| Devotion to Our Lady |
|
Article 1
What Rome Wants You to Know
What Rome Wants You to Know
The Vatican released a new document on June 20th, 2023, outlining key questions for the 16th General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops, more commonly known as the Synod on Synodality.
Here is what the Vatican wants you to know [our comments upon this will follow in a later article]:
What is the Synod on Synodality?
The Synod on Synodality, initiated by Pope Francis in October 2021, is a multiyear, worldwide undertaking during which Catholics were asked to submit feedback to their local dioceses on the question “What steps does the Spirit invite us to take in order to grow in our ‘journeying together?’”
The Catholic Church’s massive synodal process has already undergone diocesan, national, and continental stages. It will culminate in two global assemblies at the Vatican. The first will take place October 4th to 28th, 2023, and the second in October 2024 to advise the pope on the topic: “For a Synodal Church: Communion, Participation, Mission.”
What does Synodality mean?
Synodality was defined by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith’s International Theological Commission in 2018 as “the action of the Spirit in the communion of the Body of Christ and in the missionary journey of the people of God.”
The 2021 Synod preparatory document described synodality as “the form, the style, and the structure of the Church.”
The latest document published by the Vatican adds that synodality can also be understood as something that “does not derive from the enunciation of a principle, a theory, or a formula but develops from a readiness to enter into a dynamic of constructive, respectful, and prayerful speaking, listening, and dialogue.”
“At the root of this process is the acceptance, both personal and communal, of something that is both a gift and a challenge: to be a Church of sisters and brothers in Christ who listen to one another and who, in so doing, are gradually transformed by the Spirit,” it says.
What are the Documents of the Synod on Synodality?
On June 20th, 2023, the Vatican issued a working document called the Instrumentum Laboris to guide the discussions at the first global assembly of the Synod on Synodality. It contains 15 worksheets with questions for discernment for delegates participating in the upcoming October meeting [we will post them on a separate page―since they take up 70 pages of letter-size paper!].
This new Instrumentum Laboris, written by a committee of 22 people, has been presented as a synthesis of the eight final documents produced by the continental assemblies that met in the first months of 2023.
Discussions at the seven continental assemblies were based on an earlier 44-page working document referred to as the DCS (Document for the Continental Stage) published in October 2022, entitled “Enlarge the Space of Your Tent.”
The DCS was described by its authors as a summary of the more than 100 summary reports shared with the Vatican by bishops’ conferences, religious congregations, departments of the Roman Curia, lay movements, and other groups and individuals.
Local dioceses organized their synod discussions using the vademecum, or handbook, and the preparatory document issued by the General Secretariat of the Synod in 2021.
How will the Instrumentum Laboris be used in the October Synod Assembly?
The 50-page Instrumentum Laboris is divided into two sections. The first summarizes insights from the continental assemblies and outlines what a synodal Church is and how it should proceed. The second section is a series of 15 worksheets with questions for discernment.
The worksheets will be used to guide the small-group discussions of the October assembly in the Paul VI Hall. The small groups, also called Circuli Minores, will alternate with plenary sessions where all Synod participants are together.
The last part of the October gathering will focus on deciding the Church’s next steps and “the necessary in-depth theological and canonical studies in preparation” for a second assembly in October 2024.
What are the Main Questions that the Synod on Synodality will try to answer?
Here are the three overarching questions defined by the 2023 Instrumentum Laboris:
(1) How can we be more fully a sign and instrument of union with God and of the unity of all humanity?
(2) How can we better share gifts and tasks in the service of the Gospel?
(3) What processes, structures, and institutions in a missionary synodal Church?
The main objective of the first session in October, according to the Instrumentum Laboris, will be to design a plan of study in a “synodal style” and to indicate who will be involved in those discussions. Discernment will be “completed” in the 2024 session of the Synod.
What are some of the Topics that could be Addressed in the Synod Assembly?
The Instrumentum Laboris document guiding the discussions at the October synod assembly suggests discernment on questions regarding some hot-button topics, including women deacons, priestly celibacy, and LGBTQ outreach.
The document highlights a desire for new institutional bodies to allow for greater participation in decision-making by the “people of God.” One of the proposed questions for discernment for the synod of bishops asks: “What can we learn about the exercise of authority and responsibility from other Churches and ecclesial communities?”
How does the Synod on Synodality differ from Past Synods of Bishops?
A Synod is a meeting of bishops gathered to discuss a topic of theological or pastoral significance in order to prepare a document of advice or counsel to the pope.
For the first time, about 21% of the voting delegates in the 2023 Synod of Bishops on Synodality will not be bishops, and 70 delegates will be chosen directly by the pope from among a list of 140 laypeople, priests, consecrated women, and deacons selected by the leadership of this year’s continental synod meetings. The delegates for the October Synod assembly have not yet been announced.
The October assembly will be held in the Paul VI Hall, instead of the Vatican’s New Synod Hall, with delegates sitting at round tables of about 10 people each.
What other Events are happening leading up to the October Vatican Assembly?
The 2023 Synod on Synodality assembly at the Vatican will begin with a three-day retreat for the Catholic bishops and participants from October 1st to 3rd, led by Dominican Father Timothy Radcliffe, who has drawn criticism by some for his statements on homosexuality.
Pope Francis has also announced an ecumenical prayer vigil will take place in St. Peter’s Square as part of the Synod on Synodality on September 30th. The prayer vigil, organized by the Taizé Community, will entrust to God the work of the October Synod assembly.
How is the Participation in the Synod on Synodality?
The General Secretariat of the Synod of Bishops has reported that the initial diocesan listening phase concluded with the participation of 112 out of 114 of the world’s Catholic bishops’ Conferences.
According to a report from the U.S. Bishops’ Conference, about 700,000 people participated in the diocesan phase of the synod in the U.S. out of 66.8 million Catholics in the country, or about 1%.
Who are the Key Organizers of the Synod on Synodality?
Cardinal Jean-Claude Hollerich, the 64-year-old Archbishop of Luxembourg, is one of the leading organizers of the ongoing Synod on Synodality as the Relator General (Chief Coordinator and Facilitator). The Jesuit was recently added to Pope Francis’ council of cardinal advisers. Hollerich said in an interview in March that he believes that a future pope could allow women priests and that he finds “the part of the teaching calling homosexuality ‘intrinsically disordered’ a bit dubious.”
Cardinal Mario Grech, the Secretary General for the Synod of Bishops, is the former Bishop of Gozo, Malta. He was one of two authors of the Maltese bishops’ controversial pastoral guidelines on Amoris Laetitia, which stated that divorced and remarried Catholics, in certain cases and after “honest discernment,” could receive Communion. Last year, Grech decried the public criticism of the German “Synodal Way” as “denunciation.”
What has Pope Francis said about the Synod on Synodality?
On Pentecost this year, Pope Francis said that he sees the Holy Spirit not only as the “soul of the Church” but also as “the heart of synodality.”
He called for the Synod on Synodality to “place the Holy Spirit at the beginning and at the heart of the work of the Synod.”
“The Synod now taking place is — and should be — a journey in accordance with the Spirit, not a parliament for demanding rights and claiming needs in accordance with the agenda of the world, nor an occasion for following wherever the wind is blowing, but the opportunity to be docile to the breath of the Holy Spirit,” Pope Francis said.
Is there a Prayer for the Synod on Synodality?
Pope Francis announced in May that Marian shrines around the world would hold a day of prayer for the 16th Ordinary General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops. Cardinal Grech has also asked men and women in monastic and contemplative religious life to pray for the Church’s ongoing Synod on Synodality.
The vademecum for the synod published the following Prayer for the Synod on Synodality:
“We stand before you, Holy Spirit, as we gather together in Your name. With You alone to guide us, make Yourself at home in our hearts; teach us the way we must go and how we are to pursue it. We are weak and sinful; do not let us promote disorder. Do not let ignorance lead us down the wrong path, nor partiality influence our actions. Let us find in You our unity so that we may journey together to eternal life and not stray from the way of truth and what is right. All this we ask of You, Who are at work in every place and time, in the communion of the Father and the Son, forever and ever. Amen.”
Here is what the Vatican wants you to know [our comments upon this will follow in a later article]:
What is the Synod on Synodality?
The Synod on Synodality, initiated by Pope Francis in October 2021, is a multiyear, worldwide undertaking during which Catholics were asked to submit feedback to their local dioceses on the question “What steps does the Spirit invite us to take in order to grow in our ‘journeying together?’”
The Catholic Church’s massive synodal process has already undergone diocesan, national, and continental stages. It will culminate in two global assemblies at the Vatican. The first will take place October 4th to 28th, 2023, and the second in October 2024 to advise the pope on the topic: “For a Synodal Church: Communion, Participation, Mission.”
