Since faith is one, it must be professed in all its purity and integrity". Pope Francis/Pope Benedict
email:torontocatholicwitness@rogers.com

Thursday, 19 April 2018

Pope Paul VI: "the faithful are behaving like infidels"



The erudite journalist, Sandro Magister carries an excellent review of a book on Blessed Paul VI, and the late pope's real opinions on the so-called liturgical "reforms" following the Second Vatican Council. The pope did not like the deceptive and false reforms. Magister gives a number of examples of Paul questioning the changes, in a manner as if he had no actual power. Very interesting. 

Regarding the distribution of the Sacred Species on the hand, Pope Paul considered such an action as that on an "infidel", a non-believer. 

On May 18, 1975, after noting more than once that during the distribution of communion, in the basilica or in Saint Peter’s Square, there were some who passed the consecrated host from hand to hand, Paul VI commented: 
“The Eucharistic bread cannot be treated with such liberty! The faithful, in these cases, are behaving like.. infidels!”

We are confronted with the mystery as to how and why a Supreme Pontiff, opposing such abuse and "reforms", was stymied, obstructed and fluffed off by men who were literally hell-bent on corrupting the Faith. Scholarly research, such as this new book, will eventually reveal why the pope was paralyzed. I believe that it is too simplistic to say that Paul could have acted against them, but chose not to. We do not know all the machinations going on behind those Vatican Walls. We do know, as the Pope himself admitted publicly, the "smoke of Satan" had entered the Church. 

One thing, we can do: we can heed the words of the late Holy Father and not act like an infidel, but approach Holy Communion reverently and receive - always - on the tongue. 

Monday, 16 April 2018

Vatican shuts down Jewish priest's Order in Belgium



Fr. Michel Marie Zanotti Sorkine a French priest, who is also Jewish, is an extraordinary man. Inspired by Christ, this modern-day St. Paul served the faithful and all who would approach him in Marseilles.  I first came across Fr. Sorkine a number of years ago, reading about his incredible pastoral activities in a local Catholic journal, The Michael. What struck me was how Fr. Sorkine walked the streets of Marseilles in his cassock, the door of his rectory open every night until eleven. "Office hours", so prevalent amongst lukewarm priests after the Second Vatican Council, was not for Fr. Sorkine. Like his Jewish forebear, St. Paul, he portrayed that tenacity that had a messianic streak of the once chosen people.

Fr. Sorkine even established the Priestly Society of the Holy Apostles. His Society soon made its way to Belgium, at the invitation of Archbishop Leonard. Sadly, the ultra-modernist Cardinal Danneels (also publicly known for his fraternization with Freemasons) set his sights on destroying the Jewish priest's little Society. The new Archbishop, neo-modernist, De Kesel expelled the Society, whilst setting up an Islamic prayer centre at Catholic (??) schools. The Society, has finally been demolished by ultra neo-modernists in Rome: the executioners, Cardinal Beniamino Stella and Msgr. Domenico Mamberti. In late 2017, Stella obtained a decree of dissolution from the Pope. 

Read the full story here.   

Whatever you do, dear friends, stay with the Church during this very dark hour of error, confusion, evil and betrayal. Stay with the Church as She is scourged and crucified by the leaders of the Church, just as Christ was scourged and crucified by the leaders of the one, true religion of His time. Do not wander off to some schismatic Synagogue of Satan. There is one Church and She is the one, and only Mystical Body of Christ. Stay by the side of your Mother, the Church. Love her, stay with her, be Loyal to her and run the good race to your eternal salvation. 

Sunday, 15 April 2018

The Temptation to Schism




In 1969, the Abbe Georges de Nantes warned against the grave danger of the temptation to schism, as he had a number of times during the turbulence  during and following the Council. Since the Abbe's warning in 1969, the confusion, the errors, the heresies, the liberalism (modernist and integrist) has only increased in the Church. On the one hand, we have the modernists seeking to undermine and overthrow the doctrines of the Church; sadly, on the other hand we have schismatic integrists who seek to throw off the visible, hierarchical structure of the Church, emancipating themselves from Her authority and jurisdiction, but in the process establishing yet another sect which God does not recognize, nor honour. 


