Błędy Rosji szerzyły się w Kościele Katolickim przed "Drugim" SW
The Errors of Russia Spread in the Catholic Church Before the "Second" Vatican Council
Nie popieramy sedewakantyzmu
Jak wiemy z książki "Anty-apostoł 1025",
agenci Józefa Stalina
podjęli
zdecydowany
wysiłek w celu infiltracji
Kościoła Katolickiego w latach 1930. Od
czego lepiej rozpocząć niż semina-ria i
uniwersytety? "AA-1025
" podał szczegóły
w pozostawionych po sobie dziennikach:
"To w tych latach wypuściłem na rynek
(można by powiedzieć) program, który
pozwo-
liłby katolikom być akceptowanymi
przez protestantów… Katolicy oczekiwali
zbyt wiele od powrotu protestantyzmu na
łono Matki Kościoła. Był to czas kiedy
powinni wyzbyć się swojej arogancji.
Miłosierdzie uczyniło to ich obowiązkiem.
Kiedy chodzi
o miłosierdzie, udawałem,
podśmiewając się, że nic nie może pójść
źle".
"Prorokowałem z pewnością siebie, że to powtórzy się w tym samym tonie, tłumienie łaciny,
księżowskich ozdób, posągów i obrazów, świec i klęczników (żeby nie mogli klękać)… I roz-
począłem też czynna kampanię tłumienia Znaku Krzyża".
"Prorokowałem też, a był to rok 1940, zniknięcie ołtarzy, zastąpionych przez całkowicie nagi
stół, także wszystkich krzyży, żeby Chrystusa uważać za człowieka, a nie Boga. Nalegałem
by Msza była tylko posiłkiem wspólnotowym na który zaprasza się wszystkich, nawet niewie-
rzących. I doszedłem do następującego proroctwa: dla współczesnego człowieka Chrzest
stał się śmiesznie magiczny. Czy dokonywany przez zanurzenie czy nie, Chrzest należy po-
rzucić na rzecz Religii Dorosłych".
"Ponadto, wszystko ze
zwolone u protestantów, nawet jeśli w jednej sekcie, musi być zezwo-
lone
u katolików, tj. ponowne małżeństwo rozwiedzionych, poligamia, antykoncepcja i
eutanazja"…
Michael [AA-1025]
zachęcał protestantów do chodzenia na katolicką Msze i przyjmowania
Komunii. Jest tak dlatego, że "Kiedy katolicy zobaczą protestantów przyjmujących Komunię
na ich mszach, bez nawrócenia, to nie będą już mieć pewności co do ich starej 'Prawdziwej
Obecności'. To im się wyjaśni, że ta Obecność istnieje tylko jeśli się w nią wierzy. W ten
sposób sami poczują iż są twórcami własnej religii i najbadziej inteligentni z nich będą wie-
dziec jak dochodzić do pożądanych wniosków".
"
Żeby bardziej osłabić pojęcie "Prawdziwej Obecności" Chrystusa, należy usunąć wszelkie
decorum. Nie ma już kosztownych haftowanych szat, nie ma muzyki nazywanej sakralną,
zwłaszcza nie ma chórów gregoriańskich, a muzyka w stylu jazzu, nie ma Krzyża, nie ma
klękania, a tylko godne sztywne postawy… Co wiecej, wierni będą musieli wyzbyć się
zwyczaju klękania, będzie ono absolutnie zakazane przy przyjmowaniu Komunii… Bardzo
szybko Hostia będzie podawana na rękę żeby wymazać wszelkie pojęcie o świętości".
"Żeby zniszczyć wszelka świętość kultu, ksiądz będzie zaproszony do odprawienia całej
Mszy w języku ojczystym, a zwłaszcza wymawiać słowa Poświęcenia jako opowiadania,
którymi są naprawdę. Przede wszystkim nie wolno mu wypowiadać następujących słów: 'To
jest Moje Ciało, to jest moja Krew', jakby naprawdę przyjmował miejsce po Chrystusie który
je wypowiedział".
"Niech każdy odczuje, że ksiądz czyta narrację. Co więcej, nigdy nie będzie sprawy Ofiary,
czyli Mszy-
Ofiary, bezkrwawego odnowienia Ofiary Krzyża. Żaden protestant nie uznaje tej
formuły. Msza musi być jedynie posiłkiem wspólnoty dla większego dobra ludzkiego brater-
stwa".
O kulcie Maryjnym i kulcie świętych
"Wtedy pokazywałem wielką energię by zniszczyć kult Maryjny. Bardzo podkreślałem smutek
jaki katolicy i prawosławni wywoływali u protestantów trzymając się swoich licznych nabo-
żeństw do Maryi Dziewicy. Pokazałem, że drodzy rozdzieleni bracia byli bardziej logiczni i
mądrzejści. To ludzkie stworzenie o którym niemal nic nie wiemy, staje się, w naszym Koś-
ciele, w jakiś sposób, potężniejsza od Boga (albo przynajmniej bardziej delikatna)… Podkre-
ślałem to, że wielu protestantów uważa, że Maryja miała inne dzieci po Jezusie… Ludzkie
dziwactwo jest nieograniczone.Wszystko to wzmacnia moje przekonanie, że żeby negować
dziewictwo Maryi jest n
ajbezpieczniejszym sposobem przekształcenia chrześcijan w uczniów
człowieka, który w ogóle nie byłby Bogiem. Kto nie widzi jak użyteczne jest zabicie Jezusa z
Nazaretu przed zabiciem Boga?"
"Później dosadne stłumienie kultu świętych. Święci muszą zniknąć przed Bogiem, mimo że
łatwiej jest zabić Boga niż Jego świętych… Potem przejdziemy do tłumienia Osądu, Nieba,
Czyśćca i Piekła. To wszystko jest bardzo łatwe… Wielu jest przychylnych by uważać, że
Dobroć Boga przekracza wszelkie zbrodnie. Wszystko co mamy zrobić to nalegać na tę
Dobroć. Bóg którego nikt się nie boi, szybko staje się Bogiem o którym nikt nie mysli. Taki cel
mamy osiągnąć".
"Takie jest kompendium rozkazów
jakie wysłałem na świat". (Jak jest w Wyznaniach komuni-
stycznego agenta o próbie zniszczenia Kościoła Katolickiego /
Communist Agent On The Attempt to Destroy the Catholic Church
C
hoć było tam wielu prostych, zwykłych modernistów w erze przed II SW, którzy, mimo że
musieli składać Przysięgę Przeciwko Modernizmowi, próbowali realizować taki własny
program, świadectwo pokazane w "AA-1025" daje dość dokładny opis tego co miało
wydarzyć się na "Drugim" Soborze Watykańskim i w jego następstwie w "magisterium"
soborowych "papieży". Papież Pius XII, tak zajęty II wojną światową i późniejszą odbudową
zniszczonego Kościoła Katolickiego po niej w Europie, troszczył się też pojawieniem się
zimnej wojny, pozwolił by to wszystko wydarzyło się nawet kiedy pokazano mu dowody na
związki Monsignora Giovanni Battista Enrico Antonio Maria Montini z agentami Związku
Socjalistycznych Republik Radzieckich:
Starszy wiekiem dżentelman z Paryża który pracował jako oficjalny tłumacz dla wysokiego
szczebla duchownych w Watykanie na początku lat 1950, powiedział mi, że sowieci
szantażowali Montini żeby ujawnił nazwiska księży których Watykan potajemnie wysłał za
żelazną kurtynę do posługi dla katolików w Związku Sowieckim w czasie zimnej wojny.
Sowiecka tajna policja była gotowa zaraz po przekroczeniu przez tych księży radzieckiej
granicy, i księży infiltratorów albo rozstrzeliwano albo wysyłano do gułagu.
Stopnia do którego poddawano szantażowi papieża Pawła Chorego przez wrogów Kościoła
prawdopodobnie nigdy nie poznamy. Może być tak, że jeśli chodzi o komunistów i socjalis-
tów, szantaż był zupełnie niepotrzebny, biorąc pod uwagę fascynację i sympatię Montiniego
od kołyski do grobu do lewicy. Z drugiej strony włoscy masoni, MI6, OSS i później CIA i
mafia
prawdopodobnie wykorzystywały szantaż i wymuszenia wobec Montiniego począwszy
od jego wczesnej kariery jako niskiego stopnia dyplomaty, później jako arcybiskupa Medio-
lanu i w końcu jako papieża Pawła VI. (Randy Engel, Rytuał sodomii / The Rite of Sodomy,
s.1156.)
Co zrobił papież Pius XII po wykryciu zdrady Montiniego?
Mianował go na arcybiskupa Mediolanu, głównego miasta przemysłowego Włoch i wylęgarni
komunizmu. To miała być rzekomo "degradacja" Montiniego.
Ale jedną z pierwszych rzeczy którą zrobił Montini była promocja Giovanni Battista Enrico
Antonio Maria Montini/Pa
wła Chorego do Kolegium Kardynalskiego.
Kto mianował Roncallego na kardynała?
Zgadłeś.
Papież Pius XII, Anielski Pasterz [Pastor Angelicus].
Takie są tajemnice nieprawości.
Odpowiedniki "AA-
1025" były na zachodnich uniwersytetach i w szkołach zawodowych cze-
kający by wspiąć się w górę żeby zatruwać umysły młodych i kształtować prawdziwy "nowy
porządek świata", który dał nam takich jak ci którzy szkolili Baracka Husseina Obamę / Barry
Soetoro
i jego kliki treserów, zwłaszcza Valerie Jarrett. Że "media głównego nurtu" składają
się głównie z duchów spokrewnionych z naszym panującym cesarzem i jego ropu-chami nie
jest przypadkiem, ani nie jest przypadkiem, że między 2 / 5 i połową Amerykanów w wieku
wyborczym przepojona jest jakimiś skłonnościami, chocby źle zdefiniowanymi i
embrionalnymi, w kierunku fałszywego przeciwieństwa 'naturalizmu". Szeregi biur kancela-
ryjnych i urzędów administracyjnych tzw. Amerykańskiej Konferencji Katolickich Biskupów
pełne są flisaków o tak pokrewnych duszach, które, oczywiście, można znaleźć też na
soborowych uniwersytetach i w seminariach i w szkołach i programach "edukacji religijnej",
które sa pełne różnych pochodnych błędów Rosji.
To nie wydarzyło się z dnia na dzień. Rzeczywiście, jak napisałem w Pamiętajmy, Królowa
Różańca Świetego nie działa sama /
Remember, the Queen of the Most Holy Rosary Does
],
błędy Rosji nie zaczęły się od bolszewizmu. One zaczęły się od błę-
dów Focjusza, czyli prawosławia, obalenia Kościoła by zrobić zeń sługę świeckiego państwa,
odrzucenia prymatu papieża i wielu innych doktryn zawartych w Doktrynie Wiary, co dopro-
wadziło 500 lat później do rewolucji Martina Lutra przeciwko Kościołowi Katolickiemu, która
rozpuściła po świecie siły piekła. Ironiczną częścią tego co wymyślił Luter, jest to, że uwol-
nione przez niego siły piekła nieświadomie dały impuls do naturalizmu jaki zaczął się poja-
wiać na pewnych etapach Oświecenia, które wykorzystywane są dziś przez diabła w nisz-
czeniu wszystkich fałszywych religii, łącznie z jego własną, i tej soborowego kościoła, z którą
chciał się "pojednać", żeby pojawił się sam antychryst. Nawet judeomasoneria i marksizm
ustąpią z kolei antychrystowi, który miał dużo pomocy na "Drugim" Soborze Watykańskim i
ma wielką pomoc później od "magisterium" sfałszowanego kościoła konsyliaryzmu.
Negocjacje ze złem
Sfałszowany kościół koncyliaryzmu nie marnował czasu na przekształcenie polityki nieudanej
dyplomacji w jawną kapitulację wobec sił sowieckiego komunizmu.
Angelo Roncalli / Jan XXIII,
od dawna przyjaciel włoskich komunistów i socjalistów przy
asyście innego przyjaciela komunistów i socjalistów, arcybiskupa Mediolanu, wspomnianego
Giovanni Montini,
zgodził się zamienić całkowite milczenie o złu komunizmu na "Drugim" SW
na obecność "obserwatorów" z rosyjskiej Cerkwi: W przygotowaniach do soboru, katoliccy
biskupi na świecie zostali zbadani metodą pocztową przez Urząd Sekretariatu by poznac ich
opinie o tematach do rozważenia na soborze. Na szczycie listy znalazł się komunizm.