What does Synodality mean?
Synodality was defined by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith’s International Theological Commission in 2018 as “the action of the Spirit in the communion of the Body of Christ and in the missionary journey of the people of God.”
The 2021 Synod preparatory document described synodality as “the form, the style, and the structure of the Church.”
The latest document published by the Vatican adds that synodality can also be understood as something that “does not derive from the enunciation of a principle, a theory, or a formula but develops from a readiness to enter into a dynamic of constructive, respectful, and prayerful speaking, listening, and dialogue.”
“At the root of this process is the acceptance, both personal and communal, of something that is both a gift and a challenge: to be a Church of sisters and brothers in Christ who listen to one another and who, in so doing, are gradually transformed by the Spirit,” it says.
What are the Documents of the Synod on Synodality?
On June 20th, 2023, the Vatican issued a working document called the Instrumentum Laboris to guide the discussions at the first global assembly of the Synod on Synodality. It contains 15 worksheets with questions for discernment for delegates participating in the upcoming October meeting [we will post them on a separate page―since they take up 70 pages of letter-size paper!].
This new Instrumentum Laboris, written by a committee of 22 people, has been presented as a synthesis of the eight final documents produced by the continental assemblies that met in the first months of 2023.
Discussions at the seven continental assemblies were based on an earlier 44-page working document referred to as the DCS (Document for the Continental Stage) published in October 2022, entitled “Enlarge the Space of Your Tent.”
The DCS was described by its authors as a summary of the more than 100 summary reports shared with the Vatican by bishops’ conferences, religious congregations, departments of the Roman Curia, lay movements, and other groups and individuals.
Local dioceses organized their synod discussions using the vademecum, or handbook, and the preparatory document issued by the General Secretariat of the Synod in 2021.
How will the Instrumentum Laboris be used in the October Synod Assembly?
The 50-page Instrumentum Laboris is divided into two sections. The first summarizes insights from the continental assemblies and outlines what a synodal Church is and how it should proceed. The second section is a series of 15 worksheets with questions for discernment.
The worksheets will be used to guide the small-group discussions of the October assembly in the Paul VI Hall. The small groups, also called Circuli Minores, will alternate with plenary sessions where all Synod participants are together.
The last part of the October gathering will focus on deciding the Church’s next steps and “the necessary in-depth theological and canonical studies in preparation” for a second assembly in October 2024.
What are the Main Questions that the Synod on Synodality will try to answer?
Here are the three overarching questions defined by the 2023 Instrumentum Laboris:
(1) How can we be more fully a sign and instrument of union with God and of the unity of all humanity?
(2) How can we better share gifts and tasks in the service of the Gospel?
(3) What processes, structures, and institutions in a missionary synodal Church?
The main objective of the first session in October, according to the Instrumentum Laboris, will be to design a plan of study in a “synodal style” and to indicate who will be involved in those discussions. Discernment will be “completed” in the 2024 session of the Synod.
What are some of the Topics that could be Addressed in the Synod Assembly?
The Instrumentum Laboris document guiding the discussions at the October synod assembly suggests discernment on questions regarding some hot-button topics, including women deacons, priestly celibacy, and LGBTQ outreach.
The document highlights a desire for new institutional bodies to allow for greater participation in decision-making by the “people of God.” One of the proposed questions for discernment for the synod of bishops asks: “What can we learn about the exercise of authority and responsibility from other Churches and ecclesial communities?”
How does the Synod on Synodality differ from Past Synods of Bishops?
A Synod is a meeting of bishops gathered to discuss a topic of theological or pastoral significance in order to prepare a document of advice or counsel to the pope.
For the first time, about 21% of the voting delegates in the 2023 Synod of Bishops on Synodality will not be bishops, and 70 delegates will be chosen directly by the pope from among a list of 140 laypeople, priests, consecrated women, and deacons selected by the leadership of this year’s continental synod meetings. The delegates for the October Synod assembly have not yet been announced.
The October assembly will be held in the Paul VI Hall, instead of the Vatican’s New Synod Hall, with delegates sitting at round tables of about 10 people each.
What other Events are happening leading up to the October Vatican Assembly?
The 2023 Synod on Synodality assembly at the Vatican will begin with a three-day retreat for the Catholic bishops and participants from October 1st to 3rd, led by Dominican Father Timothy Radcliffe, who has drawn criticism by some for his statements on homosexuality.
Pope Francis has also announced an ecumenical prayer vigil will take place in St. Peter’s Square as part of the Synod on Synodality on September 30th. The prayer vigil, organized by the Taizé Community, will entrust to God the work of the October Synod assembly.
How is the Participation in the Synod on Synodality?
The General Secretariat of the Synod of Bishops has reported that the initial diocesan listening phase concluded with the participation of 112 out of 114 of the world’s Catholic bishops’ Conferences.
According to a report from the U.S. Bishops’ Conference, about 700,000 people participated in the diocesan phase of the synod in the U.S. out of 66.8 million Catholics in the country, or about 1%.
Who are the Key Organizers of the Synod on Synodality?
Cardinal Jean-Claude Hollerich, the 64-year-old Archbishop of Luxembourg, is one of the leading organizers of the ongoing Synod on Synodality as the Relator General (Chief Coordinator and Facilitator). The Jesuit was recently added to Pope Francis’ council of cardinal advisers. Hollerich said in an interview in March that he believes that a future pope could allow women priests and that he finds “the part of the teaching calling homosexuality ‘intrinsically disordered’ a bit dubious.”
Cardinal Mario Grech, the Secretary General for the Synod of Bishops, is the former Bishop of Gozo, Malta. He was one of two authors of the Maltese bishops’ controversial pastoral guidelines on Amoris Laetitia, which stated that divorced and remarried Catholics, in certain cases and after “honest discernment,” could receive Communion. Last year, Grech decried the public criticism of the German “Synodal Way” as “denunciation.”
What has Pope Francis said about the Synod on Synodality?
On Pentecost this year, Pope Francis said that he sees the Holy Spirit not only as the “soul of the Church” but also as “the heart of synodality.”
He called for the Synod on Synodality to “place the Holy Spirit at the beginning and at the heart of the work of the Synod.”
“The Synod now taking place is — and should be — a journey in accordance with the Spirit, not a parliament for demanding rights and claiming needs in accordance with the agenda of the world, nor an occasion for following wherever the wind is blowing, but the opportunity to be docile to the breath of the Holy Spirit,” Pope Francis said.
Is there a Prayer for the Synod on Synodality?
Pope Francis announced in May that Marian shrines around the world would hold a day of prayer for the 16th Ordinary General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops. Cardinal Grech has also asked men and women in monastic and contemplative religious life to pray for the Church’s ongoing Synod on Synodality.
The vademecum for the synod published the following Prayer for the Synod on Synodality:
“We stand before you, Holy Spirit, as we gather together in Your name. With You alone to guide us, make Yourself at home in our hearts; teach us the way we must go and how we are to pursue it. We are weak and sinful; do not let us promote disorder. Do not let ignorance lead us down the wrong path, nor partiality influence our actions. Let us find in You our unity so that we may journey together to eternal life and not stray from the way of truth and what is right. All this we ask of You, Who are at work in every place and time, in the communion of the Father and the Son, forever and ever. Amen.”
Article 2
The Plots and Plans of Rome
The Plots and Plans of Rome
What should be a totally spiritual Rome has become an almost totally political Rome. Rather than be guided by principles of God, Rome today is guided by the principles of man. If you know your history, then you will recall how the adherents of the 1789 French Revolution started and spread across France the Cult of Reason―which rejected any kind of deity and the supernatural; and instituted the Temple of Reason―a temple for a new belief system created to replace Christianity. On the 10th of November 1793 a Festival of Reason was commanded to take place all across France. All over France churches were changed into Temples of Reason. In Paris in the Cathedral of Notre Dame the altar was replaced with an altar to Liberty. As the French Revolution progressed, more de-Christianization occurred―taking most of the Church’s land and making priests swear an oath of loyalty to the Revolution. This brought about a new kind of Church―a Church that was at the service of the Revolution.
For Francis, the synod is about a new way of “being Church” ― a path for overcoming divisions through conversations “in the Spirit” and a new way of making decisions in the Church through discernment of what others think. When Francis first kicked-off these multi-year Synods on Synodality, on October 9th, 2021, at a gathering of more than 200 cardinals, bishops, clergy, religious and laity from all over the world, he quoted the Liberal and Modernist Catholic theologian, Yves Congar, OP, saying: “There is no need to create another Church, but to create a different Church!” That was Francis’ 4th Synod—after the Synods on the (1) family, (2) youth and (3) Amazonia—but his 4th Synod was intended to be the path to a profound renewal and transformation of the Catholic Church worldwide.
