How to Break Free from the Changeling (Synodal) Church

Well, Friends,

The fox is among the chickens now. Bergoglio, the anti-pope (definitely an anti-Christ is his miserable way; at least a Changeling "pope") has let the fox in among the hens. I would love to ask Dr. Peter Kwasniewski, perhaps the most famous (amongst Trads in the States) of the "Francis is really pope!" apologists, "Well, Professor, Bergoglio has just gutted the Catholic Church like gutting a fish; he's opened it with a sharp knife titled Fiducia supplicans to endless discrimination lawsuits, as "Gay, Inc." will be providing "couples" calling conservative parishes asking for a "blessing (with flowers, invited guests, special music, the works – but of course it isn't marriage, wink-wink, nod-nod) and who will be absolutely geared to sue the cassock off any priest who denies them. They can legally raise all Hell (literally) via Fiducia supplicans. So, Kwasniewski, what sayest thou now?"

Not very charitable of me, and I'm sure the Prof is a very nice man. But, his fence-sitting has betrayed us. 

John Zmirak at The Stream has sharply harped on this homosexuals-suing-the-Church here, adding his voice to many, many others who have argued this is some way. Myself, I would ask readers to pause a moment and reflect: How much money have the homosexuals cost us? Sure, they've cost the Changeling Church millions of members who have left or are leaving in utter disgust, and they've cost the Church her priceless reputation, respect, and MOST OF ALL, T.R.U.S.T. 

But just consider how much actual cashola they've cost the Church. One study I saw from 1986, I think it was, stated that only 26 percent of Roman Catholic clergy were heterosexual. Homosexual men prey on, or if somehow they resist, still lust heartily on, teenage boys. Grown men and teenage boys is the classic paradigm. It was that way in Ancient Greece's Golden Age (adult men had to train teens in the art of war, using weapons, etc., and over time this morphed into carnal activity). It was that way in China during periods of decadence, and it is that way in the Arab Muslim world, as first detailed for Westerners by Richard Francis Burton, the famous English 19th century explorer. 

So put them in among boys and the lusts of such perverts will wear down even the strongest willed of them. No one trying to break the chains of alcoholism takes a job in a liquor store or a bar. Sodomites have cost the Church literally billions of dollars – and again, the spiritual and morale disaster these degenerates have cost us is beyond staggering, and beyond counting..

Even the new Mass, the Novus Ordo, is effeminate, and encourages a flashy "performance" from the Cranmer's table (er, a.k.a. "altar"). It is like it was designed for narcissists.

Now Bergoglio has opened the floodgates to simply endless litigation and the "cancellation" of endless numbers of what true-believing, orthodox heterosexual priests remain.

And of course, here's the kicker: the laity won't remain. They've left Catholicism since 1965 by 100s of millions, literally. But now it is the turn of the remainders. The Remnant. You are a father or a mother of kids you want to raise in righteousness (justice, God-fearing and God-respecting), and after much searching you found a TLM or a N.O. that at least truly tries to be orthodox. And BANG! the bishop removes your parish priest for Non-Compliance to Gay Inc.'s demands. What are you going to do? By DEFINITION, the replacement can't be orthodox or a real believer (or he would fear God too much to do such a blasphemous thing). Solution: Vote with Your Feet. Leave. Soon, the mainstream Church will only have "Church Ladies" (a.k.a. "Karens"). The carnal vampires that are 'Gay, Inc." certainly won't fill the pews. Haha, NO ONE in his right mind would think they would, even for a second.

So, Amici, my friends, the only question is:

How do we break the "Roman Catholic Church" free from the Synodal "Changeling" Church? Will Bishop Strickland be the only one (I doubt it, but Grace accomplishes miracles) to stand up and say, "I announce and promulgate, as heir of the Apostles, that Jorge Mario Bergoglio has abandoned the chair of Peter and the See of Rome, and my banishment is null and void, and I call ALL the "cancelled" priests to me to accept faculties that I will bestow on them to confect the sacraments, either by the Novus Ordo or the ancient, glorious Vetus Ordo."

So, who will this be? Strickland? Schneider? Schneider's Archbishop, Tomasz Peta? Some African bishop, or bishop's conference? Probably one of the latter.

However it is to be done, it has to be done. And the sooner the better. No more Professor Kwasniewski fence-sitting.

          AnP

Cardinl Sticker's post Vatican II Confessions, the New Mass, destruction of the TLM

Amici,

Alfons Cardinal Stickler's essay a about the shock of seeing his Vatican II actual Council work being undone, indeed, eviscerated, in the later 1960s has been republished just now by the New Liturgical Movement. 

