
“Non
habemus authentice Catholicus Papa?”
*
1958 — the Year of the Last
Authentically Catholic Pope?
It
is typically the prerogative
of the Protodeacon of the College of Cardinals who ceremoniously proclaims
the election of a new pope with the words “Habemus Papam!”, or
“We have a Pope” — following a conclave of the Cardinal Electors who nominated
him.
With something far more profound and painful
than “regret”, we have come to acknowledge what had become increasingly
obvious — and which found its clearest expression, its
culmination, in the neo-pagan “papacy”
of Jorge Bergoglio (“Francis”).
The See
of Rome is no longer authentically Catholic — in the way
that Catholicism had been understood and practiced
for the
2000 years preceding Vatican II.
This is not to say that “Pope Francis” — is not a
legitimate pope.
He is a legitimate pope — but he
is not an authentically Catholic pope.
Confused?
Legitimacy pertains to law or legality
— in other words, conforming to canonical standards and requirements
— authenticity pertains to the substance, to what is substantive
(L. substantia — “the quality of being real”, “the
reality of a thing, as distinct from outward appearance”1.) In other
words, it pertains to what possesses reality as distinct from
appearances, or in the present case, simply meeting criteria to be deemed legal.
An example may help
Jack Ma Jun is legitimately the
owner of Alibaba, a Chinese technology giant involved in e-commerce,
retail, and Internet assets — whose personal net worth
is $38 billion dollars — but he is also a member of the Chinese
Communist Party. Communism, you may remember, eliminated private
ownership of the means of production together with all class
distinctions — all property is publicly owned and
each person works and is paid according to their abilities and needs.
All are equally “comrades” sharing in a wealth commonly generated and
commonly distributed.
As a member of the Chinese Communist Party,
Jack is legitimately one of the Proletariat, eschewing private
ownership, personal wealth, a disproportionate share in the means of
common production, and is in the same “Class” as a rice farmer (the
average Chinese annual income is approximately $1,375 USD). Jack
Ma Yun is legitimately a member of the Communist Party, although
he is indisputably an authentic Capitalist — but he is not and
cannot be a legitimate Capitalist — for Capitalism is
the antithesis of Communism: it is the Enemy of the People. Even
while Jack is overseeing more than 100 Chinese companies, and making
38 $Billion dollars in the process, these companies are, somehow, nevertheless
considered “state-run entities” under the central control of government.
While a
legitimate Communist Party member, Jack Ma Yan nevertheless remains
authentically a Capitalist. The two do not coincide.
An Enormous Crisis of
Identity
The authentic
Catholic Church ceased to be identifiably and authentically Catholic following that calamitous consistory
known to us as “Vatican II” which occurred between October 11, 1962
until December 8, 1965. Since that initial and unprecedented
defection from Sacred Tradition
2
by Angelo Giuseppe Roncalli “John XXIII”, and Giovanni Montini, or
Pope Paul VI
who concluded the Council. These two pontiffs, in collaboration
with what appears to have been a body of disaffected cardinals
3
who nominated them, sought to implement what had basically become
little more than a Modernist agenda with many of the
implicitly heretical ideologies that defined it — and which Saint Pope Pius
X had clearly enumerated in his encyclical
Pascendi Dominici Gregis in 1907, stating that Modernism
is the “synthesis
of all heresies”, and therefore
unequivocally antithetical to the One, True, Holy Catholic Church of
the preceding 2000 years.
As a matter of public
record and verifiable assertions, Jorge Bergoglio appears to be the
de facto “pope” of what has became, in significant aspects, a
possibly
new religion
altogether; a secularized religion that superficially
resembles the authentic Catholic Church as it existed prior to
1962 — which it has largely denounced — while choosing to retain a
simulacrum of it. It is a church that has been laboriously
articulated through a secular lens and then framed in terms
largely acceptable to Protestantism and inseparable from it,
the new evangel of Ecumenism — rather than
promoting the Gospel through the unparalleled missionary zeal that
had accompanied the Church for millennia.
In other words, Jorge
is, essentially, an actively and legally presiding High Priest —
but of a deeply infected
“Conciliar Church”
that is, in many ways, distinct from, and literally opposed to, the authentic
“Holy Roman Catholic Church”
of 2000 years. The conclave that elected Francis was overwhelmingly
compromised even if it was canonically lawful; and while appearing
to have the faculties of electors — but obstinately remaining in an
ideological encampment both antithetical and hostile to the
historically authentic Catholic Magisterium— they in fact possessed the legitimate (the
legal) right to vote in a papal conclave, but that legal
right does not confer authentically Catholic credentials
which would be morally binding to do so.