The few remaining Conservative cardinals of the Church have never been at ease with Francis’ Synods on Synodality and have expressed their concerns in the traditional form of written dubia (which means “doubts and questions on those doubts). They wrote down their doubts and questions about the path Francis was following and formally submitted those doubts and questions on those doubts (dubia) on two separate occasions.
All in all, the cardinals produced three documents:
(1) the initial formulation of the dubia which was sent to Pope Francis;
(2) the reformulation of the dubia in response to a private letter the signatory cardinals received from Pope Francis;
(3) the notification that the signatory cardinals made to the faithful regarding the dubia sent to Pope Francis.
1ST DOCUMENT
ORIGINAL FORMULATION OF THE DUBIA
1ST DUBIUM ― about the claim that we should reinterpret Divine Revelation according to the cultural and anthropological changes in vogue.
After the statements of some Bishops, which have been neither corrected nor retracted, it is asked whether in the Church Divine Revelation should be reinterpreted according to the cultural changes of our time and according to the new anthropological vision that these changes promote; or whether Divine Revelation is binding forever, immutable and therefore not to be contradicted, according to the dictum of the Second Vatican Council, that to God who reveals is due “the obedience of Faith” (Dei Verbum, §5); that what is revealed for the salvation of all must remain “in their entirety, throughout the ages” and alive, and be “transmitted to all generations” (Dei Verbum, §7); and that the progress of understanding does not imply any change in the truth of things and words, because faith has been “handed on…once and for all” (Dei Verbum, §8), and the Magisterium is not superior to the Word of God, but teaches only what has been handed on (Dei Verbum, §10).
2ND DUBIUM ― about the claim that the widespread practice of the blessing of same-sex unions would be in accord with Revelation and the Magisterium (CCC 2357).
According to Divine Revelation, confirmed in Sacred Scripture, which the Church “at the divine command with the help of the Holy Spirit,…listens to devotedly, guards it with dedication and expounds it faithfully” (Dei Verbum, §10): “In the beginning” God created man in his own image, male and female he created them and blessed them, that they might be fruitful (cf. Genesis 1:27-28), whereby the Apostle Paul teaches that to deny sexual difference is the consequence of the denial of the Creator (Romans 1:24-32). It is asked: Can the Church derogate from this “principle,” considering it, contrary to what Veritatis Splendor, §103, taught, as a mere ideal, and accepting as a “possible good” objectively sinful situations, such as same-sex unions, without betraying revealed doctrine?
3RD DUBIUM ― about the assertion that synodality is a “constitutive element of the Church” (Apostolic Constitution, Episcopalis Communio, §6), so that the Church would, by its very nature, be synodal.
Given that the Synod of Bishops does not represent the College of Bishops but is merely a consultative organ of the Pope, since the Bishops, as witnesses of the faith, cannot delegate their confession of the truth, it is asked whether synodality can be the supreme regulative criterion of the permanent government of the Church without distorting her constitutive order willed by her Founder, whereby the supreme and full authority of the Church is exercised both by the Pope by virtue of his office and by the College of Bishops together with its head the Roman Pontiff (Lumen Gentium, §22).
4TH DUBIUM ― about pastors’ and theologians’ support for the theory that “the theology of the Church has changed” and therefore that priestly ordination can be conferred on women.
After the statements of some prelates, which have been neither corrected nor retracted, according to which, with Vatican II, the theology of the Church and the meaning of the Mass has changed, it is asked whether the dictum of the Second Vatican Council is still valid, that “[the common priesthood of the faithful and the ministerial or hierarchical priesthood] differ essentially and not only in degree” (Lumen Gentium, §10) and that presbyters by virtue of the “sacred power of Order, that of offering sacrifice and forgiving sins” (Presbyterorum Ordinis, §2), act in the name and in the person of Christ the Mediator, through Whom the spiritual sacrifice of the faithful is made perfect. It is furthermore asked whether the teaching of St. John Paul II’s Apostolic Letter Ordinatio Sacerdotalis, which teaches as a truth to be definitively held the impossibility of conferring priestly ordination on women, is still valid, so that this teaching is no longer subject to change nor to the free discussion of pastors or theologians.
5TH DUBIUM ― about the statement “forgiveness is a human right” and the Holy Father’s insistence on the duty to absolve everyone and always, so that repentance would not be a necessary condition for sacramental absolution.
It is asked whether the teaching of the Council of Trent, according to which the contrition of the penitent, which consists in detesting the sin committed with the intention of sinning no more (Session XIV, Chapter IV: DH 1676), is necessary for the validity of sacramental confession, is still in force, so that the priest must postpone absolution when it is clear that this condition is not fulfilled.
Vatican City, July 10th, 2023
Walter Cardinal Brandmüller
Raymond Leo Cardinal Burke
Juan Cardinal Sandoval Íñiguez
Robert Cardinal Sarah
Joseph Cardinal Zen Ze-Kiun, S.D.B.
* * *
2ND DOCUMENT
NEW FORMULATION OF THE DUBIA
To His Holiness
FRANCIS
Supreme Pontiff
Most Holy Father,
We are very grateful for the answers which You have kindly wished to offer us. We would first like to clarify that, if we have asked You these questions, it is not out of fear of dialogue with the people of our time, nor of the questions they could ask us about the Gospel of Christ. In fact, we, like Your Holiness, are convinced that the Gospel brings fullness to human life and responds to our every question. The concern that moves us is another: we are concerned to see that there are pastors who doubt the ability of the Gospel to transform the hearts of men and end up proposing to them no longer sound doctrine but “teachings according to their own likings” (cf. 2 Timothy 4:3). We are also concerned that it be understood that God’s mercy does not consist in covering our sins, but is much greater, in that it enables us to respond to His love by keeping His commandments, that is, to convert and believe in the Gospel (cf. Mark 1:15).
With the same sincerity with which You have answered us, we must add that Your answers have not resolved the doubts we had raised, but have, if anything, deepened them. We therefore feel obliged to re-propose, reformulating them, these questions to Your Holiness, who as the successor of Peter is charged by the Lord to confirm Your brethren in the faith. This is all the more urgent in view of the upcoming Synod, which many want to use to deny Catholic doctrine on the very issues which our dubia concern. We therefore re-propose our questions to You, so that they can be answered with a simple “yes” or “no.”
1ST DUBIUM ― Your Holiness insists that the Church can deepen its understanding of the deposit of faith. This is indeed what Dei Verbum §8 teaches and belongs to Catholic doctrine. Your response, however, does not capture our concern. Many Christians, including pastors and theologians, argue today that the cultural and anthropological changes of our time should push the Church to teach the opposite of what it has always taught. This concerns essential, not secondary, questions for our salvation, like the confession of faith, subjective conditions for access to the sacraments, and observance of the moral law. So we want to rephrase our dubium:
Is it possible for the Church today to teach doctrines contrary to those she has previously taught in matters of faith and morals, whether by the Pope ex cathedra, or in the definitions of an Ecumenical Council, or in the ordinary universal magisterium of the Bishops dispersed throughout the world (cf. Lumen Gentium, §25)? (Yes or No?)
2ND DUBIUM ― Your Holiness has insisted on the fact that there can be no confusion between marriage and other types of unions of a sexual nature and that, therefore, any rite or sacramental blessing of same-sex couples, which would give rise to such confusion, should be avoided. Our concern, however, is a different one: we are concerned that the blessing of same-sex couples might create confusion in any case, not only in that it might make them seem analogous to marriage, but also in that homosexual acts would be presented practically as a good, or at least as the possible good that God asks of people in their journey toward Him. So let us rephrase our dubium: Is it possible that in some circumstances a pastor could bless unions between homosexual persons, thus suggesting that homosexual behavior as such would not be contrary to God’s law and the person’s journey toward God? Linked to this dubium is the need to raise another:
Does the teaching upheld by the universal ordinary magisterium, that every sexual act outside of marriage, and in particular homosexual acts, constitutes an objectively grave sin against God’s law, regardless of the circumstances in which it takes place and the intention with which it is carried out, continue to be valid? (Yes or No?)
3RD DUBIUM ― You have insisted that there is a synodal dimension to the Church, in that all, including the lay faithful, are called to participate and make their voices heard. Our difficulty, however, is another: today the future Synod on “synodality” is being presented as if, in communion with the Pope, it represents the Supreme Authority of the Church. However, the Synod of Bishops is a consultative body of the Pope; it does not represent the College of Bishops and cannot settle the issues dealt with in it nor issue decrees on them, unless, in certain cases, the Roman Pontiff, whose duty it is to ratify the decisions of the Synod, has expressly granted it deliberative power (cf. Code of Canon Law, canon 343). This is a decisive point inasmuch as not involving the College of Bishops in matters such as those that the next Synod intends to raise, which touch on the very constitution of the Church, would go precisely against the root of that synodality, which it claims to want to promote. Let us therefore rephrase our dubium:
Will the Synod of Bishops to be held in Rome, and which includes only a chosen representation of pastors and faithful, exercise, in the doctrinal or pastoral matters on which it will be called to express itself, the Supreme Authority of the Church, which belongs exclusively to the Roman Pontiff and, una cum capite suo, to the College of Bishops (cf. Code of Canon Law, canon 336)? (Yes or No?)
