and to deprive it of its most effective defense. Then the highest Ruler of the Church would be
unable to offer help to the Catholics spread all over the earth, who request his help and support because of his spiritual power.”

Rescued by Mary said...

Many may in danger of anathematizing themselves with this Sedevacantist position they are entertaining...

The Recognize and Resist camp see the truth of what I am saying, but fail to understand the true nature of Infallibility. So they set out to insist that the Pope need not be obeyed because he could actually be a heretic himself. And they inevitably destroy the Papacy in doing so.

The Secevacantists will insist that the Chair of Peter could in fact be empty, but have mixed views on Papal Infallibility.

What they all have failed to see, was the inevitable result of a world gone mad, in their utter rejection of the Divine right of God within human governments...

And a church that has no idea, that the Papacy has been taken away from them...


Please carefully review Pope Pius IX in his Infallible statement below...

It clearly forbids the idea that the Chair of Peter can be vacant. It must be a perpetual line of successors.

“If then, any should deny that it is by the institution of Christ the Lord and by Divine right, that Blessed Peter should have a perpetual line of successors in the Primacy over the Universal Church, or that the Roman Pontiff' is the successor of Blessed Peter in this primacy; let him be anathema.”


This is not saying that that there will always be a Pope on the Chair of Peter.

It doesn’t say that. Read it again...

It says that if anyone denies that Blessed Peter 'should' have a perpetual line of successors in the Primacy over the Universal Church... let him be anathema.

SHOULD DOES NOT MEAN WOULD...!!!

Almighty God NEVER assured you that there would always be a Pope...

Pope Pius IX said that no one may deny that there “should” be a Pope, not that there necessarily “would” be one...!!!

The sin of presumption may get the best of you, if you don’t watch out.

I'm sorry to tell you, but Our Heavenly Father very well may chosen to take the Papacy away from us. And there is nothing to stop Him from doing so.


This is the problem with all of the Sedevacantists...

The Papacy MUST have a clear visible line of successors on the Chair.

Pope Pius IX clearly states that to separate the temporal and spiritual authority of the Papacy is to destroy the very work of God.

He died a prisoner in the Vatican, holding out to the bitter end for the temporal authority, rather than compromise the truth and enjoy the pleasures of apostasy for a season.

As I have said previously, the whole world rejected the Papacy and its temporal authority, therefore the work of God in the Papacy was destroyed. Our forefathers have called down this scourge of Divine judgement upon us.

The Bishop of Portugal possessed no protection of infallibility, and had the Vatican had such protection in 1930, She could and would have reversed the decision concerning the deluded approval of Fatima...

But alas, the Papacy had been abandoned by an ungrateful world, and a church unwilling to defend Her...

Rescued by Mary said...

A curse to mankind...!!!

That evil prayer that actually comes from Islam...!!! Added to every Rosary by that wayward wolf in sheep clothing, shepherding a blinded flock from Portugal...

But pastor dumb dog at your antichrist church will never tell you this...

The three little children would have no way of knowing this so a demonic spirit had to have told them...

The Muslim Koran is where this smut originates...

Oh my jesus, forgive us our sins, save us from the fires of hell...

“Oh, lord! Surely we believe, therefore forgive us our faults and save us from the torment of the fire.”

Aal-e-Imran, Chapter 3, Verse 16


So you go ahead and keep praying to your devil lady....!!!

Disgusting heretical Roman Apostates...!!!

Kneel down and push your forehead into the ground, EXACTLY like the fallen angel told you to,

https://thesecularbrownie.files.wordpress.com/2016/03/n00021501-b.jpg


And then hit the play button...!!!

https://quran.com/3/16

Islam conquered Rome at Fatima. Once you finally see this, things will begin to become clear.

Little wonder why all these occupants of the papal throne have seen fit to kiss the Koran.

They can kiss my ass...!!!



Pope Pius IX was the Angelic Pope, prophesied by the Catholic Mystic for his day.

And Emperor Franz Joseph of Austria was his Great Monarch...!!!

The Three Days of Darkness are upon us. And grosser darkness the people...

Our Saviour lives out His life, vicariously, through His Church.

And having recently completed Her Dolorosa, the Church now, is in the Tomb...

The second Vatican council neither recanted any heresy, nor was the cause of the social maladies that afflict the world and church today...

The Vatican 2ew council was but the incision by the Great Physician, that excised the putrid malification from the Body of Christ that had been festering there for generations, for all the world to see...