Ale, jak wykazałem w poprzednim rozdziale, z inicjatywy kard. Montiniego, dwa miesiące
przed otwarciem soboru, papież Jan XXIII aprobował podpisanie Porozumienia w Metz z
moskiewskimi oficjelami, zgodnie z którym sowieci pozwolą dwu przedstawicielom z
rosyjskiej Cerkwi uczestniczyć w soborze w zamian za absolutne i całkowite milczenie na
soborze w kwestii komuunizmu / marksizmu.
Z wyjątkiem kard. Montiniego, który poinstruował papieża Jana by wszedł w negocjacje z
sowietami, kard. Eugene Tisseranta,
który podpisał Porozumienie, bpa Jana Willebrandsa,
który nawiązał finałowe kontakty z przedstawicielami rosyjskiej Cerkwi, Ojcowie Kościoła na
soborze nie wiedzieli o istnieniu i charakterze Porozumienia z Metz, i przerażającej
zdradzie jaką on reprezentował. (Mrs. Randy Engel, Rytuał sodomii / The Rite of Sodomy,
s. 1135-1136)
Dlaczego ostatni Sobór Ekumeniczny nie otępił komunizmu? Odpowiedź daje podpisane w
Metz tajne porozumienie.
Przechodzący obok klasztoru Małych Sióstr / Little Sisters of the Poor w Borny – na przed-
mieściu francuskiego miasta Metz – nigdy sobie nie wyobrażają, że coś o transcendentalnym
znaczeniu wydarzyło się w rezydencji ks. Lagarde, kapelana klasztoru. W holu tej religijnej
rezydencji w sierpniu 1962
– dwa miesiące przed inauguracją II SW – odbyło się tajne spot-
kanie o największym znaczeniu między dwu wysokiego szczebla osobistościami.
Jednym dygnitarzem był kard. z Kurii, Eugène Tisserant, reprezentujący papieża Jana XXIII;
drugim był metropolita Nikodim, który wypowiadał się w imieniu rosyjskiej schizmatycznej
Cerkwi.
To spotkanie miało konsekwencje, które zmieniły kierunek soboru, który już był gotowy do
otwarcia
. W istocie, spotkanie w Metz określiło zmianę w trajektorii samej historii Kościoła w
XX wieku.
Co to za sprawa miała tak wielkie znaczenie, że rozwiązano ją na tym spotkaniu? Opierając
się na dokumentach jakie znamy dzisiaj, tam ustalono, że komunizm nie zostanie potępiony
przez II SW. W 1962 Watykan i schizma tyczna rosyjska Cerkiew doszła do porozumienia.
Zgodnie z nim, rosyjski "Kościół Prawosławny" zgodził się wysłać obserwatorów na II SW
pod warunkiem, że nie dokona się na nim żadnego potępienia komunizmu. [1]
[1] Ulysses Floridi, Moskwa i Watykan / Moscou et le Vatican, Paris: France-
Empire, Paryż, 1979, ps
147-48; Romano Amerio, Iota Unum, K.C., MO: Sarto House, 1996, ps 75-76; Ricardo de la Cierva,
Oscura rebelion en la Iglesia, Barcelona: Plaza & Janes, 1987, s. 580-81.
A
dlaczego konsekwencje takiego porozumienia były tak dalekosiężne i ważne?
Bo w XX wieku głównym wrogiem Kościoła Katolickiego był komunizm. Jako taki, do II SW
był potępiany wiele razy przez Magisterium. Ponadto, na początku lat 1960 nowe potępienie
byłoby dość szkodliwe, bo komunizm przechodził przez poważny kryzys, zarówno wewnętrz-
ny jak i zewnętrzny. Z jednej strony tracił wiarygodność w ZSRR, bo ludzie stawali się coraz
bardziej niezadowoleni z przerażających rezultatów administracyjnych 45 lat komunistycznej
demagogii. Z drugiej strony poza ZSRR komunizm nie mógł przekonac robotników i ubogich
wolnych krajów do przyjęcia jego sztandaru. Faktycznie do tego czasu nigdy nie wygrał w
wolnych wyborach. Dlatego liderzy międzynarodowego komunizmu postanowili iż nadszedł
czas by rozpocząć zmieniać wygląd reżimu żeby zachować posiadaną władzę i ekspery-
mentować z nowymi metodami podboju. Dlatego w latach 1960 prezydent Nikita Chruszczow
nagle zaczął się uśmiechać i mówić o dialogu. [2]
[2] Plinio Correa de Oliveira,
Niezauważony przeładunek ideologiczny i dialog / Unperceived Ideolo-
gical Transshipment and Dialogue, New York: Crusade for a Christian Civilization, 1982, s. 8-15.
T
o byłby szczególnie nieodpowiedni moment dla papieża czy soboru by wydać formalne
potępienie, co mogłoby albo poważnie zaszkodzić albo prawdopodobnie zniszczyć nawet
komu
nistyczny reżim.
Pół tajny akt
Mówiąc o wolności na II SW by zajmować się różnymi tematami, prof. Romano Amerio
ujawnił pewne wczesniej niepublikowane fakty. "Ważnym i pół tajnym punktem który powinno
się zauważyć" – stwierdził – "jest ograniczenie wolności soboru na które zgodził się Jan XXIII
kilka miesięcy wcześniej, w zawarciu porozumienia z Cerkwią, dzięki któremu patriarchat w
Moskwie zaakceptował papieskie zaproszenie o wysłanie obserwatorów na sobór, kiedy
papież ze swojej strony gwarantował iż sobór wstrzyma się od potępienia komunizmu.
Negocjacje odbyły się w Metz w sierpniu 1962, i wszystkie szczegóły co do czasu i miejsca
podał na konferencji Mgr. Paul Joseph Schmitt, biskup tej diecezji [dziennik Le Lorrain,
2/9/63]. Negocjacje zakończyły się porozumieniem podpisanym przez metropolitę Nikodima
za Cerkiew i kard. Tisserant,
dziekana Świetego Kolegium Kardynałów, za Stolicę
Apostolską.
"Informację o porozumieniu podał France Nouvelle, główny biuletyn francuskiej partii
komunistycznej w numerze z 16-
22.01.1963, w tej wersji: 'Ponieważ światowy system
komunistyczny pokazuje swoją wyższość w sposób niekwestionowany, i jest silny dzięki
poparciu wielu setek milionów ludzi, Kościoła nie może już zadowalać brutalny
antykomunizm. Jako część jego dialoguz rozyjską Cerkwią, nawet obiecał iż na soborze nie
będzie żadnego bezpośredniego ataku na system komunistyczny'. Po stronie katolickiej,
dziennik La Croix z 15.02.1963
opublikował informację o porozumieniu, kończąc: 'W
rezultacie tej rozmowy, Msgr. Nikodim
zgodził się, że ktoś powinien udać się do Moskwy z
zaproszeniem, pod warunkiem, że zagwarantuje się apolityczną postawę soboru'.
"Warunek Moskwy, a mianowicie że sobór nie powinien mówić nic o komunizmie, nie był
za
tem tajny, ale odosobniona jego publikacja nie sprawiła wrażenia na ogólnej opinii, bo nie
podjęła tego prasa w ogóle i nie była w obiegu, albo z powodu apatycznej i nieczułej postawy
wobec komunizmu powszechnej w kręgach duchownych, albo dlatego, że papież postanowił
narzucić milczenie w tej sprawie. Niemniej jednak, porozumienie miało potężny choć
milczący wpływ na przebieg soboru, kiedy prośby o wznowienie potępienia komunizmu
odrzucono żeby przestrzegać to porozumienie, nie wypowiadania się o nim". [3]
[3] Romano Amerio, Iota Unum, s. 65-66.
A zatem sobór, który wydał oświadczenia o kapitalizmie i kolonializmie, nie powiedział nic
konkretnego o największym złu wieku, komunizmie. Kiedy watykańscy prałaci uśmiechali się
do rosyjskich schizmatyckich przedstawicieli, wielu biskupów było w więzieniu i niezliczeni
wierni byli albo prześladowani, albo wpędzeni w podziemie za wierność Świętemu
Kościołowi Katolickiemu.
Negocjacje Kreml
–Watykan
Tę ważną informację o negocjacjach Kreml-Watykan potwierdził artykuł 'Tajmenica paktu
Rzym-Moskwa' / The mystery of the Rome-Moscow pact opubli
kowany w październiku
1989 30 Dias,
który cytuje oświadczenia biskupa Metzu, Paul Joseph Schmitt. W wywiadzie
z 9.02.1963 dla dziennika Republicain Lorrain
, Mgr. Schmitt powiedział:
"
W naszym regionie odbyło się "tajne" spotkanie kard. Tisseranta z abp Nikodemem. Dokład-
nym miejscem była rezydencja ks. Lagarde, kapelana Małych Sióstr Ubogich w Borny (na
przedmieściu Metz). Tu po raz pierwszy wspomniano o przybyciu prałatów rosyjskiej Cerkwi.
Po tym spotkaniu ustal
ono warunki obecności obserwatorów Cerkwi, zrobił to kard.
Willebrands, a
systent kard. Bea. Abp Nikodem zgodził się, że powinno się wysłać oficjalne
zaproszenie do Moskwy, z gwarancją o apolitycznym charakterze soboru". [4]
[4] 30 Dias
, październik 1988, s. 55-56.
To samo źródło opublikowało transkrypcję listu bpa Georgesa Roches o Pakcie z Metz: "To
porozumienie negocjowano między Kremlem i Watykanem na najwyższym szczeblu… Ale
mogę zapewnić… że decyzję zaproszenia obserwatorów z rosyjskiej Cerkwi na II SW oso-
biście podjął Jego Świątobliwość Jan XXIII z zachętą kard. Montiniego, który był doradcą
patriarchy Wenecji kiedy temn był arcybiskupem Mediolanu…Kard. Tisserant dostał formalny
nakaz negocjowania porozumienia i zagwarantowania iż będzie przestrzegane na soborze".
[5]
[5] Ibid. s. 57
W wydanej jakiś czas potem książce, niemiecki teolog ks. Bernard Häring – który był sekre-
tarzem-koordynatorem na soborze w redakcji Gaudium et Spes
– ujawnił głębszy powód
'zaszufladkowania' petycji, którą podpisało wieu Ojców Soboru prosząc Pawła Chorego i
sobór o poważne potepienie komunizmu" – oświadczył ks. Häring – "Msgr. Glorieux …. i
mnie obwiniano jako kozły ofiarne. Nie mam powodu by zaprzeczać, że zrobiłem wszystko
co możliwe żeby uniknąć tego potępienia, które brzmiało wyraźnie jak polityczne potępienie.
Wiedziałem, że Jan XXIII obiecał moskiewskim władzom, że sobór nie potepi komunizmu
żeby zapewnić uczestnictwo obserwatorów z rosyjskiej Cerkwi". [6]…
1. Katolic
ka doktryna zawsze wyraźnie potępiała komunizm. Możliwe byłoby, gdyby było
konieczne, wydać małą książeczkę składającą się wyłącznie z antykomunistycznych doku-
mentów papieskich.
2.
Dlatego naturalne byłoby, żeby II SW, który zebrał się w Rzymie 1962-1965, potwierdził te
potepienia wobec na
jwiększego wroga Kościoła i cywilizacji chrześcijańskiej w XX wieku.
3. Ponadto, 213 kardyna
łów, arcybiskupów i biskupów zabiegało o to, żeby Paweł Chory
zmusił sobór do takiego potępienia. Później, 435 Ojców Soborowych powtórzyło tę samą
prośbę. Dwie petycje dostarczono w ustalonych terminach czasowych przez Międzynaro-
dowe wytyczne
soboru. Niemniej jednak, niewytłumaczalnie, żadnej petycji nie poddano
debacie. Pierwszej nie wzięto pod uwagę. Co do drugiej, po zakończeniu soboru, mówiono,
że ją "zgubił" Mgr. Achille Glorieux, sekretarz komisji, w której złożono by tę prośbę.
4.
Sobór zakończył się bez żadnej wyraźnej krytyki komunizmu. Dlaczego nie było tej
krytyki? Sprawa wydawała się być okryta enigmatyczną mgłą. Dopiero później pojawiły się te
ważne fakty. Celem mojego artykułu jest zebranie i przedstawienie informacji z kilku różnych
źródeł do przemyślenia przez czytelnika. Jak można wytłumaczyć czyny katolickich prałatów,
którzy zainspirowali, nakazali , przestrzegali i podtrzymali decyzje Paktu z Me
tz? Odpowiedź
zostawiam czytelnikowi.