4TH DUBIUM ― In Your reply Your Holiness made it clear that the decision of St. John Paul II in Ordinatio Sacerdotalis is to be held definitively, and rightly added that it is necessary to understand the priesthood, not in terms of power, but in terms of service, in order to understand correctly our Lord’s decision to reserve Holy Orders to men only. On the other hand, in the last point of Your response You added that the question can still be further explored. We are concerned that some may interpret this statement to mean that the matter has not yet been decided in a definitive manner. In fact, St. John Paul II affirms in Ordinatio Sacerdotalis that this doctrine has been taught infallibly by the ordinary and universal magisterium, and therefore that it belongs to the deposit of faith. This was the response of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith to a dubium raised about the apostolic letter, and this response was approved by John Paul II himself. We therefore must reformulate our dubium:
Could the Church in the future have the faculty to confer priestly ordination on women, thus contradicting that the exclusive reservation of this sacrament to baptized males belongs to the very substance of the Sacrament of Orders, which the Church cannot change? (Yes or No?)
5TH DUBIUM ― Finally, Your Holiness confirmed the teaching of the Council of Trent, according to which the validity of sacramental absolution requires the sinner’s repentance, which includes the resolve not to sin again. And You invited us not to doubt God’s infinite mercy. We would like to reiterate that our question does not arise from doubting the greatness of God’s mercy, but, on the contrary, it arises from our awareness that this mercy is so great that we are able to convert to Him, to confess our guilt, and to live as He has taught us. In turn, some might interpret Your answer as meaning that merely approaching confession is a sufficient condition for receiving absolution, inasmuch as it could implicitly include confession of sins and repentance. We would therefore like to rephrase our dubium:
Can a penitent who, while admitting a sin, refuses to make, in any way, the intention not to commit it again, validly receive sacramental absolution? (Yes or No?)
Vatican City, August 21st, 2023
Walter Cardinal Brandmüller
Raymond Leo Cardinal Burke
Juan Cardinal Sandoval Íñiguez
Robert Cardinal Sarah
Joseph Cardinal Zen Ze-kiun
p.c. His Eminence Rev. Luis Francisco Cardinal LADARIA FERRER, S.I.
* * *
3RD DOCUMENT
NOTIFICATION TO CHRIST’S FAITHFUL
(Code of Canon Law, canon 212, §3)
Regarding
Dubia Submitted to Pope Francis
Brothers and Sisters in Christ,
We, members of the Sacred College of Cardinals, in accord with the duty of all the faithful “to manifest to the sacred pastors their opinion on matters which pertain to the good of the Church” (Code of Canon Law, canon 212, §3) and, above all, in accord with the responsibility of Cardinals “to assist the Roman Pontiff…individually…especially in the daily care of the universal Church” (Code of Canon Law, canon 349), in view of various declarations of highly-placed Prelates, pertaining to the celebration of the next Synod of Bishops, that are openly contrary to the constant doctrine and discipline of the Church, and that have generated and continue to generate great confusion and the falling into error among the faithful and other persons of good will, have manifested our deepest concern to the Roman Pontiff. By our letter of July 10th, 2023, employing the proven practice of the submission of dubia [questions] to a superior to provide the superior the occasion to make clear, by his responsa [responses], the doctrine and discipline of the Church, we have submitted five dubia to Pope Francis, a copy of which is attached. By his letter of July 11th, 2023, Pope Francis responded to our letter.
Having studied his letter, which did not follow the practice of responsa ad dubia [responses to questions/doubts], we reformulated the dubia to elicit a clear response based on the perennial doctrine and discipline of the Church. By our letter of August 21st, 2023, we submitted the reformulated dubia, a copy of which is attached, to the Roman Pontiff. Up to the present, we have not received a response to the reformulated dubia.
Given the gravity of the matter of the dubia, especially in view of the imminent session of the Synod of Bishops, we judge it our duty to inform you, the faithful (Code of Canon Law, canon 212, §3), so that you may not be subject to confusion, error, and discouragement―but rather may pray for the universal Church and, in particular, the Roman Pontiff, that the Gospel may be taught ever more clearly and followed ever more faithfully.
Yours in Christ,
Walter Cardinal Brandmüller
Raymond Leo Cardinal Burke
Juan Cardinal Sandoval Íñiguez
Robert Cardinal Sarah
Joseph Cardinal Zen Ze-kiun
Rome, October 2nd, 2023
For Francis, the synod is about a new way of “being Church” ― a path for overcoming divisions through conversations “in the Spirit” and a new way of making decisions in the Church through discernment of what others think. When Francis first kicked-off these multi-year Synods on Synodality, on October 9th, 2021, at a gathering of more than 200 cardinals, bishops, clergy, religious and laity from all over the world, he quoted the Liberal and Modernist Catholic theologian, Yves Congar, OP, saying: “There is no need to create another Church, but to create a different Church!” That was Francis’ 4th Synod—after the Synods on the (1) family, (2) youth and (3) Amazonia—but his 4th Synod was intended to be the path to a profound renewal and transformation of the Catholic Church worldwide.
The few remaining Conservative cardinals of the Church have never been at ease with Francis’ Synods on Synodality and have expressed their concerns in the traditional form of written dubia (which means “doubts and questions on those doubts). They wrote down their doubts and questions about the path Francis was following and formally submitted those doubts and questions on those doubts (dubia) on two separate occasions.
All in all, the cardinals produced three documents:
(1) the initial formulation of the dubia which was sent to Pope Francis;
(2) the reformulation of the dubia in response to a private letter the signatory cardinals received from Pope Francis;
(3) the notification that the signatory cardinals made to the faithful regarding the dubia sent to Pope Francis.
1ST DOCUMENT
ORIGINAL FORMULATION OF THE DUBIA
1ST DUBIUM ― about the claim that we should reinterpret Divine Revelation according to the cultural and anthropological changes in vogue.
After the statements of some Bishops, which have been neither corrected nor retracted, it is asked whether in the Church Divine Revelation should be reinterpreted according to the cultural changes of our time and according to the new anthropological vision that these changes promote; or whether Divine Revelation is binding forever, immutable and therefore not to be contradicted, according to the dictum of the Second Vatican Council, that to God who reveals is due “the obedience of Faith” (Dei Verbum, §5); that what is revealed for the salvation of all must remain “in their entirety, throughout the ages” and alive, and be “transmitted to all generations” (Dei Verbum, §7); and that the progress of understanding does not imply any change in the truth of things and words, because faith has been “handed on…once and for all” (Dei Verbum, §8), and the Magisterium is not superior to the Word of God, but teaches only what has been handed on (Dei Verbum, §10).
2ND DUBIUM ― about the claim that the widespread practice of the blessing of same-sex unions would be in accord with Revelation and the Magisterium (CCC 2357).
According to Divine Revelation, confirmed in Sacred Scripture, which the Church “at the divine command with the help of the Holy Spirit,…listens to devotedly, guards it with dedication and expounds it faithfully” (Dei Verbum, §10): “In the beginning” God created man in his own image, male and female he created them and blessed them, that they might be fruitful (cf. Genesis 1:27-28), whereby the Apostle Paul teaches that to deny sexual difference is the consequence of the denial of the Creator (Romans 1:24-32). It is asked: Can the Church derogate from this “principle,” considering it, contrary to what Veritatis Splendor, §103, taught, as a mere ideal, and accepting as a “possible good” objectively sinful situations, such as same-sex unions, without betraying revealed doctrine?
3RD DUBIUM ― about the assertion that synodality is a “constitutive element of the Church” (Apostolic Constitution, Episcopalis Communio, §6), so that the Church would, by its very nature, be synodal.
Given that the Synod of Bishops does not represent the College of Bishops but is merely a consultative organ of the Pope, since the Bishops, as witnesses of the faith, cannot delegate their confession of the truth, it is asked whether synodality can be the supreme regulative criterion of the permanent government of the Church without distorting her constitutive order willed by her Founder, whereby the supreme and full authority of the Church is exercised both by the Pope by virtue of his office and by the College of Bishops together with its head the Roman Pontiff (Lumen Gentium, §22).
4TH DUBIUM ― about pastors’ and theologians’ support for the theory that “the theology of the Church has changed” and therefore that priestly ordination can be conferred on women.
