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”).

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:

• Neocathechumenal Way “Catholics”

• New-Age Catholics

• Charismatic-Catholics

• Neo-Catholics

• Progressive-Catholics

• Traditional-Catholics

• Orthodox-Catholics

• Liberal-Catholics

• Progressive Catholics

• Conservative-Catholics

• Trad-Catholics

• Neo-Trad Catholics

• “Recognize and Resist” 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”

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.