Giovanni Montini / Pa
weł Chory angażował się w politykę kapitulacji wobec komunizmu zna-
ną jako Ostpolitik, zgodnie z którą na "biskupów" w krajach komunistycznych za żelazną
kurtyną mianował ludzi którzy byli przyjaźni, jeśli nie agentami władz komunistycznych w tych
krajach.
Ci "biskupi" mieli przewrotny "mandat apostolski", biorąc pod uwagę sub secreto
Mont
iniego: nigdy nie krytykować komunizmu ani komunistycznych urzędników. Inaczej
mówiąc, być dobrymi sługusami dla różnych "ludowych" i "demokratycznych" republik w
zamian promowania fałszywej "ewangelii" koncyliaryzmu.
To był też Montini / Paweł Chory, który zdradził odważnego kard. Jozsefa Mindszenty,
prymasa Węgier i arcybiskupa Budapesztu, kiedy ten, po schronieniu się w Amerykańskiej
Ambasadzie w Budapeszcie przez dekadę po węgierskiej rewolucji w październiku 1956,
został zmuszony do opuszczenia budynku tej Ambasady w wyniku presji Watykanu, i wtedy,
po tym kiedy Montini / Paweł Chory powiedział mu, że dalej był arcybiskupem Budapesztu,
skorumpowany teologicznie, liturgicznie i moralnie Montini zadeklarował iż tron prymasa był
wolny.
Ten scenariusz opisuje sedeplenista dr Steve O'Brien w recenzji dwu filmów o życiu kard.
Jozsefa Mindszenty:
Więzień / The Prisoner, jak to się stało, został zakończony zbyt szybko, bo historia
Midszenty, która wydawała się być fini, jeszcze się nie rozpoczęła.W 1956 zmarł Stalin i
niezwykły hałas zaczął robić Chruszczew. W październiku Węgrzy się zbuntowali. Midszenty
nie miał pojęcia co działo się na ulicach, straznicy powiedzieli mu, że tłum na zewnątrz
więzienia wołał o jego krew. Kilka dni później został zwolniony i faktycznie pojawił się tłum
mieszkańców. Ale zamiast go rozdzierać na strzępy złapali i wyzwolili bohatera by całować
jego szaty. Kiedy wrócił do Budapesztu obaleni Czerwoni trzęśli się z powodu tego ni
dającego się zakopać ducha, ale w przesłaniu radiowym radził przeciwko zemście. Sowieci
nie byli tak wybaczający, i czołgi wjechały by zmiażdżyć ten nieprzyjemny incydent.
Oznaczony człowiek, Midszenty szukał azylu w amerykańskiej ambasadzie jako ostatnia
deska ratunku. Teraz rozpoczął się drugi długi czyściec. Pius wielokrotnie wypowiadał się
przeciwko temu najnowszemu przykładowi sowieckiego terroru, ale Zachód, nierozważny ze
swoją retoryką wyzwolenia, był głuchy.
Kiedy pokazano
Więźnia, Kościół dalej był nieugiętym wrogiem komunizmu. Słaby Pius stał
jak Kolos przeciwko zarówno lewicowemu jak i prawicowemu totalitaryzmowi. Kiedy
Piusopuścił ten świat, w Watykanie powstała moralna pustka, której nigdy nie zapełniono. Na
początku lat 1960 zachodnie rządy jak i papieże Novus Ordo zdecydowali, że kompromis z
komunistami był lepszy niż archaiczne poglądy Piusa i Midszenty. Jan XXIII i następca
Paweł Chory cieszyli się z wpuszczenia świeżego powietrza do Kościoła, i że fetor
uwzględniał współpracę z Czerwonymi.
Nowa Ostpolitik,
kierowana przez sekretarza stanu Pawła - Agostino Casaroli, nie mia-
ła miejsca dla chrześcijańskich wojowników rodzaju Mindszenty. Pozycja węgierskie-
go rządu została wzmocniona kiedy Casaroli wszedł w negocjacje ze strasznym reżi-
mem Janosa Kadara.
Kiedy topniała już zimna wojna, Mindszenty poddano zamraża-
niu.
Amerykański rząd dał do rozumienia, że już nie był mile widziany w ambasadzie.
Jeszcze gorzej, Paweł wysłał funkcjonariusza żeby przekonał Mindszenty do opusz-
czenia budynku, ale dopiero po podpisaniu dokumentu pełnego warunków, które
preferowały Czerwonych, i zasadniczo by obwiniał siebie za swój los. Spowiedź jakiej
komuniści nie mogli wymusić na nim torturami, wymusił na nim papież!
Wypędzony z ojczystej ziemi wbrew woli, Midszenty odprawił Mszę w Rzymie z Pawłem 23
października 1971. Papież powiedział mu: "Jesteś i pozostajesz arcybiskupem Esztergom i
prymasem Wegier". Był to pocałunek Judasza. Dwa lata później Mindszenty podróżował,
żywy testament prawdy, człowiek którego chłostano, poniżano, więziono i w końcu wypę-
dzono dla dobra Kościoła. Jesienią 1973, kiedy przygotowywał się do wydania swoich
Wspomnień, ujawniających światu całą historię, doznał ostatecznej zdrady. Paweł, obawiając
się iż prawda utrudniłaby nowy duch koegzystencji z marksistami, "poprosił" Midszenty by
zrezygnował z urzędu. Kiedy Midszenty odmówił, Paweł ogłosił jego stanowisko wolnym,
wręczając komunistom miażdżące zwycięstwo.
Jeśli historia Midszenty jest o powstaniu i upadku oporu Zachodu wobec komunizmu, jest też
kroniką samo wykastrowania się Kościoła. W latach 1050 człowieka takiego jak Midszenty
pokazywałoby się jako bohatera zachodniej kultury, mimo że historia amerykańska i angiel-
ska jest pełna nienawiści do Kościoła. Kiedy nastrój polityczny zmienił się na ten koegzysten-
cji i detente
, a nie ograniczania, Midszenty stał się albatrosem dla dyplomatów, i dlatego
Piłaci i rząd rozpaczliwie chcieli od niego umyć ręce. Dalej, od polityków nie oczekuje się
działać zgodnie z zasadami, i dlatego rola Kościoła w agonii Midszenty zasługuje na dużo
większe potępienie.
Ponieważ filmy, na dobre czy złe, mają dominujący wpływ na amerykańską kulturę, może
powazny film opowiadający całą historię Midszenty mógłby mieć jakiś wpływ na ospałych
katolików na Zachodzie. Winien zdrady / Guilty of Treason i
Więzień są produktami tamtych
czasów. Zaktualizowany film pokazujący prałata przez uchodźstwo w ambasadzie i jego
żałosny koniec byłby dramatem ściskającym serce. Ale wiedząc to co wiemy teraz,
komuniści, nikczemni jakimi są, nie byliby głównymi łotrami. (Zastrzelenie kardynała: film i
zdrada w przypadku Midszenty /
Shooting the Cardinal: Film and Betrayal in the Mindszenty
).
Jak wiemy, Joseph Ratzinger / Benedykt XVI kontynu
ował ten program kiedy zdradził
podziemnych katolików w Czerwonych Chinach (zobacz Armia Czerwona w Watykanie /
). Jorge Mario Bergoglio bierze to wszys
tko na następny
poziom ściskając się z kiomunistycznymmi mordercami jak Fidel i Raul Castro (zobacz
Szacunek i troska o Fidela Castro? /
"Respect and Consideration" for Fidel Castro?
Nie może być miejsca dla poświęcenia Rosji ze wszystkimi biskupami świata, bo ci którzy są
zanurzeni w błędach Rosji, które są tylko bliźniaczymi, powiązanymi błędami modernizmu i
postępu. Cudowne poświęcenia? Umysły racjonalistów nie mogą uznać cudownego. Umysły
agnostyków muszą próbowac "wyjaśniać" wszystko i odrzucać cudowne jako nieco większe
"wewnetrzne sentymenty", co jest dokładnie metodą którą teraz emerytowany Joseph
Ratzinger / Benedykt XVI
zwykł wyrażać, mimo że w jego typowo niejasny sposób, niewiarę
w prawdziwe, fizyczne objawienia Matki Bożej w Cova da Iria w Fatimie, Portugalia, 95 lat
temu.
Realizacja jego modernistycznego dzieła w samej Portugalii
W 2011 Joseph Ratzinger / Benedykt XVI
nazwał się "racjonalistą", czyli osobą która uważa,
że konieczne jest zrozumienie rzeczy samemu w świetle rzekomych nowych prawd, jakie
człowiek napotyka kiedy "postęp" z biegiem czasu prowadzi go do nowszych wersji siebie i
otaczającego go świata. Racjonalizm jest istotą rewolucji protestanckiej, bo była tylko logicz-
na dla ludzi którzy odrzucili autorytet nauczania prawdziwego Kościoła, który nasz Zbawiciel i
Pan Jezus Chrystus ustanowił na skale Piotra, papieża, żeby zaufać własnym "zdolnościom"
interpretowania Pisma Świętego tłumacząc je od nowa z własną "spostrzegawczością".
Rationalism is, of course, at the very foundation of the so-called "Age of Reason" or
"Enlightenment" that spawned so many variations of what are, when all of the complexities
and intricacies are stripped away, the same naturalist theme: that God, if He exists at all, has
revealed nothing definitively binding upon all men at all times and that it is therefore
necessary for men to "rethink" basic presuppositions in order to "discover" the meaning of life
and ways of improving man's lot here on earth.
Modernism has its proximate antecedent roots in the rationalism of the Protestant Revolution,
replete with all of its own complex variations that mutations, and the rationalism of the
"Enlightenment" that led to reign of the "rights of man" in the place of the the rights of the
Social Reign of Christ the King.
Although not described by Pope Pius IX as Modernism, the rationalism he condemned in his
first encyclical letter, Qui Pluribus, November 9, 1846, is one of the essential building-blocks
of Modernism as defined, analyzed and condemned by Pope Saint Pius X in Pascendi
Dominici Gregis, September 8, 1907:
5. In order to easily mislead the people into making errors, deceiving particularly the
imprudent and the inexperienced, they pretend that they alone know the ways to prosperity.
They claim for themselves without hesitation the name of "philosophers." They feel as if
philosophy, which is wholly concerned with the search for truth in nature, ought to reject
those truths which God Himself, the supreme and merciful creator of nature, has deigned to
make plain to men as a special gift. With these truths, mankind can gain true happiness and
salvation. So, by means of an obviously ridiculous and extremely specious kind of
argumentation, these enemies never stop invoking the power and excellence of human
reason; they raise it up against the most holy faith of Christ, and they blather with great
foolhardiness that this faith is opposed to human reason.
6. Without doubt, nothing more insane than such a doctrine, nothing more impious or more
opposed to reason itself could be devised. For although faith is above reason, no real
disagreement or opposition can ever be found between them; this is because both of them
come from the same greatest source of unchanging and eternal truth, God. They give such
reciprocal help to each other that true reason shows, maintains and protects the truth of
the faith, while faith frees reason from all errors and wondrously enlightens, strengthens
and perfects reason with the knowledge of divine matters.
7. It is with no less deceit, venerable brothers, that other enemies of divine revelation,
with reckless and sacrilegious effrontery, want to import the doctrine of human progress
into the Catholic religion. They extol it with the highest praise, as if religion itself were
not of God but the work of men, or a philosophical discovery which can be perfected by
human means. The charge which Tertullian justly made against the philosophers of his
own time "who brought forward a Stoic and a Platonic and a Dialectical
Christianity"[2] can very aptly apply to those men who rave so pitiably. Our holy religion
was not invented by human reason, but was most mercifully revealed by God; therefore, one
can quite easily understand that religion itself acquires all its power from the authority of God
who made the revelation, and that it can never be arrived at or perfected by human reason. In
order not to be deceived and go astray in a matter of such great importance, human reason
should indeed carefully investigate the fact of divine revelation. Having done this, one
would be definitely convinced that God has spoken and therefore would show Him
rational obedience, as the Apostle very wisely teaches.[3] For who can possibly not know
that all faith should be given to the words of God and that it is in the fullest agreement
with reason itself to accept and strongly support doctrines which it has determined to
have been revealed by God, who can neither deceive nor be deceived? (Pope Pius IX, Qui
Pluribus, November 9, 1846.)
Rationalism is opposed to rationality. That is, rationalism, trusting in man's ability to "figure
everything out for himself," leads to skepticism of the past and skepticism of most
supernatural truths that rationalists believe can only be accepted if they are made "accessible"
to "modern men" by adapting their expression to the exigencies of a given period in history.