After the statements of some prelates, which have been neither corrected nor retracted, according to which, with Vatican II, the theology of the Church and the meaning of the Mass has changed, it is asked whether the dictum of the Second Vatican Council is still valid, that “[the common priesthood of the faithful and the ministerial or hierarchical priesthood] differ essentially and not only in degree” (Lumen Gentium, §10) and that presbyters by virtue of the “sacred power of Order, that of offering sacrifice and forgiving sins” (Presbyterorum Ordinis, §2), act in the name and in the person of Christ the Mediator, through Whom the spiritual sacrifice of the faithful is made perfect. It is furthermore asked whether the teaching of St. John Paul II’s Apostolic Letter Ordinatio Sacerdotalis, which teaches as a truth to be definitively held the impossibility of conferring priestly ordination on women, is still valid, so that this teaching is no longer subject to change nor to the free discussion of pastors or theologians.
5TH DUBIUM ― about the statement “forgiveness is a human right” and the Holy Father’s insistence on the duty to absolve everyone and always, so that repentance would not be a necessary condition for sacramental absolution.
It is asked whether the teaching of the Council of Trent, according to which the contrition of the penitent, which consists in detesting the sin committed with the intention of sinning no more (Session XIV, Chapter IV: DH 1676), is necessary for the validity of sacramental confession, is still in force, so that the priest must postpone absolution when it is clear that this condition is not fulfilled.
Vatican City, July 10th, 2023
Walter Cardinal Brandmüller
Raymond Leo Cardinal Burke
Juan Cardinal Sandoval Íñiguez
Robert Cardinal Sarah
Joseph Cardinal Zen Ze-Kiun, S.D.B.
* * *
2ND DOCUMENT
NEW FORMULATION OF THE DUBIA
To His Holiness
FRANCIS
Supreme Pontiff
Most Holy Father,
We are very grateful for the answers which You have kindly wished to offer us. We would first like to clarify that, if we have asked You these questions, it is not out of fear of dialogue with the people of our time, nor of the questions they could ask us about the Gospel of Christ. In fact, we, like Your Holiness, are convinced that the Gospel brings fullness to human life and responds to our every question. The concern that moves us is another: we are concerned to see that there are pastors who doubt the ability of the Gospel to transform the hearts of men and end up proposing to them no longer sound doctrine but “teachings according to their own likings” (cf. 2 Timothy 4:3). We are also concerned that it be understood that God’s mercy does not consist in covering our sins, but is much greater, in that it enables us to respond to His love by keeping His commandments, that is, to convert and believe in the Gospel (cf. Mark 1:15).
With the same sincerity with which You have answered us, we must add that Your answers have not resolved the doubts we had raised, but have, if anything, deepened them. We therefore feel obliged to re-propose, reformulating them, these questions to Your Holiness, who as the successor of Peter is charged by the Lord to confirm Your brethren in the faith. This is all the more urgent in view of the upcoming Synod, which many want to use to deny Catholic doctrine on the very issues which our dubia concern. We therefore re-propose our questions to You, so that they can be answered with a simple “yes” or “no.”
1ST DUBIUM ― Your Holiness insists that the Church can deepen its understanding of the deposit of faith. This is indeed what Dei Verbum §8 teaches and belongs to Catholic doctrine. Your response, however, does not capture our concern. Many Christians, including pastors and theologians, argue today that the cultural and anthropological changes of our time should push the Church to teach the opposite of what it has always taught. This concerns essential, not secondary, questions for our salvation, like the confession of faith, subjective conditions for access to the sacraments, and observance of the moral law. So we want to rephrase our dubium:
Is it possible for the Church today to teach doctrines contrary to those she has previously taught in matters of faith and morals, whether by the Pope ex cathedra, or in the definitions of an Ecumenical Council, or in the ordinary universal magisterium of the Bishops dispersed throughout the world (cf. Lumen Gentium, §25)? (Yes or No?)
2ND DUBIUM ― Your Holiness has insisted on the fact that there can be no confusion between marriage and other types of unions of a sexual nature and that, therefore, any rite or sacramental blessing of same-sex couples, which would give rise to such confusion, should be avoided. Our concern, however, is a different one: we are concerned that the blessing of same-sex couples might create confusion in any case, not only in that it might make them seem analogous to marriage, but also in that homosexual acts would be presented practically as a good, or at least as the possible good that God asks of people in their journey toward Him. So let us rephrase our dubium: Is it possible that in some circumstances a pastor could bless unions between homosexual persons, thus suggesting that homosexual behavior as such would not be contrary to God’s law and the person’s journey toward God? Linked to this dubium is the need to raise another:
Does the teaching upheld by the universal ordinary magisterium, that every sexual act outside of marriage, and in particular homosexual acts, constitutes an objectively grave sin against God’s law, regardless of the circumstances in which it takes place and the intention with which it is carried out, continue to be valid? (Yes or No?)
3RD DUBIUM ― You have insisted that there is a synodal dimension to the Church, in that all, including the lay faithful, are called to participate and make their voices heard. Our difficulty, however, is another: today the future Synod on “synodality” is being presented as if, in communion with the Pope, it represents the Supreme Authority of the Church. However, the Synod of Bishops is a consultative body of the Pope; it does not represent the College of Bishops and cannot settle the issues dealt with in it nor issue decrees on them, unless, in certain cases, the Roman Pontiff, whose duty it is to ratify the decisions of the Synod, has expressly granted it deliberative power (cf. Code of Canon Law, canon 343). This is a decisive point inasmuch as not involving the College of Bishops in matters such as those that the next Synod intends to raise, which touch on the very constitution of the Church, would go precisely against the root of that synodality, which it claims to want to promote. Let us therefore rephrase our dubium:
Will the Synod of Bishops to be held in Rome, and which includes only a chosen representation of pastors and faithful, exercise, in the doctrinal or pastoral matters on which it will be called to express itself, the Supreme Authority of the Church, which belongs exclusively to the Roman Pontiff and, una cum capite suo, to the College of Bishops (cf. Code of Canon Law, canon 336)? (Yes or No?)
4TH DUBIUM ― In Your reply Your Holiness made it clear that the decision of St. John Paul II in Ordinatio Sacerdotalis is to be held definitively, and rightly added that it is necessary to understand the priesthood, not in terms of power, but in terms of service, in order to understand correctly our Lord’s decision to reserve Holy Orders to men only. On the other hand, in the last point of Your response You added that the question can still be further explored. We are concerned that some may interpret this statement to mean that the matter has not yet been decided in a definitive manner. In fact, St. John Paul II affirms in Ordinatio Sacerdotalis that this doctrine has been taught infallibly by the ordinary and universal magisterium, and therefore that it belongs to the deposit of faith. This was the response of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith to a dubium raised about the apostolic letter, and this response was approved by John Paul II himself. We therefore must reformulate our dubium:
Could the Church in the future have the faculty to confer priestly ordination on women, thus contradicting that the exclusive reservation of this sacrament to baptized males belongs to the very substance of the Sacrament of Orders, which the Church cannot change? (Yes or No?)
5TH DUBIUM ― Finally, Your Holiness confirmed the teaching of the Council of Trent, according to which the validity of sacramental absolution requires the sinner’s repentance, which includes the resolve not to sin again. And You invited us not to doubt God’s infinite mercy. We would like to reiterate that our question does not arise from doubting the greatness of God’s mercy, but, on the contrary, it arises from our awareness that this mercy is so great that we are able to convert to Him, to confess our guilt, and to live as He has taught us. In turn, some might interpret Your answer as meaning that merely approaching confession is a sufficient condition for receiving absolution, inasmuch as it could implicitly include confession of sins and repentance. We would therefore like to rephrase our dubium:
Can a penitent who, while admitting a sin, refuses to make, in any way, the intention not to commit it again, validly receive sacramental absolution? (Yes or No?)
Vatican City, August 21st, 2023
Walter Cardinal Brandmüller
Raymond Leo Cardinal Burke
Juan Cardinal Sandoval Íñiguez
Robert Cardinal Sarah
Joseph Cardinal Zen Ze-kiun
p.c. His Eminence Rev. Luis Francisco Cardinal LADARIA FERRER, S.I.