Do not confuse the Papal Chair with the Bark of Peter...

Let us hold fast all the dogmas of the faith, inviolate, and pray for deliverance from the Divine judgments that are upon all of mankind; And for the resurrection of the Catholic Church, when we will once again worship God, as in Ancient days...

RbM

Anonymous said...

As with past articles in a similar vein, the thrust of this one seems to be to exonerate Paul VI for his manifold failings. Apparently he was just utterly incapable, through no fault of his own, of opposing Bugnini and his ilk. Poor Paul VI...so deceived by Bugnini, but he just couldn't do anything about it but wring his hands, whisper about the "smoke of Satan" entering the Church (which he and John XXIII invited in), and let the Church follow the path to perdition. What a Saintly Pope, eh?

And RbM above needs serious mental and spiritual help.

Tancred said...

He made a mockery of papal authority, inmho.

Rescued by Mary said...

You must be one of those obstinate fatimites.

John F. Kennedy said...

PP6 knew he was being lied to and knew that the changes were NOT what respect experts wanted or demanded, BUT STILLED implemented them? What a joke. A traitor to God and His Church

Anonymous said...

"Louis Bouyer, Cong. Orat. (17 February 1913 – 22 October 2004) was a French Lutheran minister who was received into the Catholic Church in 1939. During his religious career he was a scholar who was relied upon during the Second Vatican Council.

"He was known for his books on Christian spirituality and its history. Along with Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger and others, he was a co-founder of the international review Communio. He was chosen by the pope to be part of a team to initiate the International Theological Commission in 1969...Twice appointed by the pope to the International Theological Commission, he was a consultant at the Second Vatican Council for the liturgy, the Congregation of Sacred Rites and Secretariat for Christian Unity."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_Bouyer

"Communio is a federation of theological journals, founded in 1972 by Joseph Ratzinger, Hans Urs von Balthasar, Henri de Lubac, Walter Kasper, Marc Ouellet, Louis Bouyer, and others. Communio, now published in fifteen editions (including German, English and Spanish), has become one of the most important journals of Catholic thought.[citation needed] The journals are independently edited, but also publish translations of each other's articles.

"It is often considered to be the sister publication and theological rival to the journal Concilium, which was founded in 1965 intending to keep the "spirit of Vatican II" in the church after the sessions of the Second Vatican Council had ended and the council fathers returned to their respective dioceses."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communio

I couldn't figure out why this blog would be running a series trying to exonerate Paul VI of responsibility for the New Mass (Incline not my heart to evil words; to make excuses for sins). I did notice that Mr. Martin never defined exactly where the new mass went wrong (!just that it wasn't Paul VI's fault!). In your next "report," Mr. Martin, maybe you will do that, because I personally don't think any of Bouyar's protestant 'communio' friends would change (for the better) one word of Paul VI's protestant communion service. Since you belong to the Paul VI, JP1, JP2, Ratzinger camp (pun intended) of Satan smoke blowing modernist liars, I don't think you would either. How brainwashed opus devilish: reporting lies of liars just to mislead people who are only reading your lies because they assume you want the traditional Mass back, but what you really intend is to keep them firmly ensconced in the VC2 church of Satan until they wake up in hell.

Tancred said...

Why don’t you start your own blog? If you don’t like having open discussions about things related to this important topic, go over to David Honbon’s blog. Does he even have a blog?

I try to take these comments in stride, but amount of presumption and pride involved in these posts is breathtaking.

Who are you anyway, to make comments like this? I know a few seeds, but I’ve never met anyone this pushy and full of himself.

gregoriusmagnus said...

I have read this and heard this before. I just don't buy it. The buck stopped with Paul VI. He could have stopped everything in its tracks, if he wanted to. "Holy Father, from today you must wear ladies' underwear". "Well, I am not an expert in this field, but okay I agree. Give me a break...pathetic.

Tancred said...

Louis Bouyer is a critic of the litirgical reform as much as anything else. I had no idea he was an enemy of Bugnini.
That certainly puts him in a better camp, but I find the idea that Paul VI wasn’t aware of what was going on in his name to be difficult to swallow. Indeed, we see how his subordinates were going against his apparent, at least public, will and he did nothing to stop it when he found out.

Rescued by Mary said...

Giovanni Battista Enrico Antonio Maria Montini was a faggot .