We have been eyewitnesses to the endless, tireless, ceaseless efforts on the part of the
conciliar "popes," including Jorge Mario Bergoglio/Francis, to do precisely this without
almost every facet of the Holy Faith.
The conciliar "popes," puffed up with overweening pride and oozing with hubris, have told us
that they know better than the true popes of the Catholic Church.
The conciliar "popes" have known better than anyone else how to re-read Sacred Scripture.
The conciliar "popes" have found the "true way" to re-read the Fathers of the Church.
The conciliar "popes," including Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI and Jorge Mario
Bergoglio/Francis, have twisted the words of various saints and doctors to attempt to make
them witnesses in behalf of the apostasies, blasphemies and sacrileges of his false religion,
conciliarism, rejecting entirely the official philosophy of the Catholic Church,
Scholasticism, going so far as to refer the philosophy employed by Saint Thomas Aquinas and
endorsed by numerous popes and the fathers of the Council of Trent as "the philosophical
school" of the Angelic Doctor's time.
Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI knows better than Pope Eugene IV and the fathers of the
Council of Florence under whom Cantate Domino was issued on February 4, 1442.
The conciliar "popes" have known better than Popes Benedict XIII and Saint Pius V and
Clement XII and Blessed Urban V and Innocent VI and Leo XIII, each of whom endorsed the
Scholasticism of Saint Thomas Aquinas as the true way by which Faith and reason work
together as the creature uses the rational faculties God gave him to to see all things through
the light of the Faith and to accept that we must accept that the supernatural truths revealed by
Him and taught in His Holy Name by the Catholic Church can never be contradicted or
understood in any other way.
The Modernist, inebriated by rationalism and the agnosticism that it breeds, stands the true
use of human reason on its head, believing that contraries can be true, believing that God the
Holy Ghost did not direct the work of the fathers of Holy Mother Church's twenty general
councils and/or that the language employed in the decrees promulgated by those councils
were but temporary dispositions of the truth as it was understood in the context of the
particular age in which those councils meant, that it is possible and every necessary to revisit
matters that have been considered closed. This is rationalism, and it was condemned by Pope
Pius IX in The Syllabus of Errors, December 8, 1864:
II. MODERATE RATIONALISM
8. As human reason is placed on a level with religion itself, so theological must be treated in
the same manner as philosophical sciences. -- Allocution "Singulari quadam," Dec. 9, 1854.
9. All the dogmas of the Christian religion are indiscriminately the object of natural science or
philosophy, and human reason, enlightened solely in an historical way, is able, by its own
natural strength and principles, to attain to the true science of even the most abstruse dogmas;
provided only that such dogmas be proposed to reason itself as its object. -- Letters to the
Archbishop of Munich, "Gravissimas inter," Dec. 11, 1862, and "Tuas libenter," Dec. 21,
1863.
10. As the philosopher is one thing, and philosophy another, so it is the right and duty of the
philosopher to subject himself to the authority which he shall have proved to be true; but
philosophy neither can nor ought to submit to any such authority. -- Ibid., Dec. 11, 1862.
11. The Church not only ought never to pass judgment on philosophy, but ought to tolerate
the errors of philosophy, leaving it to correct itself. -- Ibid., Dec. 21, 1863.
12. The decrees of the Apostolic See and of the Roman congregations impede the true
progress of science. -- Ibid.
13. The method and principles by which the old scholastic doctors cultivated theology
are no longer suitable to the demands of our times and to the progress of the sciences. --
Ibid.
14. Philosophy is to be treated without taking any account of supernatural revelation. --
Ibid. (Pope Pius IX, The Syllabus of Errors, December 8, 1864.)
Propositions twelve and thirteen apply particularly to the lifelong work of the immediate past
universal public face of apostasy, Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI (see
Mister Asteroid Is Looking Pretty Good Right About Now
), and,
of course, Jorge Mario Bergoglio, who loves every religion except Catholicism--and who
desconstructed Our Lady's Fatima Message but good during his visit to Fatima five months
ago (see
Bergoglio the Blaspheming Heretic Lives Down to Expectations at Fatima, part
Bergoglio the Blaspheming Heretic Lives Down to Expectations at Fatima, part
Moreover, Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI's rationalism made it impossible for him to believe
in the miraculous, which is why his denials of the doctrine of Transubstantiation and of Our
Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ's actual, bodily Resurrection on Easter Sunday had to
be cloaked with layers upon layers of his rationalistic "search for the truth." He is an
incredulous man, which is why he could not accept the fact of Our Lady's actual, physical
presence atop the holm oak in the Cova da Iria near Fatima, Portugal, ninety-five years ago,
and it is why he found the actual Third Secret of Fatima to be as much "rubbish" as did
Angelo Roncalli/John XXIII when he read it in 1960.
The now retired "Petrine Minister" sought to explain his disbelief in Our Lady's actual,
physical presence in Fatima in various ways, doing so in 2000 as a false version of the Third
Secret was released and reiterating in no uncertain terms ten years later when he visited
Portugal.
Consider these words, spoken by Ratzinger/Benedict on May 13, 2010, Ascension Thursday,
on the Esplanade in front of the Shrine of the Most Holy Trinity in Fatima, Portugal:
Brothers and sisters, in listening to these innocent and profound mystical confidences of
the shepherd children, one might look at them with a touch of envy for what they were able
to see, or with the disappointed resignation of someone who was not so fortunate, yet still
demands to see. To such persons, the Pope says, as does Jesus: “Is not this the reason you are
wrong, that you know neither the Scriptures nor the power of God?” (Mk 12:24). The
Scriptures invite us to believe: “Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have come to
believe” (Jn 20:29), but God, who is more deeply present to me than I am to myself (cf. Saint
Augustine, Confessions, III, 6, 11) – has the power to come to us, particularly through our
inner senses, so that the soul can receive the gentle touch of a reality which is beyond the
senses and which enables us to reach what is not accessible or visible to the senses. For
this to happen, we must cultivate an interior watchfulness of the heart which, for most of the
time, we do not possess on account of the powerful pressure exerted by outside realities and
the images and concerns which fill our soul (cf. Theological Commentary on The Message of
Fatima, 2000). Yes! God can come to us, and show himself to the eyes of our heart.
Moreover, that Light deep within the shepherd children, which comes from the future of
God, is the same Light which was manifested in the fullness of time and came for us all:
the Son of God made man. (
Homily at the Purported Mass on the Esplanade of the
It is very significant that the former "pontiff" cited his own
from ten years previously as he meant to convey, albeit in the obscurantist
manner of a Modernist, that the Faith is purely a matter of the senses (no room for the intellect
here) and that the three shepherd children had a "Light deep within them" that caused them to
"see" Our Lady interiorly, meaning, of course, that she was not truly physically visible to the
eyes of their bodies. And that is leaving aside the phrase "the future of God" as no true pope
has ever spoken in such a absurd manner. A Catholic can speak about the future possession of
the glory of the Beatific Vision of God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost. One
possessed of a Catholic mind does speak of the "future of God" as He is without beginning or
end.
How did the
Theological Commentary on the Fatima Message
Ratzinger/Benedict's words in 2010 to justify a conclusion that he does not believe that Our
Lady really appeared physically before the eyes of Jacinta and Francisco Marto and Lucia dos
Santos? Consider this passage from that
Theological Commentary on the Fatima Message
Before undertaking an interpretation of the message of Fatima, we must still attempt briefly to
offer some clarification of their anthropological (psychological) character. In this field,
theological anthropology distinguishes three forms of perception or “vision”: vision with the
senses, and hence exterior bodily perception, interior perception, and spiritual vision (visio
sensibilis - imaginativa - intellectualis). It is clear that in the visions of Lourdes, Fatima
and other places it is not a question of normal exterior perception of the senses: the
images and forms which are seen are not located spatially, as is the case for example
with a tree or a house. This is perfectly obvious, for instance, as regards the vision of hell
(described in the first part of the Fatima “secret”) or even the vision described in the
third part of the “secret”. But the same can be very easily shown with regard to other
visions, especially since not everybody present saw them, but only the “visionaries”. It is
also clear that it is not a matter of a “vision” in the mind, without images, as occurs at the
higher levels of mysticism. Therefore we are dealing with the middle category, interior
perception. For the visionary, this perception certainly has the force of a presence,
equivalent for that person to an external manifestation to the senses.
Interior vision does not mean fantasy, which would be no more than an expression of the
subjective imagination. It means rather that the soul is touched by something real, even if
beyond the senses. It is rendered capable of seeing that which is beyond the senses, that
which cannot be seen—seeing by means of the “interior senses”. It involves true
“objects”, which touch the soul, even if these “objects” do not belong to our habitual
sensory world. This is why there is a need for an interior vigilance of the heart, which is
usually precluded by the intense pressure of external reality and of the images and
thoughts which fill the soul. The person is led beyond pure exteriority and is touched by
deeper dimensions of reality, which become visible to him. Perhaps this explains why
children tend to be the ones to receive these apparitions: their souls are as yet little
disturbed, their interior powers of perception are still not impaired. “On the lips of
children and of babes you have found praise”, replies Jesus with a phrase of Psalm 8 (v. 3) to
the criticism of the High Priests and elders, who had judged the children's cries of “hosanna”
inappropriate (cf. Mt 21:16).
“Interior vision” is not fantasy but, as we have said, a true and valid means of verification.
But it also has its limitations. Even in exterior vision the subjective element is always
present. We do not see the pure object, but it comes to us through the filter of our senses,
which carry out a work of translation. This is still more evident in the case of interior
vision, especially when it involves realities which in themselves transcend our horizon.
The subject, the visionary, is still more powerfully involved. He sees insofar as he is able,
in the modes of representation and consciousness available to him. In the case of interior
vision, the process of translation is even more extensive than in exterior vision, for the subject
shares in an essential way in the formation of the image of what appears. He can arrive at the
image only within the bounds of his capacities and possibilities. Such visions therefore are
never simple “photographs” of the other world, but are influenced by the potentialities
and limitations of the perceiving subject. (
Theological Commentary on the Fatima
In other words, just as Modernists contend that Faith itself is a matter of interior
consciousness that comes from within so do they believe that seers such as Saint Bernadette
Soubirous and Jacinta and Francisco Marto and Lucia dos Santos have had real but
necessarily "subjective" experiences that have no actual visible, spatial reality with the eyes of
the body.
It is important to examine the connection between the
of twelve years ago and the "homily" given on the
First, Ratzinger/Benedict made the point in 2010 that the three shepherd children of Fatima
were able to "see" Our Lady because they had "these innocent and profound mystical
confidences," meaning that the children had to have pure, innocent souls to see interiorly
what they thought they had seen with their eyes. This corresponds exactly to what he wrote
ten years ago, that "this explains why children tend to be the ones to receive these
apparitions: their souls are as yet little disturbed, their interior powers of perception are
still not impaired."
My friends, Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI did not believe that Our Lady physically
appeared before the physical eyes of Jacinta, Francisco, and Lucia. He has dismissed the
Fatima apparitions as an "interior vision" that are designed to move us closer to Our Blessed
Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ and have nothing at all to do with apostasy in the ranks of those
who believe themselves to be Catholics or, Heaven forfend, the consecration of Russia to Our
Lady's Immaculate Heart by a true pope with all of the world's bishops.
Ratzinger/Benedict did not believe triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary that he referred
to gratuitously in 2010 has anything at all to do with the consecration of Russia or the
conversion of souls to the true Faith, Catholicism. Why did Ratzinger/Benedict make
reference to that triumph, therefore? Because it makes life easier for those in the Motu
communities and for Bishop Fellay of the Society of Saint Pius X as they bask in the false
reassurance that their false "pontiff" is a partisan of the Fatima Message. One cannot believe
in a request of a message that conflicts with good relations with those in Russia, whether it be
the Communists of yore (and the present day, of course) or the Orthodox at the present time.
If what happened at Fatima was but a mere "interior vision," then why did each of the
children, when being examined by ecclesiastical authorities, give identical testimony as to
what they saw with the physical eyes of their bodies? Each had the identical "inner vision"?
Logic has never been Ratzinger/Benedict's long suit as his rejection of Thomism (both
Thomistic Philosophy and Thomistic Theology) has opened up to grow from young adulthood
into an old man, who is now a "retired" antipope, who has lived in a world of contradiction,
paradox and ambiguity which makes it almost impossible for to him to see the fallacies in
what he presents as "explanations" of the Faith and the events associated with It.