* * *
3RD DOCUMENT
NOTIFICATION TO CHRIST’S FAITHFUL
(Code of Canon Law, canon 212, §3)
Regarding
Dubia Submitted to Pope Francis
Brothers and Sisters in Christ,
We, members of the Sacred College of Cardinals, in accord with the duty of all the faithful “to manifest to the sacred pastors their opinion on matters which pertain to the good of the Church” (Code of Canon Law, canon 212, §3) and, above all, in accord with the responsibility of Cardinals “to assist the Roman Pontiff…individually…especially in the daily care of the universal Church” (Code of Canon Law, canon 349), in view of various declarations of highly-placed Prelates, pertaining to the celebration of the next Synod of Bishops, that are openly contrary to the constant doctrine and discipline of the Church, and that have generated and continue to generate great confusion and the falling into error among the faithful and other persons of good will, have manifested our deepest concern to the Roman Pontiff. By our letter of July 10th, 2023, employing the proven practice of the submission of dubia [questions] to a superior to provide the superior the occasion to make clear, by his responsa [responses], the doctrine and discipline of the Church, we have submitted five dubia to Pope Francis, a copy of which is attached. By his letter of July 11th, 2023, Pope Francis responded to our letter.
Having studied his letter, which did not follow the practice of responsa ad dubia [responses to questions/doubts], we reformulated the dubia to elicit a clear response based on the perennial doctrine and discipline of the Church. By our letter of August 21st, 2023, we submitted the reformulated dubia, a copy of which is attached, to the Roman Pontiff. Up to the present, we have not received a response to the reformulated dubia.
Given the gravity of the matter of the dubia, especially in view of the imminent session of the Synod of Bishops, we judge it our duty to inform you, the faithful (Code of Canon Law, canon 212, §3), so that you may not be subject to confusion, error, and discouragement―but rather may pray for the universal Church and, in particular, the Roman Pontiff, that the Gospel may be taught ever more clearly and followed ever more faithfully.
Yours in Christ,
Walter Cardinal Brandmüller
Raymond Leo Cardinal Burke
Juan Cardinal Sandoval Íñiguez
Robert Cardinal Sarah
Joseph Cardinal Zen Ze-kiun
Rome, October 2nd, 2023
Article 3
A Biased Synod
A Biased Synod
THOSE WHO WERE INVITED TO THE SYNOD
The theme of the synod is: “For a Synodal Church: Communion, Participation and Mission,” and Synod members will be called upon to continue to carry forward a “process of spiritual discernment” that was begun in 2021 and will continue with a second Synod assembly in 2024.
On September 21st, 2023, the Vatican released the final list of names of those participating in the current Synod on Synodality assembly during October of 2023, including laypeople who will be full voting delegates at a Catholic Church Synod for the first time in history. More than a quarter (27%) of voting members are not bishops and a total of 54 voting members are women.
The delegates are made up of representatives selected by bishops’ conferences and Eastern Catholic Churches, leaders in the Roman Curia, and 120 delegates personally selected by Pope Francis. Obviously, Francis―just like any other person―will lean towards inviting those persons who are supportive of him and who tend to think like he does on Church matters and issues.
In total, 363 cardinals, bishops, priests, religious and lay men and women will be able to vote in the 16th Ordinary General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops, according to statistics released by the Holy See Press Office on July 7th. Pope Francis made significant changes to who can be a voting member of the synod on synodality and he gave women the right to vote in the synod.
Those the Pope appointed to take part in the October 4th-29th Synod include 169 cardinals or bishops representing national bishops’ conferences; 20 cardinals or bishops representing Eastern Catholic churches; five cardinals or bishops representing regional federations of bishops’ conferences; and 20 heads of Vatican dicasteries, which includes one layman, Paolo Ruffini, prefect of the Dicastery for Communication.
As he has done for previous synods, Pope Francis personally invited several church leaders to attend. They include some of his closest U.S. allies and advocates who share his vision for a more inclusive and welcoming church, individuals who have largely steered clear of some of the most divisive culture war fights.
The Pope also appointed five religious men and five religious women to represent the International Union of Superiors General and the Union of Superiors General.
There are an additional 50 papally appointed members, the majority of whom are cardinals and bishops, but they include 11 priests, religious and 1 layman and 1 laywoman. Those from the United States include: Cardinal Blase J. Cupich of Chicago; Cardinal Wilton D. Gregory of Washington; Cardinal Robert W. McElroy of San Diego; Cardinal Seán P. O’Malley of Boston; Archbishop Paul D. Etienne of Seattle; and the Jesuit LGBTQ+ supporter, Father James Martin whom Francis has befriended.
Another novelty is a large group of non-bishop voting members who represent the “continental assemblies” and are named “witnesses of the synodal process.” There are 10 members in each group divided by continent: Africa; North America; Latin America; Asia; Eastern Churches and the Middle East; Europe; and Oceania, for a total of 70 individuals who are all priests, religious or lay men and women.
In addition to the voting members, 75 other participants have been invited to the synod assembly to act as facilitators, experts, or spiritual assistants.
Though the synod may reflect certain democratic principles, it is Pope Francis alone (for now) who will ultimately decide how to implement the deliberations from the synod to move the Church forward. However, some changes the Pope has already made to the Synod process itself, means that some Church reforms will already be evident when delegates vote on various items in October. Francis recently updated the rules of the Synod to allow lay people to vote. The fact that lay people will not only be present, but also be able to vote, is a change to the synod structure, and represents the pope’s commitment to building a fully synodal Church. For Francis, that means moving away from a top-down style of management and instead embracing voices that have not traditionally been heard in the church’s decision-making apparatus.
VARIOUS FOREBODING QUOTES ABOUT THE SYNOD
► CARDINAL BESUNGU says that the synod in Rome is continuing “hand in hand” to wherever it is they are going: “Synodality is a new way for the Church to walk together, hand in hand, towards the shore where the Lord awaits us.”
► CARDINAL ZEN warned: “I see clearly a whole plan of manipulation!” Here are some key points of Cardinal Zen’s letter to episcopal members of the Synod on Synodality:
“I feel [even greater confusion and worry] when I see the suggestion being made that finally the day has come to overturn the pyramid, that is, with the hierarchy surmounted by the lay people. In the Preparatory Document, from the very beginning, it is said clearly that, for a synodal Church, it is necessary to re-establish democracy.” (Cardinal Zen).
“The Synod Secretariat is very efficient at the art of manipulation. Because of what I am going to say, I can be easily accused of ‘conspiracy theory’, but I see clearly a whole plan of manipulation. They begin by saying that we must listen to all. Little by little they make us understand that among these ‘all’ there are especially those whom we have ‘excluded’. Finally, we understand that what they mean are people who opt for a sexual morality different from that of Catholic tradition.” (Cardinal Zen).
“Often they claim not to have any agenda. This is truly an offense to our intelligence. Anybody can see which conclusions they are aiming at.” (Cardinal Zen).
“They speak of ‘conversation in the Spirit’ as if it were a magical formula. And they invite all to expect ‘surprises’ from the Spirit―evidently they are already informed which surprises to expect! ‘Conversation, no discussion! Discussions create divisions!’ Does this mean that consensus and unanimity happen miraculously? To avoid discussions is to avoid the truth.” (Cardinal Zen).
“Without any consultation, in the proximity of the beginning of the Synod, the Holy Father adds a number of lay members with right of voting. If I were one of the members of the Synod, I would place a strong protest, because this decision radically changes the nature of the Synod, which Pope Paul VI had intended as an instrument of episcopal collegiality…” (Cardinal Zen).
► CARDINAL RAYMOND LEO BURKE, in a conference at the start of October 2023, stated: “The new synodality―considered in its own categories of time, practice, and procedure―is the concluding moment of a long route that has spanned all of modernity. By drawing our attention to the philosophical sources of so-called synodality, he unmasks its worldliness. That is why our Lord Jesus Christ―Who alone is our Savior―is not at the root and center of synodality. That is why the divine nature of the Church is neglected and, in truth, forgotten ... It is unfortunately very clear that the invocation of the Holy Spirit, on the side of some, has for its purpose the advancement of an agenda that is more political and human than ecclesial and divine …
“The confusion about theology, morality, and even elementary philosophy in which we live is fueled by a great lack of clarity in the vocabulary used, and this is probably intentional on the part of some. We witness a semantic slippage of some words or expressions, which makes the Church’s teaching on some points incomprehensible … Sometimes new words are introduced or exaggerated without a clear definition, as in the case of the word synodality. In this case of confusion about the essential features of the Church there is a risk of losing the identity of the Church … The moment these concepts become central and are not clearly defined, the door is open to anyone who wants to interpret them in a way that breaks with the Church’s constant teaching on these issues ... Synodality, as an abstract term, is a neologism [a newly coined word or expression] in the doctrine on the Church. It is well known that the Second Vatican Council wanted to avoid the abstract terms of Conciliarity and Collegiality, which are not found in the Conciliar texts. It is to be assumed that the Council itself would have wanted to avoid an abstract term like ‘synodality’, if it would have known it!
