Christ the Sovereign King

The Burning of Notre Dame and You

April 16, 2019 By FrM

Two faces of postmodern France

There are those, even secular, who still honor the beautiful, Good and True. They include the atheists and agnostics who respond affirmatively to my question: “If the normative Christian God was true would you want it to be so?”

Then there are those who hate Christendom and what is left of it.

You’re entitled to either view. But opinion carries us only so far before it smacks against ontology. In other words, the reality of the normative Christian God, whether He exists or not, is not contingent on our opinions, tears, cheers, votes or prayers.

I am not proclaiming this is a fulfillment of prophecy, but I will bring to your attention three points from the Church approved apparition of Our Lady of Lasalette (1846):

“Paris will be burned.”

“France, Italy, Spain and England will be in war; blood will flow in the streets; Frenchman will fight with Frenchman, Italian with Italian; subsequently there will be a general war which will be appalling. For a time, God will no longer be mindful of France or Italy, because the Gospel of Jesus Christ is no longer known. The wicked will deploy all their malice.”

“Rome will lose the Faith and become the Seat of the Antichrist.”

Well folks, Rome has lost the Faith; just compare current teaching and pronouncements with stuff pre-1960. This is not an insult to sincere Catholics who through no fault of their own, simply do not know this. There are many folks of good will and sincere desire to serve God, (clergy and lay) in the mainstream Church. But they maintain their Faith in spite of modernist Rome, not because of it. Even an honest atheist, if they compared the Old Faith with the nuFaith, can see there is rupture- not an organic development with the Faith of the Saints. Many Catholics from all jurisdictions would agree we have a really problematic and distressing pope but no anti-Christ yet, to our knowledge.

Francis before God – one of MANY times a kneeler is placed which he refuses to use.

In the last days satan will set-up a counter-church “which will be the ape of the Church because, he the devil, is the ape of God. It will have all the notes and characteristics of the Church, but in reverse and emptied of its divine content. It will be a mystical body of the anti-Christ that will in all externals resemble the mystical body of Christ.”

“The Church was critically spurned in the last few centuries because it claimed that it was Catholic and universal, uniting all men on the basis of one Lord, one faith and one Baptism, but in the new era, what the modern lost soul will take particularly about the counter-Church, is that it is catholic or international. It breaks down all national boundaries, laughs down patriotism, dispenses men from piety to country which the Christ enjoined, makes men proud that they are not Americans, French, or British, but members of a revolutionary class...
– Ven. Archbishop Fulton Sheen, 1947

Paris will be burned… did you know there have been 50+ Catholic church burnings since February in France? No? Gee why would the media not bother considering this newsworthy?

Civil war in within the EU? England? France? Italy? Never happen? Hmph. What news have you been reading?

Fulfillment? No, in spite of the alignment in many respects I don’t think so yet. But if the current under reported uprisings against the anti-Christian state flourish into something bigger then I think we are seeing the times spoke of by Our Lady of Lasalette.

For your sake: go to confession (at least yearly), go to Mass (at least weekly). If you don’t have the Traditional Mass then pray the Rosary and say the Act of Contrition frequently. Pray for the return of the Old Faith where you are. These are things you should be doing whether OL Lasalette is correct or not. Even whether Chicken Little is or not, as many secularists would mock Christians as being.

Time is short (prophecies aside- we never know when our time is up). You can ignore at your own peril, but you cannot say that you haven’t been warned.

This coming Friday we look upon Him who died for your Sins. The perfect Lamb of God. The Precious Blood, shed for you. Do we receive this with entitlement or with conviction?

God gave you your gift of Faith. He gave you your Holy Baptism. Do you respond with indifference or a life lived worthy to the vocation of being the Saint you were created to be?

For many of us, it’s not the rules we break, but our own inaction and indifference that is the greatest obstacle to our vocation and peril to our soul and eternity. The First Commandment is often forgotten long after the others are kept habitually with fidelity.

“Thou shalt not have other gods besides Me”
“‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.”

This day resolve to pray and recommit with all you have those words of the Our Father: “Thy will be done.” Ask your Lord and King, given what He has given you in resources and talents what you are meant to do to restore Christendom, to be a light in this postmodern world that mocks Him when they haven’t forgotten Him.