Second, Ratzinger/Benedict said in 2010 that God "has the power to come to us,
particularly through our inner senses, so that the soul can receive the gentle touch of a
reality which is beyond the senses and which enables us to reach what is not accessible
or visible to the senses." This corresponds with his statement of ten years previously:
It is clear that in the visions of Lourdes, Fatima and other places it is not a question of
normal exterior perception of the senses: the images and forms which are seen are not
located spatially, as is the case for example with a tree or a house. This is perfectly
obvious, for instance, as regards the vision of hell (described in the first part of the
Fatima “secret”) or even the vision described in the third part of the “secret”. . . .
It means rather that the soul is touched by something real, even if beyond the senses. It
is rendered capable of seeing that which is beyond the senses, that which cannot be
seen—seeing by means of the “interior senses”. It involves true “objects”, which touch
the soul, even if these “objects” do not belong to our habitual sensory world. This is why
there is a need for an interior vigilance of the heart, which is usually precluded by the
intense pressure of external reality and of the images and thoughts which fill the soul.
(
Theological Commentary on the Fatima Message
Why is it "perfectly obvious" that the images and forms seen, to cite the false "pope's own
example, by the fourteen year-old Bernadette Soubirous and Jacinta, Francisco, and Lucia
"are not located spatially"?
Our Lady did not actually part the earth and show Jacinta, Francisco, and Lucia a vision of
Hell that they saw with their own eyes? This was merely an "interior" vision vision of theirs
that did not really happen in time and space?
The the buds on holm oak tree over which Our Lady hovered as she physically appeared to
Jacinta, Francisco, and Lucia did not change their appearance as seen by eyewitnesses who
came to watch them? They were all suffering from mass delusion when they saw the
following things?
The second apparition - June 13, 1917
Preceding the second apparition, the seers once again saw a great brilliance, which they called
lightning, but which was really the glare of the approaching light. Some of the
approximately fifty spectators who had come to the place noticed that the light of the
sun became dimmer during the first few minutes of the conversation. Others said that
the top of the budding holm oak bent down, as if under the weight of something, a
moment before Lucia spoke. During Our Lady's conversation with the seers, some of the
bystanders heard a whispering, like the humming of a bee.
When this vision ceased, the Lady, still surrounded by the light that she radiated, rose from
the little tree and glided toward the east until she disappeared completely. Several persons
who were closer noticed that the buds at the top of the holm oak were bent in the same
direction, as if they had been drawn by the Lady's clothes. They returned to their usual
position only some hours later.
The third apparition - July 13, 1917
Mr. Marto, father of Jacinta and Francisco, says that when the third apparition began, a little
grayish cloud hovered over the holm oak, the sunlight diminished, and a cool breeze
blew over the mountain range, even though it was the height of summer. He also heard
something that sounded like flies inside an empty jug.
The fourth apparition - August 19, 1917
On 13 August, the day the fourth apparition was to take place, the seers could not go to Cova
da Iria, as they had been abducted by the mayor of Vila Nova de Ourém, who wanted to force
the secret from them. The children held fast.
At Cova da Iria, thunder followed by lightning was heard at the usual time. The
spectators noticed a small white cloud that hovered over the holm oak for a few minutes.
Phenomena of coloration were observed on the faces of the people, the clothing, the
trees, and the ground. Our Lady had certainly come, but she had not found the seers.
The fifth apparition – September 13, 1917
A crowd estimated at twenty thousand observed atmospheric phenomena similar to
those of the previous apparitions: the sudden cooling of the air, a dimming of the sun to
the point where the stars could be seen, and a rain resembling iridescent petals or
snowflakes that disappeared before touching the ground. This time, a luminous globe
was noticed which moved slowly and majestically through the sky from east to west and,
at the end of the apparition, in the opposite direction. The seers saw a light, and,
immediately following this, they saw Our Lady over the holm oak.
All of this did not happen? The crowd did not see what they reported? Were they having
"interior visions"? Preposterous.
What about the Miracle of the Sun on October 13, 1917, ninety-eight years ago today?
Was the following report from a reporter for O Seculo, Avelino de Almeida, who had written
pieces that were scathing in their criticism of the children's claims to have seen Our
Lady, making up the following story that he wrote about what happened in the Cova da Iria
near Fatima, Portugal, on October 13, 1917?
One could see the immense multitude turn towards the sun, which appeared free from clouds
and at its zenith. It looked like a plaque of dull silver and it was possible to look at it without
the least discomfort. It might have been an eclipse which was taking place. But at that
moment a great shout went up and one could hear the spectators nearest at hand shouting: "A
miracle! A miracle!" Before the astonished eyes of the crowd, whose aspect was Biblical as
they stood bareheaded, eagerly searching the sky, the sun trembled, made sudden incredible
movements outside all cosmic laws - the sun "danced" according to the typical expression of
the people.
People then began to ask each other what they had seen. The great majority admitted to
having seen the trembling and dancing of the sun; others affirmed that they saw the face of the
Blessed Virgin; others, again, swore that the sun whirled on itself like a giant Catherine wheel
and that it lowered itself to the earth as if to burn it with its rays. Some said they saw it change
colors successively.
.)
Is the testimony below about what happened on October 13, 1917, bogus?
From dawn, our reporter relates, visibly impressed by that calm courage, groups looming up
again, intrepid individuals who pass through, without stopping for a moment, the small town,
whose silence is broken by the chant of hymns intoned by feminine voices in harmony which
contrasts with the roughness of the men... The sun rises, but the aspect of the sky is
threatening. Some black clouds accumulate, precisely from the Fatima side. Nothing however
holds back the pilgrims who, from all roads and by all means of locomotion, flock in that
direction... Some small bells on a chain tinkle; we see here and there a cart decorated with
palms. However, the festive atmosphere is discreet; the general manner is grave, the order
perfect ... Towards ten o’clock, the sky is covered completely and a heavy rain begins to
fall. The downpour, whipped by a bitter wind, beating against the face, inundates the
gravel roads, and pierces to the bone those who did not take the precaution of carrying
an umbrella or some other means of protection from the bad weather. But no one
becomes impatient nor gives up following the road
Whereas «the low and heavy sky had a very dark color, laden with moisture, released an
abundant and long lasting rain,» during the time of the apparition, the rain stopped
totally. Abruptly the sky cleared: «The sun triumphantly pierced the thick bed of clouds
hiding it until then, and shone intensely.» (Dr. Almeida Garrett).
This abrupt change of weather took all the eyewitnesses by surprise: «It was a day of
heavy and continuous rain. But a few minutes before the miracle, it stopped raining.»
(Alfredo da Silva Santos)
«Suddenly I heard the uproar of thousands of voices, and I saw the whole multitude spread
out in that vast space at my feet ... turn their backs to that spot where, until then, all their
expectations focused, and look at the sun on the other side ... I turned around, too, toward the
point commanding their gazes, and I could see the sun, like a very clear disc, with its sharp
edge, which gleamed without hurting the sight ... It could not be confused with the sun seen
through a fog (there was no fog at that moment), for it was neither veiled, nor dim. At
Fatima, it kept its light and heat, and stood out clearly in the sky, with a sharp edge, like
a large gaming table. The most astonishing thing was to be able to stare at the solar disc
for a long time, brilliant with light and heat, without hurting the eyes, or damaging the
retina.» (Dr. Almeida Garrett).
«And then we witnessed a unique spectacle, the reporter of "O Seculo" remarked in similar
vein, an incredible spectacle, unbelievable if you did not witness it. From above the road ...
We see the immense crowd turn towards the sun, which appeared at its zenith, clear of the
clouds. It looked like a plate of dull silver, and it was possible to stare at it without the least
discomfort. It did not burn the eyes. It did not blind. One might say that an eclipse had
occurred.» (Article of October 15, 1917) «The people could look at the sun as we look at the
moon.» (Maria do Carmo)
Suddenly, the heavenly body began to tremble, to shake with abrupt movements, and
finally to turn on itself at a dizzying speed while throwing out rays of light, all colors of
the rainbow: «The sun turned like a fire wheel, taking on all the colors of the rainbow.»
(Maria do Carmo) «It appeared like a globe of snow turning on itself.» (Father Lourenço)
«The pearl-like disc had a giddy motion. This was not the twinkling of a star in all its
brilliance. It turned on itself with impetuous speed.» (Dr. Almeida Garrett) «At a certain
moment, the sun stopped and then began again to dance, to spin; it stopped again, and began
again to dance.» (Ti Marto) It is indeed therefore a triple "dance of the sun" which thousands
of witnesses affirm, having contemplated it for several minutes.
«The sun took on all the colors of the rainbow. Everything assumed those same colors: our
faces, our clothes, the earth itself.» (Maria do Carmo) «A light, whose colors changed from
one moment to the next, was reflected on the people and on things», notes Dr. Pereira Gens.
«We suddenly heard a clamor, relates Almeida Garrett, like a cry of anguish of that entire
crowd. The sun, in fact, keeping its rapid movement of rotation, seemed to free itself
from the firmament and blood-red, to plunge towards the earth, threatening to crush us
with its fiery mass. Those were some terrifying seconds.» «I saw the sun turn and it
seemed to descend. It was like a bicycle wheel.» (John Carreira) «The sun began to
dance and, at a certain moment, it appeared to detach itself from the firmament and to
rush forward on us, like a fire wheel.» (Alfredo da Silva Santos) «I saw it perfectly
descending as if it came to crash on the earth. It seemed to detach itself from the sky and rush
toward us. It maintained itself at a short distance above our heads; but that sort of attack was
of very short duration ... It seemed very near the people and it continued to turn in the
opposite direction.» (Maria do Carmo) «From those thousands of mouths, relates the engineer
Mario Godinho, I heard shouts of joy and love to the Most Holy Virgin. And then I believed. I
had the certainty of not having been the victim of a suggestion. I had seen the sun as I would
never see it again.»
Everyone Had Dry Clothes
A last astonishing fact: all those people, who were for the most part soaked to the
bone, verified with joy and amazement that they were dry. The fact is attested to in the
canonical process.
The Vision of the Solar Prodigy at a Distance
A marvelous thing, the phenomenon could be admired from beyond Fatima. And even,
some perfectly credible witnesses, who were very far away from the Cova da Iria, related
having seen the unprecedented spectacle of the dance of the sun, exactly like the thousands of
pilgrims gathered around the holm-oak.
A photograph of part of the 70,000 witnesses as they are actually
observing the Miracle of the Sun at Fatima on October 13, 1917.
In the small village of Alburitel, situated eighteen or nineteen kilometers from Fatima, the
whole town was able to enjoy the vision of the solar prodigy. The testimony frequently quoted
is that of Father Inacio Lourenço, because it is the most detailed. But what he relates having
seen, all the good villagers, questioned by the investigators, confirmed seeing it in exactly the
same way.
«In October, I will perform a miracle,» Our Lady had sovereignly declared on July 13.
And on October 13, it was at Her efficacious gesture that the marvelous "dance of the sun"
began: «Then, opening Her hands, She made them reflect on the sun, and as She rose, the
reflection of Her own light continued to be projected on the sun itself.»
Thus, the magnificent miracle, it is She Who promised it, Who announced it three months in
advance, and at Her gesture the miracle was fulfilled. That is the reply of the Queen of
Heaven to the instant supplication of Her shepherd: «I would like to ask You to tell us Who
You are, and to perform a miracle so that all may believe that You are appearing to us.» A
response surpassing all expectations and one of such magnitude, of such splendor, that no one
would dare to dream it possible.
The witnesses of the event were indeed innumerable, their testimonies agree and we are
flooded with the documents they have left us.
In the first place, the numerous accounts conveyed appeared at once in the Portuguese press.
It is noteworthy that the first to provide testimony were the anticlerical reporters. The three
articles of Avelino de Almeida, the one of October 13, immediately before the event, the other
of October 15, edited at Vila Nova de Ourem on the evening of the 13th, and a third article of
October 29, merit a special mention. In spite of the jeering tone and Voltarian irony which
inspire in part the first article, in spite of the expected anticlerical tones which still appear in
the article of the 15th. These texts from a reporter of talent, one who besides, is honest and
conscientious, are historical documents of prime importance5. But he was not the only one to
relate the facts, for other reporters were present at the Cova da Iria.
Next there were the official investigations. In November, 1917, at the request of Bishop de
Lima Vidal, who was then directing the diocese of Lisbon, the Parish Priest of Fatima led his
investigation and questioned several witnesses of the parish. Unfortunately, he transcribed
only... four depositions!
The investigations of the historians fortunately compensated for those negligences of the
official investigators. Since Father Formigao, who obtained from Dr. José Maria de Almeida
Garrett, professor at the Faculty of Sciences of Coimbra, a very thorough account, the most
scientific report in our possession6, all the top historians went to question the witnesses.
Father da Fonseca, in order to verify the points disputed by Father Dhanis; Father De Marchi,
Canon Barthas, Father Dias Coelho and Father Richard.