The Abbe wrote: 

“ May Catholic charity always triumph in our hearts  ! One does not answer schism by schism. In the face of ill-feeling, partiality and hatred which raise barriers and trenches, our only answer must be that of love, that love which is founded on the infrangible community of the sacramental life. The Church is the charity of Christ spread and communicated amongst all the brothers. Whilst our brothers maintain albeit only the appearance of belonging to the Church, we must hold and retain them in Catholic charity without accepting their ostracism and their scission, and without adding our own thereto. If we quit the community, if we emancipate ourselves from hierarchical authority and reject its jurisdiction, we reinforce the schism, we provide it with the homogeneous consistency of a sect, and we give it a free hand in the Church  ! We must stay put, resigned to being punished, to suffering and to obeying whatever is not forbidden or intolerable, as martyrs for Catholic Unity and Charity… We must reject everything that is commanded for the purpose of subversion and not let ourselves be penalised without protesting. But never, never ever, will we contest the unique inviolable power of jurisdiction that belongs to the Pope and to the bishops united to him. Even though they behave unjustly, it is they who are the Catholic hierarchy, not ourselves.

“ One cannot save the Church by building on other foundations. But some people wanted to persuade me to do just that. As someone unjustly (although legally) deprived of all power of jurisdiction over souls by a Pope and bishops suspected of schism and heresy, I was supposed to consider myself a victim of persecution and to attribute to myself some kind of extraordinary jurisdiction directly derived from God  ! The determining factor was meant to be the pressing necessity of souls who were in danger of perishing in a Church that had completely lost her direction. Well, my answer to this was  : never, not at any price. Such jurisdiction has never been recognised by the holy canons except in the case of bishops in countries where persecution has totally destroyed or paralysed the local hierarchy. Presuming on the assent of the Holy See, these bishops would exercise this kind of extraordinary jurisdiction to save these Churches from total ruin and to provide for the urgent necessities of souls (Dom Gréa, L’Église, p. 235-238). As none of this can be verified in my own case, the usurpation that is proposed to me would be invalid, criminal and strictly schismatic.

“ We are not the saviours of the Church. Rather it is she, both now and always, who is our salvation. I may not actually see this, but I believe it with an unwavering faith  : the salvation of the Church today, as yesterday and for all times, is to be found in her Pastors. Although temporarily sunk in the error and sectarianism of their Reform, this grace still subsists in them, indefectibly. It may not be apparent, but it is ready on the day appointed by God to spring forth again for the salvation of all. The disorder may be great, the damage to souls mortal, but God does not wish to govern us except through the hierarchy. In such a sacred matter He cannot tolerate any fraudulent usurpation. If we were foolish enough to imagine that we could save the Church by carrying her off with us into the escapade of yet another schism, we who are nothing, it is we and we alone who would be irremediably lost. The only life we have within us is that which we have received. It is from the Roman Rock alone that this life springs forth.

“ The Church does not lie within us. It subsists in those very men whom we see busying themselves in her ruin and whom we nevertheless believe, by virtue of their apostolic jurisdiction, to be the bearers of Christ’s grace. We ourselves have no share in their powers of order and ministry except in the exact extent to which they delegate it to us. Thus, I am recognised as having the power to celebrate the Holy Mass, and this would be the case even if I were to be punished by an unjust excommunication (which God forbid  !), provided that I then celebrate it in private and without the risk of scandal. I also retain the power to give absolution to those who are dying… I give thanks to the Church for these faculties which she allows me to keep. I make use of them and I will continue to do so. But to go beyond this would be to build a simulacrum of the Church outside the Church. Good heavens  ! What would be the point  ? To deceive myself into thinking that I could save everyone  ? Ah, no  ! When the schism of this Reform is over, I do not wish to be separated from the Church. ”

Catholic and Orthodox Patriarchs issue Statement condemning Attack on Syria

The following is a Formal Statement issued by the Catholic and Orthodox Churches in Syria, following the attack by the United States, the United Kingdom and France on Syria. 




I advise Catholics and all men and women of good will to study and pray over this document. It is not "my country right or wrong". That idea is false and not Catholic. My mother was a British Patriot who loved her country. Had she been here, she too, as I do now, denounce the United Kingdom in the strongest possible terms for participating in this vile attack, as a pawn of international Zionism-Freemasonry, who are the real puppet masters in London, Washington and Paris. 

The hatred, the rage that is being directed towards Russia needs to be explained. That nation has made many mistakes and is not perfect: but one thing is certain, the Orthodox Church is increasing in power and the Russian State is defending and advancing the Orthodox Church. The traditional enemies of Our Lord Jesus Christ hate this. 

Let there be no mistake: Our Lord has real enemies who hate Him and wish to wipe His Name off the face of the earth and destroy His Church. Politics ultimately always comes down to religion. To believe the contrary is blindness and foolishness. Americans and Frenchmen and women: pray and decide. 