God doesn’t NEED you. BUT He HAS chosen you. Your soul was changed and marked forever unto Him via your Holy Baptism. That entails great privilege, but also great duty and responsibility. It entails a commission.

“You have not chosen Me: but I have chosen you; and have appointed you, that you should go, and should bring forth fruit; and your fruit should remain: that whatsoever you shall ask of the Father in My name, He may give it you.” – John 15:16

Are you going to refuse the summons from your King? Or perhaps you’re going to bury your talent in the ground while Christendom burns around you. Your choice. Choose BOLDLY.

The Parable of the Talents

“For it will be as when a man going on a journey called his servants and entrusted to them his property; to one he gave five talents, to another two, to another one, to each according to his ability. Then he went away.

He who had received the five talents went at once and traded with them; and he made five talents more. So also, he who had the two talents made two talents more. But he who had received the one talent went and dug in the ground and hid his master’s money.

Now after a long time the master of those servants came and settled accounts with them. And he who had received the five talents came forward, bringing five talents more, saying, ‘Master, you delivered to me five talents; here I have made five talents more.’ His master said to him, ‘Well done, good and faithful servant; you have been faithful over a little, I will set you over much; enter into the joy of your master.’

And he also who had the two talents came forward, saying, ‘Master, you delivered to me two talents; here I have made two talents more.’ His master said to him, ‘Well done, good and faithful servant; you have been faithful over a little, I will set you over much; enter into the joy of your master.’

He also who had received the one talent came forward, saying, ‘Master, I knew you to be a hard man, reaping where you did not sow, and gathering where you did not winnow; so I was afraid, and I went and hid your talent in the ground. Here you have what is yours.’

But his master answered him, ‘You wicked and slothful servant! You knew that I reap where I have not sowed, and gather where I have not winnowed? Then you ought to have invested my money with the bankers, and at my coming I should have received what was my own with interest.

So take the talent from him, and give it to him who has the ten talents. For to every one who has will more be given, and he will have abundance; but from him who has not, even what he has will be taken away. And cast the worthless servant into the outer darkness; there men will weep and gnash their teeth.’
– Matthew 25:14-30

The Social Kingship of Christ the King

June 28, 2018 By FrM

“The empire of Christ the King includes not only Catholic nations, not only baptized persons who, though of right belonging to the Church, have been led astray by error, or have been cut off from her by schism, but also all those who are outside the Christian faith: so that truly the whole of mankind is subject to the power of Jesus Christ.” – Pope Leo XIII, Annum sacrum

The Reign of Christ the King

Globalism and the “New World Order”

June 28, 2017 By FrM

Traditionally, the Church recognizes the right of individuals to band together and form nations. While It holds a monolithic notion of one true doctrine and one correct morality for all the world, it recognizes that the worldly affairs of people may differ from one region of the globe to another. Political rule is best left to the lowest organizational level possible, so that the rulers are personally familiar with the conditions about which they are legislating. Localized rule also gives people who don’t like the way things are done in one place the freedom to move somewhere else — global rule implies a requirement for everyone to think alike. At the end of the First World War, Pope Benedict XV put it this way:

The coming of a world state is longed for and confidently expected by all the worst and most disordered elements…. The state based on an absolute equality of men and a community of possessions, would banish all national loyalties…. In it no acknowledgement would be made of a father over his children — or of God over human society…. If these ideas are put into practice there will inevitably follow a reign of terror.¹

Yet in spite of this, several documents point to the Vatican II popes as globalists. Gaudium et spes, the Vatican II document on the Church in the modern world, is long winded but deserves a reading. It points out a lot of things in the world that “ought to be.” Now, it is hard to argue with “ought-to-be”s. Everyone should have a good standard of living, and education, and health insurance, and safety from crime, and the benefits of music and art, and so on – – very few would disagree. However, aa problem arises when, after lots of well publicized discussion, no one has any real world solutions for how the “ought-to-be”s might be made realities. More and bigger government is usually the final answer, despite calls for something called “subsidiarity.” In this case, bigger government means world government — a very frightening prospect for any but those in favor with that government. For those who disagree with its policies, world government means nowhere to hide.