In 1977, to commemorate the sixtieth anniversary of the last apparition, it was still possible to
assemble in Fatima more than thirty persons who had been present at the solar prodigy and
who could reveal their memories.
Thanks to those numerous testimonies, it is possible to reconstruct a precise running
commentary, allowing us to relive, hour by hour and minute by minute, this decisive day,
assuredly one of the most important in the history of the world. (
.)
Did it not actually rain?
Were not the thousands of people assembled soaked to the bone with rain water?
Was not the ground beneath them muddy with puddles of water aplenty?
Were not the clothes of those people made completely try in an instant after the Miracle of the
Sun?
Was not the ground beneath made them dry as though it had never rained?
For the retired Ratzinger/Benedict XVI to have contended that the Fatima seers had a "interior
vision" of the "senses" that were not "located spatially" is to discount all of this evidence as so
much nonsense, unworthy of even being mentioned during his first pilgrimage to Fatima five
years ago as what he believed himself to be, a true and legitimate Successor of Saint Peter, the
very Vicar of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ on earth. It is he who is deluded, not
the people who reported as one, with once voice, if you will, the experiences recounted above.
The conciliarists have made war upon Our Lady's Fatima Message and her Third Secret,
seeking to turn Our Lady into a witness in behalf of concilairism, precisely because they do
not want to admit that that Third Secret deals with their own very apostasy as they deceive
souls and blaspheme Our Lady and her own chosen souls such as Jacinta and Francisco Marto
and Lucia dos Santos. It is that simple.
Admitting that I am agnostic as to whether the following account of the Third Secret is real
and legitimate, I would like to pose the following question to my readers? What if the account
below, as has been reported on the anti-sedevacantist Tradition in Action website, accurate?
Would this not explain the antipathy of the unholy trio--Joseph Ratzinger-Angelo Sodano-
Tarcisio Bertone--who worked so mightily to "reinvent" the Fatima Message and to
misrepresent its Third Secret?
Tuy September 1, 1944 or April 1, 1944
JMJ
Now I am going to reveal the third fragment of the secret: This part is the apostasy in the
Church!
Our Lady showed us the individual who I describe as the 'holy Father' in front of a multitude
that was cheering him.
But there was a difference from a true holy Father, his devilish gaze, this one had the gaze of
evil.
Then, after some moments we saw the same Pope entering a Church, but this Church was the
Church of hell; there is no way to describe the ugliness of that place. It looked like a gray
cement fortress with broken angles and windows similar to eyes; it had a beak in the roof of
the building.
Next, we raised our eyes to Our Lady who said to us: You saw the apostasy in the Church;
this letter can be opened by the holy Father, but it must be announced after Pius XII and
before 1960.
In the kingdom of John Paul II the cornerstone of Peter’s grave must be removed and
transferred to Fatima.
Because the dogma of the faith is not conserved in Rome, its authority will be removed and
delivered to Fatima.
The cathedral of Rome must be destroyed and a new one built in Fatima.
If 69 weeks after this order is announced, Rome continues its abomination, the city will be
destroyed.
Our Lady told us that this is written,[in] Daniel 9:24-25 and Matthew 21:42-44 (
I do not know whether this is the true Third Secret. All I do know with certainty is that there
are some, including the late Mario Luigi "Cardinal" Ciappi, O.P., who had read the Third
Secret and stated that it did indeed deal with apostasy:
[Journalist Antonio] Socci also notes that Cardinal Ratzinger had said in 2000 that the Vatican
interpretation was merely hypothesis and not the official interpretation, but now Cardinal
Bertone “demands to impose it as the official version.”
Socci goes on to note various facts that support the thesis of two texts of the Secret: one
published in 2000 and another yet unpublished:
• the evidence that the Secret was written on one sheet of paper;
• the evidence that the size of the paper was about 9x14 cm contained in an envelope about
12x18 cm;
• the evidence that the Secret consists of only 20–25 lines of text;
• the evidence from Paris Match magazine, from Sister Pasqualina, the confidential assistant
of Pope Pius XII; and from Msgr. Capovilla, personal secretary to Pope John XXIII who said
the Secret was held in a desk in the Pope’s apartment, which conflicts with the 2000
commentary that claims it was stored at the Holy Office.
"Bertone does not answer these testimonies in his book”, says Socci. The Prelate merely says
“the cinematographic reconstructions of the envelope hidden in the desk of the Pope are pure
fantasies,” but provides no evidence except his own testimony.
Bertone goes on to ridicule the idea that the Secret speaks of “apostasy” in the Church.
Socci responds, “I don’t talk about apostasy, but Cardinal Ottaviani and Cardinal
Ciappi did.” (“In the Third Secret, it is foretold, among other things, that the great
apostasy in the Church will begin at the top.” – Ciappi)
More hints that the Third Secret speaks of an apostasy in the Church, notes Socci, are found in
Sister Lucy’s 1957 interview with Father Fuentes, and in two statements of Cardinal
Ratzinger.
(Those who you who read the Italian language can access the
May 12, 2007, article in Libero at:
Enrico Baccarini - SUL "QUARTO SEGRETO" C'È
What?
Ratzinger contradicted himself?
No, really?
Yes, really. He did it all of the time.
The apostasy of conciliarism was on display in Portugal forty-one months ago now as
Ratzinger/Benedict not only endorsed the Portuguese Revolution of 1910 and praised the
"separation of Church and State" despite the fact that Pope Saint Pius X had condemned both
in Iamdudum, May 24, 1911 (see
Mocking Pope Saint Pius X and Our Lady of Fatima
and as he said once again that the Catholic Church had to "search for truth," a false belief that
is shared completely by Jorge Mario Bergoglio/Francis:
Precisely so as “to place the modern world in contact with the life-giving and perennial
energies of the Gospel” (John XXIII, Apostolic Constitution Humanae Salutis, 3), the Second
Vatican Council was convened. There the Church, on the basis of a renewed awareness of
the Catholic tradition, took seriously and discerned, transformed and overcame the
fundamental critiques that gave rise to the modern world, the Reformation and the
Enlightenment. In this way the Church herself accepted and refashioned the best of the
requirements of modernity by transcending them on the one hand, and on the other by
avoiding their errors and dead ends. The Council laid the foundation for an authentic
Catholic renewal and for a new civilization – “the civilization of love” – as an evangelical
service to man and society.
Dear friends, the Church considers that her most important mission in today’s culture is
to keep alive the search for truth, and consequently for God; to bring people to look
beyond penultimate realities and to seek those that are ultimate. I invite you to deepen
your knowledge of God as he has revealed himself in Jesus Christ for our complete fulfilment.
Produce beautiful things, but above all make your lives places of beauty. May Our Lady of
Belém intercede for you, she who has been venerated down through the centuries by
navigators, and is venerated today by the navigators of Goodness, Truth and Beauty.
(
Meeting with the world of culture in the Cultural Center of Belém
This is the talk of Antichrist.
Does the "Second" Vatican Council represent a "renewed awareness of the Catholic
tradition"?
Did it "accept and refashion the best of the requirements of modernity by transcending them
on the one hand, and on the other by avoiding their errors and dead ends?
Did the "Second" Vatican Council lay the "foundation for an authentic Catholic renewal and
for a new civilization--'the civilization of love'--as an evangelical service to man and society"?
Is not Modernity opposed to the Social Reign of Christ the King and the separation of Church
and State? So are the conciliarists.
Is not Protestantism opposed to the Social Reign of Christ the King and the separation of
Church and State? So are the conciliarists.
Do not the lords of Modernity embrace religious liberty? So do the conciliarists.
Do not Protestants believe that it is necessary to "search for the truth"? So do the conciliarists.
While, as Pope Leo XIII noted in Testem Benevolentiae Nostrae, January 22, 1899, Holy
Mother Church rejects nothing that is good and true in the world, she wants everyone in the
world to subordinate all of their activities to the Deposit of Faith and to undertake them for
the honor and glory of the Most Blessed Trinity, it is nevertheless true that the Catholic
Church does not have to "search for truth." (See
She is sacred repository of the Deposit of Faith.
This madness of "searching for truth" is quintessential Modernism as assessed and
condemned by Pope Saint Pius X in Pascendi Dominici Gregis, September 8, 1907:
The chief stimulus of the evolution of worship consists in the need of accommodation to
the manners and customs of peoples, as well as the need of availing itself of the value
which certain acts have acquired by usage. Finally, evolution in the Church itself is fed
by the need of adapting itself to historical conditions and of harmonizing itself with
existing forms of society. Such is their view with regard to each. And here, before
proceeding further, We wish to draw attention to this whole theory of necessities or needs, for
beyond all that we have seen, it is, as it were, the base and foundation of that famous method
which they describe as historical.
27. Although evolution is urged on by needs or necessities, yet, if controlled by these
alone, it would easily overstep the boundaries of tradition, and thus, separated from its
primitive vital principle, would make for ruin instead of progress. Hence, by those who
study more closely the ideas of the Modernists, evolution is described as a resultant from
the conflict of two forces, one of them tending towards progress, the other towards
conservation. The conserving force exists in the Church and is found in tradition; tradition
is represented by religious authority, and this both by right and in fact. By right, for it is
in the very nature of authority to protect tradition: and in fact, since authority, raised as
it is above the contingencies of life, feels hardly, or not at all, the spurs of progress. The
progressive force, on the contrary, which responds to the inner needs, lies in the
individual consciences and works in them -- especially in such of them as are in more
close and intimate contact with life. Already we observe, Venerable Brethren, the
introduction of that most pernicious doctrine which would make of the laity the factor of
progress in the Church. Now it is by a species of covenant and compromise between
these two forces of conservation and progress, that is to say between authority and
individual consciences, that changes and advances take place. The individual
consciences, or some of them, act on the collective conscience, which brings pressure to
bear on the depositories of authority to make terms and to keep to them. (Pope Saint Pius
X, Pascendi Dominci Gregis, September 8, 1907.)
"By right, for it is in the very nature of authority to protect tradition: and in fact, since
authority, raised as it is above the contingencies of life, feels hardly, or not at all, the
spurs of progress."
Does Jorge Mario believe this?
"Now it is by a species of covenant and compromise between these two forces of
conservation and progress, that is to say between authority and individual consciences,
that changes and advances take place. The individual consciences, or some of them, act
on the collective conscience, which brings pressure to bear on the depositories of
authority to make terms and to keep to them."
Is this an accurate description of what Ratzinger/Benedict called his "hermeneutic of
continuity"?
Absolutely.
Indeed, while warning the conciliar "bishops" of Portugal in 2010 that the various
"movements" (Cursillo, "Catholic Charismatic Renewal, Focolare, Regnum Christi, Opus Dei,
the Neocatechumenal Way, et al.) have tended to stray away from the direction of the
conciliar "hierarchy" when it is offered to them, Ratzinger/Benedict also praised them for
possessing a "charism" that is identical to the Modernist spirit of "progress" condemned by
Pope Saint Pius X:
In this regard, I confess to you the pleasant surprise that I had in making contact with the
movements and the new ecclesial communities. Watching them, I had the joy and the grace to
see how, at a moment of weariness in the Church, at a time when we were hearing about "the
winter of the Church", the Holy Spirit was creating a new springtime, awakening in young
people and adults alike the joy of being Christian, of living in the Church, which is the living
Body of Christ. Thanks to their charisms, the radicality of the Gospel, the objective contents
of the faith, the living flow of her tradition, are all being communicated in a persuasive
way and welcomed as a personal experience, as adherence in freedom to the present
event of Christ. (
New springtime?
Personal experience?
Modernism.
Moreover, Jorge Mario Bergoglio has given his unquestioned support for the "movements,"
which he believes should be left alone by the Roman dicasteries to let the "spirit" lead them
according to their particular "charisms."
In the face of this effort to deconstruct the Fatima Message so as to deflect attention from
conciliarism's apostasies and errors we must be ever steadfast in its promotion. Our Lady gave
Saint Dominic de Guzman her Most Holy Rosary in 1208 to be the chief weapon, after the
offering of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass itself, against the Albigenses heresy. It remains
Heaven's chief weapon to help us combat the power of the world, the flesh, and the devil in
our own lives as well as to win the conversion of apostates and infidels and schismatics and
heretics to the true Faith.