Dagger John died in January 3, 1864. The Vatican I Council wasn’t convoked by Pope Pius IX until June 29, 1868…

The general populace, including the dominant protestants, had no fear at all for the pre-Vatican II pope’s and clergy back then. The First Vatican Council hadn’t even been convened at that point.
After a period of planning and preparation that began on 6 December 1864, the twentieth ecumenical council of the Catholic Church, held three centuries after the Council of Trent, opened on 8 December 1869 and adjourned on 20 October 1870…

Pius IX, as well as the council fathers, were crystal clear, that if the Papacy were to lose the temporal authority, it would be nothing less than to overturn and destroy the work of God…

Our Angelic Pope Pius IX goes on to say in:
Inter Multiplices

Pleading for Unity of Spirit
Pope BI. Pius IX – 1853

7. “Now you know well that the most deadly foes of the Catholic religion have always waged a fierce war, but without success, against this Chair; they are by no means ignorant of the fact that religion itself can never totter and fall while this Chair remains intact, the Chair which rests on the rock which the proud gates of hell cannot overthrow[5] and in which there is the whole and perfect solidity of the Christian religion.”

“…while this Chair remains intact,…” He said…
But the Chair cannot remain intact without the temporal authority…

It is not the Chair that the gates will never overthrow, but the foundation it rests upon, the Rock itself…

And a careful review of Church history will show this. The See of Rome no longer remained infallible after the death of Pope Pius IX. We lost the Papacy when we lost the Papal States.
But the purveyors of this modern ‘catholicanity’ that we have seen take shape over the last 140 years, up to our present time, have given us this Vatican 2ew church, which bears no resemblance to real Catholicity…

And the “traditionalists” would have us return to pre-vatican II theology with a bastardized Latin liturgy, as if that will somehow deliver us all from the impending doom that looms over the heads of all of humanity, and save us from the Babylonian harlot…

The harsh reality is that we have a heretic on the Vatican City State Stool, because there in no Papacy in Rome…

You cannot have a Catholic Papacy without temporal authority.

RbM

Anonymous said...

I read another article of a conversation Paul VI had weeks before he died with a famous French philosopher, who was also his friend. Apparently Paul VI had a feeling that his days were short, so he felt free to speak. Among the most interesting things he said was, regarding Vatican II. Of the Council he said that when he was elected, it was as if " I was the conductor of a train, forced to chart a course that I myself would not have chosen...."
In other words, had there been no Vatican II in session, he never would have called one. I also read that already, before he even was elected, he could sense the Council was off course, but when elected was too weak to either change direction, or cancel it/close it down.
He was also asked by a close priest associate, if he had ever thought of closing the Council after his election. He did not answer yes, or no. He only said that "it had already gone too far."
He had a reputation as an indecisive pope, who took forever to make up his mind and agonized about it even after he made a decision. Unfortunatly, his decisions except for Humanae Vitae, were nearly always wrong.
Pope Francis is the opposite. He is a radical liberal, bent on pushing thru his own disasterous agenda, and will run roughshod over anyone who opposes him. Unless he is brought down by his own Cardinals and bishops. And we know that that is very unlikely.

Damian Malliapalli

Tancred said...

In Paul VI’s defense, he was constantly under threat of assassination (once in the Philippines and another time in Rome when it looked like someone had loosened the lintel of the Holy Door which fell on him as he opened it. The stones fell on his forearms af the last second as he backed away from the door. It looked bad enough to have broken his arms, but I don’t know. He also lost his close friend, Aldo Moro, had been murdered by the Red Brigades. Maybe Paul VI wasn’t as robust as JPII.

gm said...

Pope Paul VI was making a mess in the Church long before Francis. Alice von Hildebrand wife of the great Catholic philosopher Dietrich von Hildebrand, reported that during his audience with Paul VI, von Hildebrand told the Pope, "Holy Father do you know what theologians are saying, do you know what the liturgists are doing? Paul VI would not hear it but asked him to write it down and dismissed him.

Anonymous said...

How on earth could you post such blasphemous remarks against Our Lady?!? Shame on you!

Margaret

Athelstane said...

I'm afraid that all that Bouyer's testimony does is to confirm that Bugnini was a manipulative liar.

It doesn't exculpate Paul VI for the creation of the new missal.

Anonymous said...