Saturday, 14 April 2018

Pope Francis CANNOT lose "his Office" [UPDATE]



Over the past few days there have been reports of an historian speculating that Pope Francis can "lose his office", (but not be "deposed"), after he has been found "guilty" of "manifest" heresy. In other words he would materially cease to be pope, but not formally. 

Who would declare the Pope has lost his "office", and by what authority?

Who would decide what "manifest heresy" is, and by what authority? 

I refer readers to an article written a number of years ago by Br. Andre Marie, in which he wrote the following: 


Regarding the possibility of an heretical pope and his consequent loss of office, I would like to present another argument. Supposing we were to follow the opinions of certain authors that if a pope were to fall into heresy, he would then lose his office. Then suppose that we were to apply that opinion to a certain pope. At best, what we have accomplished is to establish, based upon theological speculation, the possibility that the See of Peter could be vacant. That is all we could do, given the uncertain nature of this situation. At this point, the individual Catholic is at a moral juncture: Either accept a man as the Roman Pontiff whom he thinks might not be pope, or reject him. If he realizes that the claimant to the Apostolic See might be the pope — and he has to admit that he might be — then rejecting the claimant constitutes a schismatic act. 

Let me explain. This is what is known in moral theology as a “practical doubt.” About this “practical doubt” the Jesuit moralist, Father Slater, says the following. “If I eat meat with a practical doubt as to whether it is not forbidden on that day by the Church, I commit a sin of the same kind and malice as if I ate meat knowingly on a day of abstinence.” Apply this to the pontificate. If I refuse my subjection to the Roman Pontiff with a practical doubt as to whether or not he is the pope, I commit an act of schism. It’s a form of spiritual Russian Roulette.


[UPDATE: Sunday, April 15, 2018: 9:05 a.m.]


For those  who have succumbed to sedevacantism, I again refer you to Br. Andre Marie:


“Yes, and we all know what our Lord did. He deposed the high priest and declared the Seat of Moses vacant! Didn’t He?” The point is simply this: If the Man-God himself had enough respect for the sovereign pontiff of the law of types and figures as to say of the heretical Jew who was soon to murder Him, that he sat “in the seat of Moses,” how does anyone in the present law, the more perfect law, dare to do the opposite? 
Let me spell this out. Our Lord was not a sedevacantist. The evil deicide heretic who had authority over the “church” of Israel, was still the head of the true Religion. 
The religious society of the Old Law was still intact. Anyone wishing to save his soul could look to this office for leadership. Its sacrifices were accepted by God, and despite the abusive use to which it was put, the prophetical office was even maintained by this man. What did St. John say about Caiphas’ prophesy of our Lord’s death? “And this he spoke not of himself: but being the high priest of that year, he prophesied that Jesus should die for the nation.” No matter how you view it, the present Pope’s actions come nowhere near the iniquity of Caiphas.


Thursday, 12 April 2018

Pope Francis: the question of Papal Heresy and the temptation to Schism



I have been warning readers of the temptation to schismatic dissidence for some time now. As the crisis in the Church increases, so too will the temptation to schism and heresy. I, for one, will not be leaving the Church, and wander off to some Synagogue of Satan. Nor do I intend to leave the Church in my heart. Do you realize, dear friend, what a grave mortal sin it is to deny that Pope Francis is Pope, yet attend a Mass that prays for him in the Canon, as Pope? 

The Church is visible, is She not? 

The Church is hierarchical, is She not? 

We have a Pope, do we not? 

The Church, though gravely ill, will not die. The Church needs Catholics by Her bedside, caring for Her, though Her injuries are heavy, grotesque; Her body covered with open sores. It is now, more than ever, that we should be caring lovingly for Our Mother. 

The Church is sustained by Christ and Our Lord is far, far more powerful than popes, who come and go. Have we ever considered that God knows exactly what He is doing? 

Now, there have been claims that Pope Francis cannot be "deposed", but rather, "lose his Office"! He would, according to this fantastical theory that tries to square a circle, remain Pope until his "heresy has become manifest" in this delusion. 

Manifest to whom? 

Who will judge what is "manifest"? 


From where will these self-appointed judges receive their authority?


This is a fine work of schism. If he has lost office, he can hardly be the Pope. Let us not quibble over semantics! What this is, is a mental exercise in denying the Pope in praxis, but not in theory. 

I am no theologian. Therefore, I shall refer to a theologian: the Abbe de Nantes. The Abbe himself wrote once that a Catholic has a thousand reasons more to follow the Pope than the opinion of a priest. Therefore, in this humble opinion of this priest let us review the possibility that the "Church" (??) can declare the Supreme Pontiff, "deposed". The Abbe certainly was prescient in his belief that this will cause grave confusion. 