We are dealing with forces at present that are preternatural. We are not going to "will"
ourselves out of the apostasies of the moment. We are not going to "vote" ourselves out of the
present chastisement. While a given article here and there might help one or two souls now
and again, we have to recognize that any and all efforts, whether spoken or written, to combat
the apostasies of the day, will come to nothing if they are not undergirded by the rock solid
foundation of assisting at the daily offering of the Immemorial Mass of Tradition, offered by
priests who make no concessions to conciliarism or to its false shepherds, profound
Eucharistic piety, and deep, tender devotion to the Mother of God by means of Total
Consecration to her Divine Son through her own Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart and by the
reverent praying of her Most Holy Rosary each and every day without fail.
Our efforts to form our own families so as to keep them unspotted by the world and unspotted
by the apostasies of conciliarism will come to nothing if we fail to remember the promises of
Sacred Heart of Jesus revealed to Saint Margaret Mary Alacoque and thus fail to keep the
Nine First Fridays.
Our efforts to seek the restoration of the Social Reign of Christ the King are fruitless if we do
not keep the Five First Saturdays, spending at least fifteen minutes in prayer before the
Blessed Sacrament as we truly meditate upon the mysteries contained in Our Lady's Most
Holy Rosary.
Our efforts to convince others that the "modern church" is not the Catholic Church will be
less effective if we do not accuse ourselves on a regular (weekly) basis in the Sacred Tribunal
of Penance, resolving after we have received Absolution from an alter Christus acting in
persona Christi to live more penitentially, giving all of our sufferings and those of the Church
Militant on earth to the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus through the Sorrowful and Immaculate
Heart of Mary.
We must, however, be people who are on fire for our love of the Rosary, which Our Lady
stressed in Fatima is a principal means to save our own souls and to help to convert other poor
sinners and thus to save them from the fires of Hell that she had shown to Jacinta, Francisco
and Lucia on July 13, 1917. Our Lady told Francisco that he would have to pray many
Rosaries to get to Heaven. Francisco Marto, mind you! And we must convince more and more
of our friends and acquaintances to pray the Rosary. Our Lady wants this. So does her Divine
Son.
Consider these words of Saint Louis Grignion de Montfort, contained in The Secret of the
Rosary:
Later on, when these trials were over, thanks to the mercy of God, our Lady told Blessed
Alan[de la Roche] to revive the former Confraternity of the Holy Rosary. Blessed Alan was
one of the Dominican Fathers at the monastery at Dinan, in Brittany. He was an eminent
theologian and a famous preacher. Our Lady chose him because, since the Confraternity had
originally been started in that province, it was fitting that a Dominican from the same
province should have the honour of re-establishing it.
Blessed Alan began this great work in 1460, after a special warning from our Lord. This is
how he received that urgent message, as he himself tells it:
One day when he was offering Mass, our Lord, who wished to spur him on to preach the holy
Rosary, spoke to him in the Sacred Host. "How can you crucify me again so soon?" Jesus
said. "What did you say, Lord?" asked Blessed Alan, horrified. "You crucified me once before
by your sins," answered Jesus, "and I would willingly be crucified again rather than have my
Father offended by the sins you used to commit. You are crucifying me again now because
you have all the learning and understanding that you need to preach my Mother's
Rosary, and you are not doing it. If you only did that, you could teach many souls the
right path and lead them away from sin. But you are not doing it, and so you yourself
are guilty of the sins that they commit."
This terrible reproach made Blessed Alan solemnly resolve to preach the Rosary
unceasingly.
Our Lady also said to him one day to inspire him to preach the Rosary more and more, "You
were a great sinner in your youth, but I obtained the grace of your conversion from my Son.
Had such a thing been possible, I would have liked to have gone through all kinds of suffering
to save you, because converted sinners are a glory to me. And I would have done that also to
make you worthy of preaching my Rosary far and wide."
Saint Dominic appeared to Blessed Alan as well and told him of the great results of his
ministry: he had preached the Rosary unceasingly, his sermons had borne great fruit and many
people had been converted during his missions.
He said to Blessed Alan, "See what wonderful results I have had through preaching the
Rosary. You and all who love our Lady ought to do the same so that, by means of this holy
practice of the Rosary, you may draw all people to the real science of the virtues."
Briefly, then, this is the history of how Saint Dominic established the holy Rosary and of how
Blessed Alan de la Roche restored it.
From the time Saint Dominic established the devotion to the holy Rosary up to the time when
Blessed Alan de la Roche reestablished it in 1460, it has always been called the Psalter of
Jesus and Mary. This is because it has the same number of Hail Marys as there are psalms in
the Book of the Psalms of David. Since simple and uneducated people are not able to say the
Psalms of David, the Rosary is held to be just as fruitful for them as David's Psalter is for
others.
Ever since Blessed Alan de la Roche re-established this devotion, the voice of the people,
which is the voice of God, gave it the name of the Rosary, which means "crown of roses."
That is to say that every time people say the Rosary devoutly they place on the heads of Jesus
and Mary 153 white roses and sixteen red roses. Being heavenly flowers, these roses will
never fade or lose their beauty.
Our Lady has approved and confirmed this name of the Rosary; she has revealed to several
people that each time they say a Hail Mary they are giving her a beautiful rose, and that each
complete Rosary makes her a crown of roses.
So the complete Rosary is a large crown of roses and each chaplet of five decades is a little
wreath of flowers or a little crown of heavenly roses which we place on the heads of Jesus and
Mary. The rose is the queen of flowers, and so the Rosary is the rose of devotions and the
most important one. (
Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI mentioned the Rosary, including, of course, the "luminous
mysteries," precisely once during his pilgrimage to Portugal in 2010. Once. Even unlike his
conciliar predecessor, the very man who deconstructed the Rosary, Karol Wojtyla/John Paul
II, who did preach about the Rosary quite a lot, Ratzinger/Benedict did not do so unceasingly.
He rarely mentioned it at all. He did so in only one talk during his visit to Portugal, after he
had led a recitation of the Rosary. His words were perfunctory, having nothing of beauty or
fervor of those found in Pope Leo XIII's many encyclical letters on the Rosary
(see
, and
Bergoglio?
Please, we don't need any more jokers out there right now as most of the jokers in the
counterfeit church of conciliarism are putting on a really "good shew," to quote the late
Edward Vincent Sullivan, in the Aula Paolo Sicko now.
The practice of praying the Rosary was lost between the time of the Fourteenth and the
Fifteenth Centuries. Our Lady gave the Rosary to Saint Dominic, who used it to crush the
Albigenses heresy. She told Father Alan de la Roche to re-establish the Confraternity of the
Holy Rosary in the year 1460, just one hundred one years before the Battle of Lepanto.
We must use this great weapon to fight the errors of Russia today, among which are quite
indeed the errors of conciliarists that can trace many of their roots to Orthodoxy and those of
the "pro-Luther," if you will, Photius.
What did Pope Leo XIII recommend to combat the evils of society?
Our Lady's Most Holy Rosary:
But men of carnal mind, who love nothing but themselves, allow their thoughts to grovel
upon things of earth until they are unable to lift them to that which is higher. For, far
from using the goods of time as a help towards securing those which are eternal, they lose
sight altogether of the world which is to come, and sink to the lowest depths of degradation.
We may doubt if God could inflict upon man a more terrible punishment than to allow him to
waste his whole life in the pursuit of earthly pleasures, and in forgetfulness of the happiness
which alone lasts for ever.
It is from this danger that they will be happily rescued, who, in the pious practice of the
Rosary, are wont, by frequent and fervent prayer, to keep before their minds the
glorious mysteries. These mysteries are the means by which in the soul of a Christian a most
clear light is shed upon the good things, hidden to sense, but visible to faith, "which God has
prepared for those who love Him." From them we learn that death is not an annihilation which
ends all things, but merely a migration and passage from life to life. By them we are taught
that the path to Heaven lies open to all men, and as we behold Christ ascending thither, we
recall the sweet words of His promise, "I go to prepare a place for you." By them we are
reminded that a time will come when "God will wipe away every tear from our eyes," and that
"neither mourning, nor crying, nor sorrow, shall be any more," and that "We shall be always
with the Lord," and "like to the Lord, for we shall see Him as He is," and "drink of the torrent
of His delight," as "fellow-citizens of the saints," in the blessed companionship of our
glorious Queen and Mother. Dwelling upon such a prospect, our hearts are kindled with
desire, and we exclaim, in the words of a great saint, "How vile grows the earth when I look
up to heaven!" Then, too, shall we feel the solace of the assurance "that which is at present
momentary and light of our tribulation worketh for us above measure exceedingly an eternal
weight of glory" (2 Cor. iv., 17).
Here alone we discover the true relation between time and eternity, between our life on
earth and our life in heaven; and it is thus alone that are formed strong and noble
characters. When such characters can be counted in large numbers, the dignity and well-
being of society are assured. All that is beautiful, good, and true will flourish in the measure
of its conformity to Him who is of all beauty, goodness, and truth the first Principle and the
Eternal Source.
These considerations will explain what We have already laid down concerning the
fruitful advantages which are to be derived from the use of the Rosary, and the healing
power which this devotion possesses for the evils of the age and the fatal sores of society.
These advantages, as we may readily conceive, will be secured in a higher and fuller measure
by those who band themselves together in the sacred Confraternity of the Rosary, and who are
thus more than others united by a special and brotherly bond of devotion to the Most Holy
Virgin. In this Confraternity, approved by the Roman Pontiffs, and enriched by them with
indulgences and privileges, they possess their own rule and government, hold their meetings
at stated times, and are provided with ample means of leading a holy life and of laboring for
the good of the community. They are, are so to speak, the battalions who fight the battle of
Christ, armed with His Sacred Mysteries, and under the banner and guidance of the Heavenly
Queen. How faithfully her intercession is exercised in response to their prayers, processions,
and solemnities is written in the whole experience of the Church not less than in the splendor
of the victory of Lepanto. (Pope Leo XIII, Laetitiae Sanctae, September 8, 1893.)
We are in a figurative Battle of Lepanto at present, dealing with preternatural forces that
appear to vastly outnumber those who have chosen, despite their own sins and failings, to
remain faithful to the authentic patrimony of the Catholic Church and have rejected such
abominations as the Protestant and Masonic Novus Ordo liturgical service and the "luminous
mysteries" (how do the 150 Psalms fit into the the number 200? what, as a reader reminded
me, is "one third" of a Rosary consisting of 200 Hail Marys? Sixty-six point six; got it?) and
the new ecclesiology and ecumenism and religious liberty and separation of Church and State.
We are hated by our own former friends and colleagues and by many of members of our own
families. None of this matters if we care to unite ourselves to the Mercies of the Most Sacred
Heart of Jesus through Our Lady's Most Holy Rosary, giving each Rosary we pray to the
Sacred Heart through the Immaculate Heart of Mary as her consecrated slaves.
Although we should note with sadness the ceaseless (and ceaselessly clumsy and transparent)
efforts of the conciliar revolutionaries to deconstruct Our Lady's Fatima Message, we must
never be discouraged or disconsolate. Never. We are Catholics, not brooding or sappy
sentimentalists. The final victory belongs to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. We can plant the
seeds for this victory by our daily fidelity to Our Lady's Most Holy Rosary. And, my friends,
praying the Rosary is not being inert or passive in the midst of our state of apostasy and
betrayal!
We must make sure not to be in league with the Mayor of Ourem, Portugal, Artur de Oliveira
Santos, who held the Fatima children captive in August of 1913, and those who are in league
with him in the counterfeit church of conciliarism, who hold all truth captive, including that of
the Fatima Message, in order to promote their lies. As we seek refuge from the conciliar
revolutionaries in the catacombs with true bishops and true priests, may we always prove
ourselves to belong to God by praying and propagating the Most Holy Rosary of His Most
Blessed Mother.
Isn't it time to pray a Rosary now?
Vivat Christus Rex! Viva Cristo Rey!
Immaculate Heart of Mary, pray for us now and the hour of our death. Amen.
Our Lady of Fatima, pray for us.
Saint Joseph, pray for us.
Saints Peter and Paul, pray for us.
Saint John the Baptist, pray for us.
Saint John the Evangelist, pray for us.
Saint Michael the Archangel, pray for us.
Saint Gabriel the Archangel, pray for us.
Saint Raphael the Archangel, pray for us.
Saints Joachim and Anne, pray for us.
Saints Caspar, Melchior, and Balthasar, pray for us.
Saint Edward the Confessor, pray for us.