“It is odd to say that we do not know in what direction the Synod will go, when it is so clear that the will is to profoundly change the hierarchical constitution of the Church. A similar process has been employed in the Church in Germany to achieve the same so harmful purpose … Such a change in the Church’s self-understanding has as a further consequence a weakening of teaching on morality as well as discipline in the Church … The Commandments of the Decalogue [The Ten Commandments] are valid and will remain valid as they have always been in every age … We are told that the Church we profess―in communion with our ancestors in Faith since the time of the Apostles―to be One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic, must now be defined by Synodality, a term that has no history in Church doctrine and for which there is no reasonable definition. It is obviously an artificial construction, more like a human construction rather than the Church built on the rock that is Christ … Synodality and its adjective, synodal, have become slogans behind which a revolution is at work to change radically the Church’s self-understanding, in accord with a contemporary ideology which denies much of what the Church has always taught and practiced. It is not a purely theoretical matter, for the ideology has already, for some years, been put into practice in the Church in Germany, spreading widely confusion and error and their fruit, division ― indeed schism ― to the grave harm of many souls. With the imminent Synod on Synodality, it is rightly to be feared that the same confusion and error and division will be visited upon the universal Church.
“The Instrumentum Laboris [the Working Document] of the upcoming session of the Synod of Bishops certainly contains statements that depart strikingly and gravely from the perennial teaching of the Church … Today’s Bishops and Cardinals need a great deal of courage to confront the grave errors coming from within the Church itself! … I would like to conclude by urging you to pray to implore Heaven’s help against all powers, human and preternatural, that dream of the destruction of the Church!” (Extracts from the October 2023 conference on the Synod by Cardinal Raymond Leo Burke).
► ARCHBISHOP CARLO MARIA VIGANÒ, in October of 2023, wrote: “The system of the subverters is always the same: they modify a law by leveraging emotion and not reason, not because they care about the common good, but because they need a (false) pretext with which to legitimize what the law instead condemns. This was also the case for introducing divorce, abortion, and euthanasia.
“In the ecclesial sphere, the subverters of doctrine and morality put forward the (false) pretext of understanding the Rites in order to introduce the vernacular language into the Liturgy, or the (false) pretext of ecumenical dialogue to water down Catholic Truths. Bergoglio resorted to the same trick for the death penalty, with the (false) pretext that it is contrary to the spirit of the Gospel, and today his minions use the (false) pretext of discrimination against adulterers, concubines, and perverts to legitimize adultery, concubinage, and sodomy.
“This happens when the vicarious authority of those who govern society or the Church does not limit itself, as it should, to acting in the Name of God, but presumes that it has something to teach even God Himself, Who is said [to] not be able to legislate with justice, and that He imposes precepts that are impossible to observe.
“And this is the same accusation with which Satan rebelled against God, and his main argument to convince us to disobey Him. That civil rulers do this is painful and very serious; but that the one who, sitting on the Throne of Peter, dares to make these recriminations his own ― in order to adulterate the Deposit of Faith and lead souls to eternal damnation ― is scandalous and unheard of.”
► BISHOP ATHANASIUS SCHNEIDER, on June 29th, 2023, wrote a critique of the then forthcoming Synod on Synodality. Here are some key extracts:
“Many questions have arisen about the current “synodal process,” and therefore, in order to be of service to Christ’s flock, I would like to address some important points of the Instrumentum Laboris for the October 2023 Session of the Synod on Synodality. This Working Document or Instrumentum appears to undermine the Divine constitution and the Apostolic character of the life and mission of the Catholic Church, substituting for them an invented “synodal church,” inspired predominantly by Protestant, social and anthropocentric categories.
(1) The episcopal authority is undermined by demanding a greater involvement of all the Faithful and thus a less exclusive exercise of the Bishops’ role, and by fostering a community discernment process. Second, by making episcopal authority dependent on and accountable to non-hierarchical advisory bodies.
(2) Papal authority is undermined by suggesting that local institutions in different regions may adopt different approaches to those of the Bishop of Rome, which he ought to accept.
(3) The hierarchical structure of the Church is undermined by an ambiguous use of the word “ministry,” which is attributed to both the ordained and the non-ordained. The hierarchical structure of the Church is also undermined by calling for the issue of women’s participation in governance, decision-making, mission and ministries at all levels of the Church.
(4) The unity of the Sacrament of Holy Order is undermined by calling the Church to question the diaconal ordination of women, and calling for the question of women’s inclusion in the diaconate to be considered.
“Divinely revealed moral law is undermined in three principal ways. First, there are grave omissions by the absence of any discussion of sin, the Ten Commandments, and the virtue of chastity. Second, the so-called LGBTQ movement is implicitly promoted, which includes promoting homosexual activity and the current world-wide totalitarian “gender ideology.” Third, immorality regarding marriage is implicitly promoted, when the document laments those who do not feel accepted in the Church, such as the divorced and remarried, people in polygamous marriages; and when it calls the Church to welcome those who feel excluded. . .because of their status or sexuality (for example, remarried divorcees, people in polygamous marriages, etc.).
“The Life and Mission of the Church is undermined. The Apostolic and supernatural character of the life and mission of the Church is undermined in three principal ways. First, there are grave omissions by the absence of a discussion of Eucharistic adoration, the Cross of Christ, and man’s final end in eternity. Second, there is a worldly bureaucratization of the Church, through an increase of structures and meeting sessions, with the key words “consensus-building” and “decision-making” used as if the Church were a human-focused business. Third, there is a subjectivistic “pentecostalization” of the life of the Church by presumptuously attributing to human dialogue, non-official prayers, and mutual exchange of views a vague spiritual quality such as the “conversation in the Spirit,” (cf. nos. 32-42) “called by the Holy Spirit.” “protagonism of the Spirit.”
“Other grave harms are committed. The apostolic law of priestly celibacy in the Latin Church is undermined by calling for a reflection to be opened concerning the discipline on access to the Priesthood for married men, at least in some areas. The Instrumentum Laboris [Working Document] for the October 2023 Session of the Synod on Synodality essentially promotes the same ideas put forward by the German Synodal Path. It substitutes the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church with a fantasy “synodal church” that is worldly, bureaucratic, anthropocentric, neo-Pelagian, and hierarchically and doctrinally vague – all the while masking these features behind unctuous expressions such as “conversation in the spirit.” We do not believe in – nor would anyone give his life for – a “synodal church.” We believe in the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church founded by Our Lord Jesus Christ, and we hold fast to His unchanging divine truth, for which countless Catholic martyrs have shed their blood.”
► BISHOP JOSEPH STRICKLAND of Tyler, Texas, wrote on August 22nd, 2023: “In this time of great turmoil in the Church and in the world, I must … warn you of the evils that threaten us … In St. Paul’s letter to the Galatians, he writes: ‘I am amazed that you are so quickly forsaking the one who called you by [the] grace [of Christ] for a different gospel [not that there is another]. But there are some who are disturbing you and wish to pervert the Gospel of Christ. But even if we or an angel from Heaven should preach [to you] a gospel other than the one that we preached to you, let that one be accursed! As we have said before, and now I say again, if anyone preaches to you a gospel other than the one that you received, let that one be accursed!’ (Galatians 1:6-9) ... The Church exists, not to redefine matters of Faith, but to safeguard the Deposit of Faith as it has been handed down to us from Our Lord Himself through the apostles and the saints and martyrs. …
“Any attempts to pervert the true Gospel message must be categorically rejected as injurious! … The Sacrament of Matrimony is instituted by God. Through Natural Law, God has established marriage as between one man and one woman faithful to each other for life and open to children. Humanity has no right or true ability to redefine marriage. Every human person is created in the image and likeness of God, male or female … Sexual activity outside marriage is always gravely sinful and cannot be condoned … The belief that all men and women will be saved regardless of how they live their lives is false and is dangerous, as it contradicts what Jesus tells us repeatedly in the Gospel ...
“In the weeks and months ahead, many of these truths will be examined as part of the Synod on Synodality. We must hold fast to these truths and be wary of any attempts to present an alternative to the Gospel of Jesus Christ, or to push for a Faith that speaks of dialogue and brotherhood … When we seek to innovate upon what God, we find ourselves upon treacherous ground ... Regrettably, it may be that some will label as schismatics those who disagree with the changes being proposed. Be assured, however, that no one who remains firmly upon the plumb line of our Catholic Faith is a schismatic. We must remain unabashedly and truly Catholic, regardless of what may be brought forth. We must be aware also that it is not leaving the Church to stand firm against these proposed changes ... Standing firm does not mean we are seeking to leave the Church. Instead, those who would propose changes to that which cannot be changed seek to commandeer Christ’s Church, and they are indeed the true schismatics! … Make sure you stand firmly upon the Catholic Faith of the ages!” (Bishop Joseph E. Strickland).
MSGR. RICHARD C. ANTALL wrote: “I worry that the deck is stacked for the synod and am not surprised that its sessions will be closed to the media.”