See Saint Gallen conspiratorial group
The formal
papacy of Jorge Bergoglio is unquestionably the most perfidious
and destructive in the 2000 year history of the Catholic Church.
We do not “judge” the man — that is reserved to God. We do, however,
examine his public statements and actions in light of
the Sacred Deposit of Faith and Tradition (Tradere: “to hand
down, to pass on”
1) entrusted to Holy Mother Church by God — and find
them irreconcilable with Sacred Scripture, Sacred Tradition,
the Depositum Fidei, and the canons of logic.
The question now is,
where are we to find the One, Tue, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic
Church from time immemorial? It is and ever will be.
Christ promised as much. But if the “First See” can no longer be found
in Rome, where is it? Where is the “authentic” Chair of Saint
Peter rather than its legal simulacrum? And if we can
discover it, who occupies it? — if anyone! If we hold that “the Chair
is empty” in light of the repudiation of orthodox Catholic canons— are
we to be understood as “Sedevacantists” ... or simply “orthodox”?
God by any
other name ...
Is, then, being an orthodox Catholic,
or even a Sedevacantist (who holds that the Chair of Saint Peter is
temporarily vacant) more scandalous than a “Conciliar
Catholic” which maintains that there is no inconsistency in worshipping
Pachamama idols together with Jesus Christ, or who holds that the God
of the Catholic Saints and Martyrs is the same god as Islam’s Allah
(a concept no Muslim would tolerate)? Or, for that matter, that
the Sixth Commandment against adultery is not incompatible with divorce,
and that, moreover, cohabitating adulterers can receive Holy Communion
in good conscience — no matter what God said! Are “Post-Conciliar
Catholics” more in keeping with the mind of Christ in promoting
“Accompaniment” (in sin, more often than not) as more vital than
conversion to the end of the salvation of souls— indeed,
that the efforts of Missionaries to proselytize pagans into the one
true Faith is really just so much “solemn nonsense”, as Jorge describes
it?
We believe, rather, that we must be understood
simply as orthodox Catholics had always been understood: as faithful
to the Sacred Deposit of Faith and the authentic Magisterium
of the Church over the two millennia preceding “Vatican II”, the widely
vaunted “Aggiornamento”, and the unmitigated abdication of Catholicism
in the pursuit of Ecumenism and the Hydra it spawned as it
ineluctably became pantheistic.
Largely secular issues such as
discrete national states, politics, economics, environmentalism, commercial
ventures, social justice, global warming, immigration, sovereign borders,
aboriginal cultures, plastic in the ocean — to mention a few — have
no place in an institution established solely to the end of the
salvation of souls. Their strident advocates are many and
broadly strewn throughout the “City of Man”. Only one institution — the
Holy Catholic Church — is the sole advocate of the “City of God” to
which it calls all men to eternal salvation and everlasting happiness.
Much, much, more remains to be said —
so much of authentic Catholicism remains to be articulated
against the hyphenated-Catholics:
So much remains to be re-acquired
because it has not been taught for 60 years. It has been forgotten,
contemptuously dismissed, suppressed, and ridiculed by Jorge
Bergoglio as “rigid” (by
which assessment Christ is the paradigm of “rigidity”, for He was
absolutely inflexible in His teachings! May we be as inflexible,
and as rigid, as our Lord!) and by his five predecessors
as “unenlightened by new and ever-evolving secular ideologies”
— or as Jorge dismissively claims, simply “Stuck in the past.”
Grains of Incense
-
Joseph Ratzinger (“Benedict XVI”)
-
Karol Józef Wojtyła (“John Paul II”)
-
Albino Luciani (“John Paul I”)
-
Giovanni Montini (“Paul VI”)
-
Angelo Roncalli (“John XXIII”) the
Proto-New-Age-Pontiff with the clarion to “throw open
the windows of the Church”
Each of the above shamefully offered more
than “a grain of incense” to false gods on the altar of Ecumenism in
Assisi and elsewhere. The kissing of the Koran by nominally Catholic
popes was not simply scandalous, but treasonable to the Catholic Faith
and to Christ Himself to Whom alone allegiance and latria is
due. Jorge’s claim that virtually all religions worship the same God
is a blatant abrogation of the very First Commandment:
“Thou shalt not have strange gods before me.”