I couldn't read all of it – I just go rabid-dog crazy. Stickler and his contemporaries KNEW by 1967 that what was going down was adult male bovine excrement. They knew – precisely because they had their heads so far up Vat II's derrière – that Montini and Bugnini were screwing them over. Sticker reports on his going to see old Cardinal Benno Gut, and they sit around, like so many others, shaking their heads, wringing their hands, crying in their soup, a bunch of helpless prey for obvious mountebanks and charlatans. (And Freemasons, of course.) And Montini (if that guy's an actual saint, I'm the Prophet Muhammad – "peace be upon me") would cry around even more than the others, and complain when confronted with the Bug's liturgical realities, but never reverse the mess, and exiling the Bug to Iran was far, far, far too little too late.

Did you ever hear of the time Archbishop Lefebvre tried to actually see that miserable Montini? Montini was absolutely terrified of Lefebvre. Just terrified. And had his major lackys keep Lefebvre away until the most important one of those was on vacation and inside-the-Vatican friends of Lefebvre got him into the pope's presence. Montini had to see him briefly and was visibly in utter terror. Absolutely, utterly, comprehensibly pathetic. And Lefebvre, known for his kind demeanor, was a real man – had spent most of his career in Africa in the missions. His father had been in the Resistance and was murdered by the Nazis.

So then after "The Weeper" Montini, we get John Paul I, who got himself killed only 33 days in, and then Karol Karol Wojtyła, an actual man (imagine!) and hero against both Nazis and Commies, him they tried to bump him off three years after electing him (okay, the Russians tried it via the Bulgarians, but still), leaving him half the man he had been, going about kissing the Koran and apologizing to all and sundry, especially Jews, who took it to mean apologizing for trying to convert any Jews in the last two millenna! And then we get Benedict, Ratzinger the Intellectual, smartest man in the office since Leo III. Ratziger knows the score; he prays for protection from the wolves after he's elected, and HE gets tossed for promulgating Summorum Pontificum. And THEN THEY INSTALL BERGI! THE OGRE Peronista! This recent, pathetically written, utterly asinine new Bergoglio document, the impossible to pronounce Desiderio Desideravi, full of lies, direct lies, and repeated old hoary lies like a drunk's vomit is full of puke, as see here. 

My friends, this dying Vatican II church is one huge SNAFU mess, and its decline has happened and is happening right before our eyes. 

Just unbelievable. But reality.

AnP

The Traditional Latin Mass as Training for Heaven

Sometimes I’m asked “Why the Latin?” in regards to the Traditional Latin Mass, or more rarely, “Why all the rigmarole?” I remember a youngish nun (some thirty years ago now) asking in a very acidic tone, “What’s the point of praying in Latin?” Such questions, especially asked in that acerbic tone, remind me of a scene in one of those juvenile Austin Powers movies (I forget which one) where in Dr. Evil has concocted some bizarre method of doing away with Austin Powers, and Dr. Evil’s very American-like teenage son says in exasperation, “Just shoot him. Don’t go to all this trouble; he’ll likely escape anyway. Just shoot him.” (I’m paraphrasing from distant memory.) Dr. Evil stares in disgust at his son and says, “You just don’t get it, do you?”

I no longer remember now what I said to the nun, if anything, but perhaps, in that context and with that particular individual, this answer is as good as any: “You just don’t get it, do you?” In other words, she wasn’t disposed to hear a real reason; it was self-evidently stupid to her and she wouldn’t have been inclined to consider an explanation. It was inherently unreasonable to her. She was also a nun in the modern nun sense, no habit, no apparent religious status or affiliation at all. (I would never have guessed she was a nun if she hadn’t been introduced to me as such by an aunt.) But for everyone else in the world, for those Catholics or Protestants who might bring up why Traditional Catholics (and the Orthodox) prefer “all the rigmarole”, there is a very simple answer: the Mass is preparation for Heaven.

It’s not rocket science to figure this out, although it is spiritual science. God is a mystery; indeed, THE Mystery, and both humans and angels can easily spend all eternity in an eternal contemplation and communion with God and never remotely “know all there is to know.” (We can loosely “image” eternity with God, but we can’t really conceive it, any more than we can conceive of God.) That’s what the Old Mass – and of course the Orthodox liturgies – convey: we’re entering into the Eternal Presence and utter Mystery that is God. Yet it is essential to note that for Christians, God is in no way unknowable to us. In Islam, God is unknowable: the Islamic afterlife for men is a carnal one, and a man’s women from this life must endure forever their husband’s carnal frolicking with the legendary 72 virgins; but Allah is not there. Wherever Allah is; he’s far above the “Garden of Allah”. In the religions further Eastward, all human individuals lose their individual selves in maya, a spiritual non-existence of spiritual existence soup, with some of them perhaps to be reborn on Earth once again to do it all over.