Among the global utopian socialist ideas of the postconciliar church we find: International re-distribution of income, and a world bank;² the elimination of nationalism;³ the desirability of an armed world-force to allow the disarmament of nations, and the government control of privately owned weapons.⁴ The inability of any but a world organization to protect the rights of each individual.⁵

In his 1964 speech to the United Nations, Pope Paul VI referred to that body as the “last great hope for mankind.” Not the Catholic Church, or the Blessed Virgin, or Christ the King — but the United Nations.

1. Pope Benedict XV, 25 July 1920. Bonum sane

2. Pope Paul VI; Populorum progressio #49, #51.

3. Populorum progressio #62.

4. CCC #1308, #1316.

5. Pope John XXIII, Pacem in terris #137, #145

[Fr Brusca]

Religious Indifferentism

June 28, 2017 By FrM

Closely connected to the error of Religious Liberty is the error of Religious Indifferentism, the idea that all religions are of equal value or that it is permissible to just ignore the differences between them. Traditionally, the Church insisted that “there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church.” Grant for the moment that there might have been some minor discussion about just who was “outside the Church,” and how much ignorance of the Church might excuse one from membership — but the adage was taken pretty literally. For example, the Council of Florence (1438-45) declared:

The holy Roman Church believes, professes, and preaches that “no one remaining outside the Catholic Church, not just pagans, but Jews or heretics or schismatics, can become partakers of eternal life; but will go to the ‘everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels’ (Matt. 25:41) unless before the end of life they are joined to the Church.¹

An enormous body of Catholic literature exists, mirroring the pronouncement cited above; so large that the Modernists couldn’t just ignore it. But Vatican II adopted a truly ingenious way of changing this doctrine — it simply (!) redefined the Church:

This Church constituted and organized as a society in the present world, subsists in the Catholic Church, which is governed by the successor of Peter and by the bishops in communion with him. (emphasis added)²

The difference between “subsists in the Catholic Church” and “is the Catholic Church” is considerable. “Subsistence” is an accidental relationship, possibly temporary; as if the Church of Christ might subsist somewhere else in the future or the past. Indeed, the terminology would allow the Church to “subsist” in various places, even simultaneously.

It gets better. I won’t bother with the obvious stuff about how we share so much in common with the Orthodox and the Protestants:

To the Jews “belong the sonship, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the worship, and the promises; to them belong the patriarchs, and of their race, according to the flesh, is the Christ”; “for the gifts and the call of God are irrevocable.³

I spoke of the Jews as our _elder brothers in the faith._ These words were an expression both of the Council’s teaching, and a profound conviction on the part of the Church.⁴

The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind’s judge on the last day.⁵

Thus in Hinduism men contemplate the divine mystery and express it through an unspent fruitfulness of myths and through searching philosophical inquiry…. Buddhism in its multiple forms acknowledges the radical insufficiency of this shifting world. It teaches a path by which men, in a devout and confident spirit, can either reach a state of absolute freedom or attain supreme enlightenment by their own efforts or by higher assistance.⁶

Why should anyone be a Catholic? Wouldn’t it make more sense to find the religion one finds easiest or otherwise most appealing? Indeed, doesn’t being a Catholic constitute a liability to salvation, requiring the observance of all sorts of difficult rules not required of our separated brethren?

In addition to the theological problems caused by this Religious Indifference, there is a very practical one with regard to the Moslems. Western Civilization has been under siege by Islam for over a thousand years. Early on, they invaded Christian North Africa, whence they proceeded up the Iberian Peninsula as far as Tours and Poitiers in France before being beaten back in 711. They held Spain and Portugal for hundreds of years, not being completely expelled until 1492 after an eight-hundred year occupation. The Holy Lands were conquered, liberated and conquered again in the Middle Ages. By the 1500s Moslems had taken Turkey and represented a long term threat to Austria and Hungary. The fight continues in 1995 in the Balkans.

The Church celebrates Western triumphs over Islam in its feasts of Our Lady of the Rosary, Our Lady of Victories, and the Holy Name of Mary. But today we are told, “the believers in Allah are especially close to us,” and we are asked to follow the example of a fictional Poland, “a country of deeply rooted ecumenical traditions.”⁷ In reality, several hundred years ago, John Sobieski, the Polish general who liberated Vienna from the Moslems, said, “I came, I saw, and God conquered.”