"when it looked like someone had loosened the lintel of the Holy Door which fell on him as he opened it. The stones fell on his forearms af the last second as he backed away from the door. It looked bad enough to have broken his arms, but I don’t know"

I saw that on YouTube. It was just a mess of plaster, but it was a freak accident, not an assassination attempt. It brushed against Paul's shoulder and startled him. Had it been bigger pieces, it could have done significant harm. But it was just small chunks that came loose when the door was rolled away.
Nowadays for a Holy Year, all that is cleaned away and the actuall door is there which the Pope taps with the hammer. Of course that is the correct way.....unless you're Pope Francis and decide to just push it open and throw away the nearly 800 year old tradition of tapping the door with the golden or silver hammer.
But of course we all know that he's very good at throwing tradition away, and Catholic belief and practice.

Whoever here once stated that Francis wants a global government (world government rather than the independent nations, is right. Horrible as it is, he called for it in Bulgaria and Macedonia this week. He seriously needs to be removed.

Damian Malliapalli

Anonymous said...

Hard to believe none have commented that Paul VI himself is supposed to have been a Mason according to research of Don Villa.

https://www.cathinfo.com/fighting-errors-in-the-modern-world/paul-vis-moms-masonic-tomb/

Paul VI wanted Giordano Gamberini (1915-2003) 7 to be part of the steering committee of the Bibbia Concordata 8. Gamberini was grandmaster of the Grand Orient of Italy, one of the founders and “bishop”, under the name of Tau Julianus, of the Italian Gnostic Church. Gamberini was responsible for the translation of the Gospel of St. John. He later wrote the funeral eulogy of Paul VI in La Rivista Massonica9:
To us, it is the death of him who made the condemnation [of Freemasonry] of Clement XII and of his successors fall. That is, it is the first time – in the history of modern Freemasonry – that the Head of the greatest Western religion dies not in a state of hostility with the Freemasons. […] F or the first time in history, the Freemasons can pay respect to the tomb of a Pope, without ambiguities or contradiction 10.
— On June 2, 1971, Paul VI received a public audience, at the Vatican, of the members of the “Masonic Lodge” of the B’nai B’rith, and he addressed them thus:
Dear friends, it is with joy that we welcome to St. Peters your distinguished group of leaders of the Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith 11
— Under Paul VI the suppression of the excommunication of the Freemasons was prepared. In August 1972 Cardinal Seper, prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, communicated to Fr. Riquet S.J.:

“The interpretation of Canon 2335 restricting the excommunication to members of the associations that act against the Church can be admitted.”

Two years later Cardinal Seper addressed a letter to Msgr. Krol, president of the episcopal conference of the United States. Due to the large diversity of situations from country to country, the cardinal explained, the Holy See did not change the general legislation in force “until the new Code of Canon Law be published by the competent pontifical commission“. For particular cases the penal law “should always be interpreted restrictively” ; but, he continues :

“One can thus surely teach and apply the opinion of the authors saying that Canon 2335 concerns only the Catholics who are part of associations that act against the Church

http://www.dominicansavrille.us/saint-paul-vi/

Rescued by Mary said...

The lady of good success

Why I Comdemn the lady of good success

By: RbM


The lady of good success is a fraud for the following reasons...

The new and novel idea of the “Victim Soul” originated here, having never appeared within catholic thought before the invention of this devotion.

This wretched creature supposedly said that Jesus Christ desires to give Marianna de Jesus Torres, “every type of suffering,” in order to save souls...

Reminiscent of the Fatima Delusion here, it reeks of the foul odor of the demonic. Just as fartima supposedly predicts the future through the writings of Lucia don Santos, after it already happened, so we see similarities not only in the false doctrine of this devotion, but in its propagation as well...

It would have us believe that it was telling of twentieth century, as it was being released in the twentieth century...!

The stupid thing wasn’t “approved” until 1991...!!!

Whoever is responsible for inventing all the sensational and fascinating aspects of this stupidity obviously was following the example of prognostigators of Fatima...


The creeps that authored this hoax did the same thing to Mother Marianna that the fatimites did to Jacinta Marto...

The simple and plain truth of the matter, is that:

IT NEVER HAPPENED...!!!


The little men who follow after this ridiculous fairy tale, do so because their intellect has been darkened through their rejection of Papal Infallibility...

Look, if you’ll believe this stupid sh*t, you’ll believe anything....!!!

And indeed, they have. This is not saving faith.

It is credulity...



RbM

JBQ said...

It is dangerous to presume that John XXIII was a well meaning illiterate who was taken to the woodshed by liberal manipulators. After all, he was the one quoted as saying that the three little children of Fatima (8,9,10) were "prophets of doom". He had Masonic links and from every indication was intentionally reforming the Church away from its religious roots to one more sympathetic to everyday life.

Rescued by Mary said...