In Christianity, however, God is a Person, indeed, Three Persons in one God, and we’ll spend forever in a most personal knowing – an eternal getting acquainted – of this Absolute Being. Angels do this already. Their minds are mirrored back to them in God, each of the nearly innumerable angels having his own presence in and with God. And they thus reflect the glory of God. The higher angels in the nine choirs shine more brightly than the lower ones because the hierarchy of Heaven gives each his unique place, closer in to or farther out from God, and of course all angels, being pure spirits, greatly reflect in their natures the received glory of the Absolute Spirit. (Even devils, according to one old tradition, can’t escape from the glory of God: the fires of Hell are nothing more than the very presence of God endured by those who have eternally rejected Him; I’ll pass on opining whether this idea is true or not, but it certainly makes sense: their rejection of God is eternal, but since God Himself is eternal, they can never escape His presence).

Human beings, those admitted to Heaven, can now participate in this Beatific Vision because of the Incarnation. The Second Person of the Holy Trinity is now a Man, both Man and God. But why was that necessary? God took on human nature in order to elevate human nature to the point where it could take on God’s divine nature, making us “new creations in Christ.” This teaching is stated in many ways throughout the New Testament. Examples: John 1:12 “But to all who received him, who believed in his name, he gave power to become children of God; 13 who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.” (Obviously, a new creation.) St. Paul states it succinctly in 2 Cor 5:17, “Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, the new creation has come: The old has gone, the new is here!” The chief of the Apostles puts it best in 2 Peter 1:4: “By whom He hath given us most great and precious promises: that by these you may be made partakers of the divine nature: flying the corruption of that concupiscence which is in the world.” “Partakers of the Divine Nature.” (BTW, St. Paul mentions the idea quite often: see Romans 6:4, 7:6, 12:2; Galatians 3:27; Ephesians 4:22-24; Colossians 3:8-12.) And to return to St. John for a moment, he goes into great detail, not only for the necessity of the Most Holy Eucharist in the 6^th chapter of his gospel, but – with this new creation idea in mind, reread the 3^rd chapter of his gospel about being “born again”.

In the Eastern Churches, this transformation in Christ is called Theosis, and in the West, Divinization, or more likely you’ll have encountered it as the “infusion of grace” by which we are saved. As “Divinization” may seem outlandish to some Catholics, recall St. Athanasius: "For the Son of God became man so that we might become God." (De inc. 54, 3: PG 25, 192B) and [CCC 460] and of course St. Thomas Aquinas: "The only-begotten Son of God, wanting to make us sharers in his divinity, assumed our nature, so that he, made man, might make men gods." (Opusc. 57, 1-4) [CCC 460]. The Incarnation made this infusion of grace possible, as through baptism Original Sin is removed, and then through the Holy Eucharist, we can receive into ourselves God Himself, transforming our nature to a higher form, one that can endure the Beatific Vision experienced by the Angelic Host. God’s Real Presence in the Holy Eucharist is the New Covenant, for the New Testament isn’t the 27 books of the Christian Bible but the Holy Eucharist itself. (The New Testament came to be called that because it describes God’s saving work through the Holy Eucharist.)

Of course, Orthodoxy and Catholicism have their differences, which in a mostly cultural and linguistic way existed before the split in 1054, and which has grown since, but both are “Christianity of the Real Presence”, unlike Protestantism, which although it is a direct offspring of Catholicism, is proudly the Christianity of the Real Absence. From Luther and Calvin on, the Real Presence of God in the Holy Eucharist is denied: whereas in Catholicism Christ is ontologically present, in Protestantism Christ is present only in a  mnemic sense – the memory of His life and death on Earth 2,000 years ago, so it exhibits quite a different understanding of the importance for the Incarnation. Whereas Historical Christianity teaches we are changed in our nature, Protestantism (generally) teaches our nature remains sinful and fallen, but God allows us into Heaven even so: thus Luther’s famous Simul Justus et Peccator, simultaneously justified with God and going to Heaven, but yet a sinner in our nature, as in Luther’s analogy of a manure pile covered with snow. (N.B. C.S. Lewis contested this idea in his 10^th letter in his Letters to Malcom, Chiefly on Prayer.)

Now, all this is truly a Mysterium Fidei, a Mystery of Faith, and the old Mass (and Eastern Liturgies) are our introduction to it, just as in them we receive Our Blessed Lord intimately, in Holy Communion. The old liturgy seems to the newcomer – especially a newcomer raised in the New Mass of Paul VI or the generalized Protestant worship services – to be arcane, esoteric, impenetrable, and mysterious. Latin itself is only one element of all of this profundity. Yet the Old Mass existed to introduce you to the Mystery that is God. (And the New Mass exists to remove the Mystery. But that’s a subject for another essay.) God is all these profound mysteries to us, and far more. The Old Mass is our boot camp, our basic training, for God’s eternity. And just as God is not “plain English”, not something “taken in at a glance”, so neither is the Old Mass.