Appendix
Material from The Devil's Final Battle on the Deconstruction of Our Lady's Fatima
Message (a book that accepts the legitimacy of the conciliar officials)
It is this part of the Third Secret that causes the conciliar revolutionaries to undertake their
clumsy and sometimes transparent efforts to replicate within the walls of the Vatican, which is
now conciliar-occupied territory, what the Artur de Oliveira Santos did in Ourem: silence the
Fatima Message once and for all. Consider these passage from The Devil's Fatima Battle,
edited by Father Paul Kramer, published by Good Counsel Publications in 2002:
First, as Vatican Secretary of State, Cardinal Sodano is literally the most powerful figure in
the Church today, given the reorganization of the Roman Curia under Pope Paul the Sick; and,
as such, Cardinal Sodano is the de facto rule of the daily affairs of the Church, especially
given the failing health of the Supreme Pontiff.
Second, owing to the same curial reforms of Pope Paul the Sick, Cardinal Sodano stands at
the head of every Vatican dicastery, including the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith
(CDF), which (when it was called the Holy Office) was formerly headed by the Pope.
Third, it is Cardinal Sodano who has dictated what we have called the Party Line on Fatima:
i.e., the falsehood that he Message of Fatima, including the Third Secret, belongs entirely to
the past., and that no one may request any longer the Consecration of Russia. We know this
because:
•
it was Cardinal Sodano, not the Pope, who announced to the world on May
13, 2000 that the Third Secret would be revealed, but only after a
"commentary" had been prepared by the CDF, which, again, is
subordinated to him, and
•
it was Cardinal Sodano's "interpretation" of the Third Secret that was cited
no fewer than four times in the CDF's commentary The Message of Fatima
(TMF).
Fourth, Cardinal Sodano, as the de facto ruler of daily Church affairs, has vigorously enforced
the new orientation of the Church in the manner of Fatima We know this because,
•
Cardinal Sodano took control of the "interpretation" of the Third Secret and
its false reduction to a thing of the past, along with the rest of the Fatima
Message.
•
One day after the publication of TMF, Cardinal Sodano pointedly
demonstrated his adherence to the new orientation by inviting Mikhail
Gorbachev, the pro-abortion, ex-Soviet dictator, to the Vatican for a bogus
"press conference" (no questions allowed), during which Cardinal Sodano,
Gorbachev and Cardinal Silvestrini sat together to heap praise on a key
element of the new orientation, developed by Cardinal Sodano's
predecessor, Cardinal Cassaroli, namely, Ostpolitik, under which the
Church "dialogues" with Communist regimes rather than opposing them,
and observes diplomatic silence in the face of Communist persecution of
the Church.
Cardinal Sodano's representative, Cardinal Cassidy, negotiated the Balamand Declaration
(1993) which declares that the return of the Orthodox to Rome is "outdated ecclesiology"--as
is, therefore, (according to Cardinal Sodano) the conversion of Russia to the Catholic Faith
called for by Our Lady of Fatima. . . .
The Devil's Final Battle also discussed the role played by Joseph Ratzinger in deconstructing
and misinterpreting the Third Secret of Fatima:
First, Cardinal Ratzinger, in his capacity as head of the CDF, has on innumerable occasions
stated his commitment to the new orientation of the Church, which he described as
"demolition of bastions" in a book published after he had become head of the CDF.
Second, in accordance with this "demolition of bastions", Cardinal Ratzinger has openly
declared his view that Blessed Pius IX and St. Pius X were "one-sided" in their solemn,
infallible condemnation of liberalism, and that their teaching was "countered" by Vatican II.
He further declares that the Catholic Church no loner seeks to convert all the Protestants and
schismatics, and that it is no right to "absorb" their "churches and ecclesial communities," but
must make a place for them in a "unity of diversity"--a view that is obviously irreconcilable
with the consecration and conversion of Russia to the Catholic Faith. Cardinal Ratzinger's
view is, to say the least, suspect of heresy.
Third, one of the "bastions" Cardinal Ratzinger has sought to "demolish" is the traditional
Catholic understanding of the Message of Fatima.
Fourth, Cardinal Ratzinger sought to demolish the bastion of Fatima in TMF, which he
published under the control of Cardinal Sodano.
Fifth, TMF attempts to destroy the authentic Catholic prophetic content of the Message by the
following exegetical frauds:
•
Cardinal Ratzinger removed the words "in the end" from the Virgin's prophecy
"In the end, My Immaculate Heart will triumph."
•
Cardinal Ratzinger also cropped the immediately following words from the
Fatima prophecy: "The Holy Father will consecrate Russia to Me, and it will be
converted, and a period of peace will be granted to the world.
•
Having deliberately tampered with the words of the Mother of God, Cardinal
Ratzinger then declared that the (predicted future) Triumph of the Immaculate
Heart means only Mary's fiat, 2,000 years ago, in consenting to be the Mother of
the Redeemer.
•
Cardinal Ratzinger thus deliberately ignored the Virgin's prophecy of four future
events surrounding the consecration and conversion of Russia, and deliberately
reduced them all to one event--Her fiat in 1 B.C.
•
Concerning devotion to the Immaculate Heart, which Our Lady of Fatima
announced that God wills to establish in the world, Cardinal Ratzinger dared to
say that devotion to the one and only Immaculate Heart of Mary means nothing
more than following Mary's example by achieving an "immaculate heart" of
one's own, through "interior unity" with God.
•
By means of this grotesque and blasphemous "interpretation," Cardinal Ratzinger
debases the Mother of God Herself in order to sever any link between devotion
to the Immaculate Heart in the world, and Our Lady of Fatima's call for the
conversion of Russia to the Catholic religion, which must precede true devotion
to the Immaculate Heart in that nation since the Russian Orthodox religion does
not recognize the dogma of the Immaculate Conception.
Sixth, Cardinal Ratzinger, following Cardinal Sodano's Party Line, stated in TMF that "we
must affirm with Cardinal Sodano: ...the events to which the third part of the 'secret' of Fatima
refers now seem part of the past", and (according to Cardinal Sodano's "interpretation") that
the Third Secret culminated with the failed assassination attempt in 1981.
Seventh, in adopting the Sodano Party Line on the Third Secret, Cardinal Ratzinger flatly
contradicted his own testimony in 1984--three years after the assassination attempt--that the
Third Secret is a "religious prophecy" concerning "dangers to the faith and the life of the
Christian, and therefore the world", on which occasion Cardinal Ratzinger made no
suggestion that the Secret pertained to the 1981 assassination attempt or any other past event.
Eighth, in furtherance of the Party Line, Cardinal Ratzinger went out of his way to criticize
Father Nicholas Gruner at the press conference of June 26, 2000, advising the world press that
Father Gruner "must be submissive to the Magisterium" and accept the alleged 1984
consecration of the world as a consecration of Russia. That is, according to Cardinal
Ratzinger, Father Gruner must submit to Cardinal Sodano's Party Line. Cardinal Ratzinger's
claim is false because there has been no binding, authoritative pronouncement of the
Magisterium--not the Pope, not a Council, not the Ordinary and Universal Magisterium.
Ninth, in sum, Cardinal Ratzinger, carrying out the Party Line, deliberately used his position
as head of the CDF to lend the false appearance of theological weight and validity to a
shameless "deconstruction" of the Message of Fatima--an effort so blatant that even the Los
Angeles Times sub-headlined its coverage of TMF and the June 26, 2000 press conference as
follows: "The Vatican's Top Theologian Gently Debunks a Nun's Account of Her 1917 Vision
that Fueled Decades of Speculation." (The Devil's Final Battle, pp. 230-233)
The Devil's Final Battle discusses additional questions about the conciliar Vatican's party line
about the The Third Secret of Fatima on pp. 284-285:
June 26, 2000 - At a press conference, the Vatican publishes a text it claims is the entire Third
Secret. The text describes a vision in which the Pope (a "bishop in white") is killed by a band
of solders who shoot him down while he is kneeling at the foot of a large wooden cross atop a
hill, after having traversed a half-ruined city filled with corpses. The execution of the Pope is
followed by the execution of many bishops, priests and laity.
Questions abound. (See article by Andrew Cesanek in The Fatima Crusader, Issue No. 64.)
Among those questions is why the published vision contains no words of Our Lady, even
though, when it announced suppression of the Secret in 1960, the Vatican itself referred to
"the words which Our Lady confided to the children as a secret." The vision fails to mention
the words which clearly follow. "In Portugal the dogma of the Faith will always be preserved
etc."--the phrase Sister Lucy included in her fourth memoir as part of the integral text of the
Third Secret of Fatima. The phrase concerning the dogma of the Faith in Portugal is
mysteriously demoted to a footnote in the Vatican commentary on the Secret, where it is
ignored by both Cardinal Ratzinger and Msgr. Bertone, the co-authors of the commentary.
Cardinal Ratzinger's portion of the commentary specifically states that he and Msgr. Bertone
are following the "interpretation" given by Cardinal Sodano: i.e., that the Message of Fatima,
and the Third Secret in Particular, relates entirely to events which now belong to the past.
Accordingly, Cardinal Ratzinger claims that the Pope's escape from death in 1981 is what is
depicted in the vision of the Pope being killed. Even the secular media recognize the falsity of
this interpretation.
The published text of the vision contains none of the elements described by Cardinal
Ratzinger in his mysteriously censored 1984 interview in Jesus magazine. The published
vision says nothing about "dangers threatening the Faith and the life of the Christian and
therefore of the world", nothing about "the importance of end times", nothing about what is
contained "in many other Marian apparition" approved by the Church and nothing about
prophecies "announced in Scripture". Further, while Cardinal Ratzinger said in 1984 that the
Third Secret contains "religious prophecy:"--a statement he made three years after the attempt
on the Pope's life--he will now claim that there is no prophecy, but only a description of past
events, culminating in the 1981 assassination attempt.
Further, Cardinal Ratzinger's commentary scandalizes the faithful by claiming that the
triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary is nothing more than love conquering bombs and
guns, and that devotion to the Immaculate Heart means nothing more than each person doing
God's will and thus acquiring an 'immaculate heart" of his or her own. The conversion of
Russia to Catholicism and the spreading of devotion to the one unique Immaculate Heart of
Mary throughout the world are not even mentioned in Cardinal Ratzinger's commentary.
Dr. David Allen White summarized the contents of The Devil's Final Battle as follows in a
2002 book review that was published in Catholic Family News:
More than the Vatican’s "top theologian" were involved in this public insult to the Catholic
faithful, and public insult to the Mother of God. One of the glories of the new book is that it
names and thoroughly explores the roles played by each of the four prelates who are quite
rightfully lined up as an anti-Fatima cabal. They are Cardinal Angelo Sodano, Cardinal
Joseph Ratzinger, Archbishop Tarcisio Bertone and Cardinal Dario Castrillón Hoyos. These
prelates have colluded to stifle the Mother of God, to silence Sister Lucy, to obscure the
Message of Fatima and to promote a new Church that stands in opposition to all of Catholic
Tradition. They deserve to be exposed; they should be forced to answer to the Catholic
faithful even before they stand before their Maker and are made to answer to Him. Their
opposition puts both world peace and millions of souls in peril.
http://tradcatknight.blogspot.com/2017/10/the-errors-of-russia-spread-in-catholic.html#more
Wyszukiwarka
Podobne podstrony:
62 NIEWIARA W ISTNIENIE SZATANA SZERZY SIĘ W KOŚCIELE
Prawda o kościele katolickim Kościół Rzymsko Katolicki błędy rzymskiego katolicyzmu błędy kościoł
Odpusty w Kościele Katolickim, Katolicyzm
Święta nakazane w kościele katolickim
Katecheza przedchrzcielna w Kościele katolickim
Działania Masonerii w Kościele Katolickim
Sensacja w Kościele katolickim w RFN(1)
Żydomasońska rewolucja w Kościele Katolickim Piekielne kościoły
Człowiek rodzi się mądry i głupieje przed TV
Człowiek rodzi się mądry i głupieje przed TV
kłopotliwe, spowiedz powszechna, Dlaczego w Kościele katolickim nie ma spowiedzi powszechnej
Spotkali się w święto o piątej przed kinem miejscowa idiotka z tutejszym kretynem
W Kościele Katolickim pełne egzorcyzmy obejmują obszerne modlitwy wstępne, MITOLOGIA WIERZENIA DEMON
Instrukcja Episkopatu Polski o przygotowaniu do zawarcia małżeństwa w kościele katolickim (1)
Motywacja do uczenia się pływania. Lęk przed wodą-konspekt, uczelnia awf, pływanie
NWO - KORZENIE ZLA -PRZEPOWIEDNIA SIE SPELNIA LUDZKOSC PRZED NOWYM NIEWOLNICTWEM, N W O - nowy
Co udało się Owsiakowi udowodnić i przed czym Owsiak łamiąc prawo uciekł, WIELKA ORKIESTRA ŚWIĄTECZN
Masoneria w Kościele Katolickim
więcej podobnych podstron