1. Jesuit Fathers of St. Marys, The Church Teaches (Rockford: TAN, 1973), no. 165 (Council of Florence, decree for the Jacobites).

2. Lumen gentium #8.2.

3. The JPII Catechism of the Catholic Church, #839. Hereinafter referred to as CCC.

4. H.H. John Paul II, Crossing the Threshold of Hope (NY: Knopf, 1994) p. 99. Hereinafter referred to as CTTOH.

5. Lumen gentium #16.

6. Nostra aetate #2.

7. CTTOH, pp. 91 & 145.

[Fr Brusca]

Religious Liberty

June 28, 2017 By FrM

Perhaps the primary error — because it comes so close to taking the heresy of Modernism and making it into a dogma of the new religion — is that of Religious Liberty. Traditionally, the Church holds that since It alone teaches the truth, all other religions represent a dangerous compromise with error. It forces no one to become a Catholic (you can’t control someone’s mind), but reserves the right to keep non-believers from spreading their errors and from publicly acting in accord with an incorrect moral code. (The discussion assumes that the Church is in a political position to say or do something about such matters.) To a modern American this sounds like a rerun of the Spanish Inquisition, but a little reflection will remind you that virtually all of the nations of the world functioned in this manner until very recently. Even here in these United States we had laws which regulated immoral acts like contraception, divorce, sodomy, abortion, and suicide — only in the past fifty years or so have they been eliminated or greatly liberalized.

Now you might, correctly, point out that even today the Church strongly disapproves of the immoral acts listed immediately above. In fact It does, but you will find a contradictory statement in Dignitatis humanae, the Vatican II declaration on Religious Liberty:

This Vatican Synod declares that the human person has a right to religious freedom. This freedom means that all men are to be immune from coercion on the part of individuals or of social groups and of any human power, in such wise that in matters religious no one is to be forced to act in a manner contrary to his own beliefs. Nor is anyone to be restrained from acting in accordance with his own beliefs, whether privately or publicly, whether alone or in association with others, within due limits. (emphasis added) [6]

Now, the phrase “within due limits” and other statements that hold that the State may protect itself and its citizens from harm perpetrated in the name of religion might seem to make this statement harmless enough — but who defines the “due limits” in a society with religious liberty? certainly not the Catholic Church nor any other Christian body. At best the “due limits” might be determined by the Gallop Poll, but in practice such limits are usually determined by politicians, lobbyists, bankers, and lawyers. (e.g. Kennedy, Cuomo, Rockefeller, Earl Warren, etc.) And guess who decides which religions are or are not harmful to the public?

In Sacred Scripture the psalmist teaches that Christ is to be regarded as King in a literal manner:

The Lord said to Me: “Thou art My Son; this day I have begotten Thee. Ask of Me and I will give Thee the nations for an inheritance, and the ends of the earth for Thy possession. Thou shalt rule them with an iron rod; Thou shalt shatter them like an earthen dish.” And now, O kings, give heed; take warning, you rulers of the earth. Serve the Lord with fear, and rejoice before Him; with trembling pay homage to Him.[7]

Pope Pius XI in establishing the liturgical feast of Christ the King tells us that:

… it is of the Catholic Faith to believe that Jesus Christ has been given to men as Redeemer in whom we are to believe, and as a Lawgiver whom we are to obey…. Anyone would err gravely, on the other hand, who would take away from Christ as man the rule over civil affairs, since He has been given by the Father such complete power over created things that all are subject to His will.[8]

By the mid 1970s, the few remaining Catholic countries in the world amended their constitutions to conform to Vatican II and ceased being officially Catholic. Even the Vatican concordat with Italy was amended to reflect a change in the spiritual status previously enjoyed by the City of Rome.[9] This must have been particularly difficult in South American countries like Ecuador, previously a republic dedicated in its Constitution to the Sacred Heart of Jesus; or Argentina, where the Blessed Virgin Mary was legally Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces. (Guess which formerly Catholic continent is rapidly becoming Protestant, and which Armed Force got “creamed” by Queen Elizabeth’s troops after losing their Commander in Chief.)