Lucia Don Santos is Baphomet


Lucia Don Santos is Baphomet. The devil’s darling, the chosen vessel for the infestation of the damnable dunce himself, the little lying manipulator of Portugal.

The memoirs of the little liar tell a tale of a cleverly devised fable, one for the propagation of the spirit of antichrist and his denial of the Incarnation of the Magnanimous Son of God.

Who would have ever thought that the anti-christ would have his anti-mary.

But this is just what Lucia has given us. The most monstrous and grotesque distortion of the Gospel of God that could have ever been devised in the criminal mind of a created creature

- “Sacrifice yourself”…

Such a despicable wrenching of scripture from its relation could have only been hatched in the bowels of the pit itself, by none other than the enemy of all that is good, pure and holy - satan.

The difference between Sacrifice and Satisfaction is a distinction that seems to have eluded the darkened intellects of catholicity in our modern time...

We may offer our sufferings to God on behalf of others, but to sacrifice is reserved for Lord God Jesus Christ and Him alone...!!!

The Fairytale of Fatima is one which would twist the truth of Catholic doctrine into something that was so distorted and perverse, that were it not for the Strong Delusion that accompanied it, sent by the Hand of God Himself, it would have been rejected outright and condemned as the heretical and apostate counterfeit that it was.

But alas…! The judgement of God is upon us, and what shall we do now…?

Obey Mother and Father; a concept that seems to be totally absent from the wicked and deplorable heart of the daughter of Baphomet, Lucia Don Santos, with the way she would mock and ridicule her parents in her memoirs...

A child that would conspire with the prince of darkness, to murder her unwilling co-conspirators, the wayward children of Fatima, Francisco and Jacinta.

For they alone drank of the chalice of deception, filled with the adrenalineized blood of beasts sacrificed to devils...

A more tragic story has never been told, than the death of two baptized children of God, victims as the Hänsel und Gretel of Catholicism.




RbM

Peter W said...

Bats aplenty in the Belfry tonight.

Tancred said...

And a gay enabler.

Anonymous said...

The Fatima prayer is optional while praying the Holy Rosary.
There is nothing wrong with it but I avoid it some days due to time restrictions.
-Andrew

Anonymous said...

Pius XII was a world class wrecking ball from 1951-1958 but no one wants to discuss his astounding "Alterations."
-Andrew

Rescued by Mary said...

That’s because he was nothing more than a stooled goat in disguise sitting upon the Vatican City State Stool.

Pontificating down upon an ignorant church of people that had no idea that the Papacy had been taken away from them ...

It’s sad. So sad... Trolling about the Vatican gardens having delusions of spinning suns in his head...


RbM

Anonymous said...

"But one of them, named Caiphas, being the high priest that year, said to them: You know nothing. Neither do you consider that it is expedient for you that one man should die for the people, and that the whole nation perish not."

You could write a blog post defending Caiphas. Set it up: Caiphas vs Judas (and all the other apostles, actually you could go the extra mile like Francis and blame Jesus Himself).

Caiphas didn't know Jesus was the Messiah (and John didn't tell him because he wanted the high priest's job back in his family (you know how ambitious (and violent) John and James were (not to mention their mom)). It was Judas the thief who really betrayed Jesus. And you can see from the quote above, the Sanhedrin were no help either. Caiphas couldn't know everything and he was just trying to help the people and save the nation. He was the first Liberation Theologist. It was really his father in law (and his wife) who were greedy. Caiphas was the good guy caught in a bad situation w/bad advisors and he was having a bad hair year too. Sure he killed the Son of God. But it wasn't his fault! He really didn't know what he was doing (remember Jesus said forgive them, they know not what they're doing). None of them but Judas knew! That's why he hung himself--he was a mason besides being a thief. The other apostles should have done something or the Sanhedrin shouldn't have given Caiphas bad advice or his father-in-Law shouldn't have threatened him w/divorce (if you want to know the real truth, everyone, including John and James kept trying to assassinate him so he was in fear for his life most of the time which doesn't lead to good decision-making). Here's the real deal (Sr. Lucia told this to Cardinal Siri who told it to me right before he died): ultimately it was God's will the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass be axed. You can say it was His permissive will if you feel like it or you can flat out lie that He never instituted the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass at all, but whatever you do, don't hold J23, P6, JP1, JP2, B16 or Francis responsible for anything. That would destroy the Catholic Church! And you know how many souls would go to hell if that happened.

Tancred said...

Oh, humor.

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...