(Exodus 20.3). There are far
too many instances to enumerate in which the One, True, Holy Catholic
Faith is either attenuated, ignored, or dismissed altogether by every
pontiff since Pope Pius XII.
Of course we understand that such insistence
on authentic Catholicism, on the factual rendering of the Gospels and
Epistles, the Church Fathers, and the Sacred Deposit of Faith and Tradition
will be greeted with much enmity, contempt, ridicule, and disdain. Actually,
we delight in this! It has ever been our conviction that a faithful Catholic cannot
be on mutually good terms with the World and God. Saint James was clear
about this:
“Know you not that the friendship of this world is the enemy of God?”
(St. James 4.4)
We choose God.
“ If
the world hates you, know that it hath hated Me
before you. If you had been of the world, the
world would love its own: but because you are not
of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world,
therefore the world hates you.”
(Saint John 15.18-19)
O, hope beyond joy!
It remains to be said
that the reluctant position into which
we have found ourselves forced was not of our own choosing; it
was, and remains deeply painful. Obedience to the pope was the sine
qua non of every orthodox Catholic. It was unthinkable that a pope
would openly contradict God, Holy Scripture, the Sacred Deposit of Faith,
and Tradition. Indeed, to defend all four was, as we say, his
“job description” — even to the point of the shedding of his blood.
He was the faithful shepherd when all others fled. He laid down his
life for his flock — as Christ did for him. He did not lead them into
strange and foreign pastures, nor did he open the gate of the sheepfold
to flocks that were not his own. Should a wolf in sheep’s clothing attempt
to enter, his staff was ready and swift. After all, the sheep were entrusted
to him, to do his master’s will — not his own. When this obligation
to obedience, however, became obedience to sin and false gods, we fled
the false shepherd who urged us to
“accompany”
him in implementing the priorities of the world, rather than
the evangel of Christ.
We never left the sheepfold and never
will — it was the shepherd
who fled the fold to bring in recreants to mingle with and adulterate
the faithful, and we can no longer call him our own — who belongs to
these strange others as well. In the absence of a true shepherd, if
we must bar the gate ourselves and at so great a cost to ourselves,
bar it we will until the one with the Key arrives at the time of God’s
choosing.
Printable PDF Version
Editor
Boston Catholic Journal
Comments? Write us:
editor@boston-catholic-journal.com
_____________________________
*
“We do not have an authentically Catholic
pope”
1
The Latin Oxford Dictionary, Oxford University
Press, 1968
2 “traditio:”
‘the transmission of knowledge, teaching; the handing down of
knowledge; an item of traditional knowledge, belief, etc. from
“trado”
to”
hand or pass over (to a person to hold)’.
The Latin
Oxford Dictionary, Oxford University Press, 1968.
In this regard, it is important to see
the word ‘tradidi”,
together with its context,
in I Corinthians
11.2 in the
ancient Latin Vulgate.
3
Cardinal Josef Frings, Fr. Henri de Lubac, S.J., Fr. Karl
Rahner, S.J., Fr. Gregory Baum, Fr. Bernard Haring, CSsR, Father
John Courtney Murray, S.J., Fr.Edward Schillebeeckx, O.P., Fr. Hans
Urs Von Balthasar, S.J., Fr. Hans Kung, and Fr. Annibale Bugnini
who was responsible for the destruction of the entire liturgy.
Bugnini was the secretary of the Pontifical Preparatory
Commission on the Liturgy, that would become the Constitution
of the Sacred Liturgy. He was described by Fr. Louis Bouyer, a
peritus for the liturgy at Vatican II, as
“a man as
bereft of culture as he was of basic honesty.”

Totally Faithful to the Sacred
Deposit of Faith entrusted to the Holy See in Rome
“Scio
opera tua ... quia modicum habes virtutem, et servasti verbum
Meum, nec non negasti Nomen Meum”
“I
know your works ... that you have but little power, and
yet you have kept My word, and have not denied My Name.”
(Apocalypse
3.8)
Copyright © 2004 - 2023 Boston Catholic
Journal. All rights reserved. Unless otherwise stated, permission
is granted by the Boston Catholic Journal for the copying
and distribution of the articles and audio files under the
following conditions: No additions, deletions, or
changes are to be made to the text or audio files in any
way, and the copies may not be sold for a profit. In the
reproduction, in any format of any image, graphic, text,
or audio file, attribution must be given to the Boston Catholic
Journal.
|
|