" Papa hæreticus depositus est… A heretical Pope is deposed. ” This is the solution advocated by Robert Bellarmine in the heyday of the Counter-Reformation. “ Heresy being a form of spiritual death, a withdrawal from the Church, any Pope who should fall into heresy, would find himself ipso facto cut off from the Church. He is, by this very fact, deposed. He ceases to occupy the Apostolic See of his own accord. ” This theory was well adapted to an epoch when everyone clearly distinguished the Catholic Faith from error.
 What neither Suarez nor Bellarmine could have foreseen, is that a time would come when evolutionism and subjectivism would spread such darkness in people’s minds that it would be impossible for them to immediately identify heresy, particularly in the private doctrines of a pope. Given the current confusion, in which Protestant private judgement is further complicated by Modernist immanentism, if we were to accept this solution, anyone might declare the Pope a heretic according to his own private whim and conclude that, as far as his own direction was concerned, there was no longer any pope. ” (CRC no. 30, March 1970, p. 7) Thus, the theologian of the Catholic Counter-Reformation was of the opinion that this solution would be impracticable as it would have no effect other than to cause confusion and lead to contesting any Pope whoever he might be.
“ Papa haereticus deponendus est, a heretical Pope must be deposed. ” This is the solution proposed by Cardinal Cajetan and other theologians. It implies two important consequences. “ If it so happens that a Pope is a heretic, he must be deposed for him to cease being the Pope. Furthermore, the person who accuses the Pope of heresy must not leave it at that, but must ask for the legal process for his deposition to be undertaken, since he cannot make a universally and immediately executory decision of his personal judgement. ” (CRC no. 69, June 1973, p. 10)
This is a wise solution, yet it raises further questions, in particular, who will judge the Pope  ? Cajetan’s answer is unsatisfactory. He maintains that in undertaking such a process of deposition of a heretical Pope, the Church is not in fact passing a verdict on the offender, but is merely bringing him to the attention of the Sovereign Judge Who is God Himself. “ It is hard to see just what Cajetan had in mind, ” Fr. de Nantes comments. “ He is in an obvious dilemma. We are left only with the idea that any ecclesiastical tribunal in such a trial would be competent merely to institute proceedings, but not to pass sentence. "

Sunday, 8 April 2018

Pope Benedict XVI: "Those Sacred Wounds..." are the source of Divine Mercy



BENEDICT XVI
REGINA CÆLI

II Sunday of Easter, 23 April 2006

Dear Brothers and Sisters,

This Sunday the Gospel of John tells us that the Risen Jesus appeared to the disciples, enclosed in the Upper Room, on the evening of the "first day of the week" (Jn 20: 19), and that he showed himself to them once again in the same place "eight days later" (Jn 20: 26). From the beginning, therefore, the Christian community began to live a weekly rhythm, marked by the meeting with the Risen Lord.

This is something that the Constitution on the Liturgy of the Second Vatican Council also emphasizes, saying: "By a tradition handed down from the Apostles, which took its origin from the very day of Christ's Resurrection, the Church celebrates the Paschal Mystery every seventh day, which day is appropriately called the Lord's Day" (Sacrosanctum Concilium, n. 106).

The Evangelist further recalls that on the occasion of both his appearances - the day of the Resurrection and eight days later - the Lord Jesus showed the disciples the signs of the crucifixion, clearly visible and tangible even in his glorified Body (cf. Jn 20: 20, 27).

Those sacred wounds in his hands, in his feet and in his side, are an inexhaustible source of faith, hope and love from which each one can draw, especially the souls who thirst the most for divine mercy.

In consideration of this, the Servant of God John Paul II, highlighting the spiritual experience of a humble Sister, St Faustina Kowalska, desired that the Sunday after Easter be dedicated in a special way to Divine Mercy; and Providence disposed that he would die precisely on the eve of this day in the hands of Divine Mercy.


The mystery of God's merciful love was the centre of the Pontificate of my venerable Predecessor. Let us remember in particular his 1980 Encyclical Dives in Misericordia, and his dedication of the new Shrine of Divine Mercy in Krakow in 2002. The words he spoke on the latter occasion summed up, as it were, his Magisterium, pointing out that the cult of Divine Mercy is not a secondary devotion but an integral dimension of Christian faith and prayer.

May Mary Most Holy, Mother of the Church, whom we now address with the Regina Caeli, obtain for all Christians that they live Sunday to the full as "the Easter of the week", tasting the beauty of the encounter with the Risen Lord and drawing from the source of his merciful love to be apostles of his peace.