As one journalist asked: “How is this assembly discerning whether something comes from the Holy Spirit or from another spirit?” Good question, huh?
The theme of the synod is: “For a Synodal Church: Communion, Participation and Mission,” and Synod members will be called upon to continue to carry forward a “process of spiritual discernment” that was begun in 2021 and will continue with a second Synod assembly in 2024.
On September 21st, 2023, the Vatican released the final list of names of those participating in the current Synod on Synodality assembly during October of 2023, including laypeople who will be full voting delegates at a Catholic Church Synod for the first time in history. More than a quarter (27%) of voting members are not bishops and a total of 54 voting members are women.
The delegates are made up of representatives selected by bishops’ conferences and Eastern Catholic Churches, leaders in the Roman Curia, and 120 delegates personally selected by Pope Francis. Obviously, Francis―just like any other person―will lean towards inviting those persons who are supportive of him and who tend to think like he does on Church matters and issues.
In total, 363 cardinals, bishops, priests, religious and lay men and women will be able to vote in the 16th Ordinary General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops, according to statistics released by the Holy See Press Office on July 7th. Pope Francis made significant changes to who can be a voting member of the synod on synodality and he gave women the right to vote in the synod.
Those the Pope appointed to take part in the October 4th-29th Synod include 169 cardinals or bishops representing national bishops’ conferences; 20 cardinals or bishops representing Eastern Catholic churches; five cardinals or bishops representing regional federations of bishops’ conferences; and 20 heads of Vatican dicasteries, which includes one layman, Paolo Ruffini, prefect of the Dicastery for Communication.
As he has done for previous synods, Pope Francis personally invited several church leaders to attend. They include some of his closest U.S. allies and advocates who share his vision for a more inclusive and welcoming church, individuals who have largely steered clear of some of the most divisive culture war fights.
The Pope also appointed five religious men and five religious women to represent the International Union of Superiors General and the Union of Superiors General.
There are an additional 50 papally appointed members, the majority of whom are cardinals and bishops, but they include 11 priests, religious and 1 layman and 1 laywoman. Those from the United States include: Cardinal Blase J. Cupich of Chicago; Cardinal Wilton D. Gregory of Washington; Cardinal Robert W. McElroy of San Diego; Cardinal Seán P. O’Malley of Boston; Archbishop Paul D. Etienne of Seattle; and the Jesuit LGBTQ+ supporter, Father James Martin whom Francis has befriended.
Another novelty is a large group of non-bishop voting members who represent the “continental assemblies” and are named “witnesses of the synodal process.” There are 10 members in each group divided by continent: Africa; North America; Latin America; Asia; Eastern Churches and the Middle East; Europe; and Oceania, for a total of 70 individuals who are all priests, religious or lay men and women.
In addition to the voting members, 75 other participants have been invited to the synod assembly to act as facilitators, experts, or spiritual assistants.
Though the synod may reflect certain democratic principles, it is Pope Francis alone (for now) who will ultimately decide how to implement the deliberations from the synod to move the Church forward. However, some changes the Pope has already made to the Synod process itself, means that some Church reforms will already be evident when delegates vote on various items in October. Francis recently updated the rules of the Synod to allow lay people to vote. The fact that lay people will not only be present, but also be able to vote, is a change to the synod structure, and represents the pope’s commitment to building a fully synodal Church. For Francis, that means moving away from a top-down style of management and instead embracing voices that have not traditionally been heard in the church’s decision-making apparatus.
VARIOUS FOREBODING QUOTES ABOUT THE SYNOD
► CARDINAL BESUNGU says that the synod in Rome is continuing “hand in hand” to wherever it is they are going: “Synodality is a new way for the Church to walk together, hand in hand, towards the shore where the Lord awaits us.”
► CARDINAL ZEN warned: “I see clearly a whole plan of manipulation!” Here are some key points of Cardinal Zen’s letter to episcopal members of the Synod on Synodality:
“I feel [even greater confusion and worry] when I see the suggestion being made that finally the day has come to overturn the pyramid, that is, with the hierarchy surmounted by the lay people. In the Preparatory Document, from the very beginning, it is said clearly that, for a synodal Church, it is necessary to re-establish democracy.” (Cardinal Zen).
“The Synod Secretariat is very efficient at the art of manipulation. Because of what I am going to say, I can be easily accused of ‘conspiracy theory’, but I see clearly a whole plan of manipulation. They begin by saying that we must listen to all. Little by little they make us understand that among these ‘all’ there are especially those whom we have ‘excluded’. Finally, we understand that what they mean are people who opt for a sexual morality different from that of Catholic tradition.” (Cardinal Zen).
“Often they claim not to have any agenda. This is truly an offense to our intelligence. Anybody can see which conclusions they are aiming at.” (Cardinal Zen).
“They speak of ‘conversation in the Spirit’ as if it were a magical formula. And they invite all to expect ‘surprises’ from the Spirit―evidently they are already informed which surprises to expect! ‘Conversation, no discussion! Discussions create divisions!’ Does this mean that consensus and unanimity happen miraculously? To avoid discussions is to avoid the truth.” (Cardinal Zen).
“Without any consultation, in the proximity of the beginning of the Synod, the Holy Father adds a number of lay members with right of voting. If I were one of the members of the Synod, I would place a strong protest, because this decision radically changes the nature of the Synod, which Pope Paul VI had intended as an instrument of episcopal collegiality…” (Cardinal Zen).
► CARDINAL RAYMOND LEO BURKE, in a conference at the start of October 2023, stated: “The new synodality―considered in its own categories of time, practice, and procedure―is the concluding moment of a long route that has spanned all of modernity. By drawing our attention to the philosophical sources of so-called synodality, he unmasks its worldliness. That is why our Lord Jesus Christ―Who alone is our Savior―is not at the root and center of synodality. That is why the divine nature of the Church is neglected and, in truth, forgotten ... It is unfortunately very clear that the invocation of the Holy Spirit, on the side of some, has for its purpose the advancement of an agenda that is more political and human than ecclesial and divine …
“The confusion about theology, morality, and even elementary philosophy in which we live is fueled by a great lack of clarity in the vocabulary used, and this is probably intentional on the part of some. We witness a semantic slippage of some words or expressions, which makes the Church’s teaching on some points incomprehensible … Sometimes new words are introduced or exaggerated without a clear definition, as in the case of the word synodality. In this case of confusion about the essential features of the Church there is a risk of losing the identity of the Church … The moment these concepts become central and are not clearly defined, the door is open to anyone who wants to interpret them in a way that breaks with the Church’s constant teaching on these issues ... Synodality, as an abstract term, is a neologism [a newly coined word or expression] in the doctrine on the Church. It is well known that the Second Vatican Council wanted to avoid the abstract terms of Conciliarity and Collegiality, which are not found in the Conciliar texts. It is to be assumed that the Council itself would have wanted to avoid an abstract term like ‘synodality’, if it would have known it!
“It is odd to say that we do not know in what direction the Synod will go, when it is so clear that the will is to profoundly change the hierarchical constitution of the Church. A similar process has been employed in the Church in Germany to achieve the same so harmful purpose … Such a change in the Church’s self-understanding has as a further consequence a weakening of teaching on morality as well as discipline in the Church … The Commandments of the Decalogue [The Ten Commandments] are valid and will remain valid as they have always been in every age … We are told that the Church we profess―in communion with our ancestors in Faith since the time of the Apostles―to be One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic, must now be defined by Synodality, a term that has no history in Church doctrine and for which there is no reasonable definition. It is obviously an artificial construction, more like a human construction rather than the Church built on the rock that is Christ … Synodality and its adjective, synodal, have become slogans behind which a revolution is at work to change radically the Church’s self-understanding, in accord with a contemporary ideology which denies much of what the Church has always taught and practiced. It is not a purely theoretical matter, for the ideology has already, for some years, been put into practice in the Church in Germany, spreading widely confusion and error and their fruit, division ― indeed schism ― to the grave harm of many souls. With the imminent Synod on Synodality, it is rightly to be feared that the same confusion and error and division will be visited upon the universal Church.
“The Instrumentum Laboris [the Working Document] of the upcoming session of the Synod of Bishops certainly contains statements that depart strikingly and gravely from the perennial teaching of the Church … Today’s Bishops and Cardinals need a great deal of courage to confront the grave errors coming from within the Church itself! … I would like to conclude by urging you to pray to implore Heaven’s help against all powers, human and preternatural, that dream of the destruction of the Church!” (Extracts from the October 2023 conference on the Synod by Cardinal Raymond Leo Burke).
► ARCHBISHOP CARLO MARIA VIGANÒ, in October of 2023, wrote: “The system of the subverters is always the same: they modify a law by leveraging emotion and not reason, not because they care about the common good, but because they need a (false) pretext with which to legitimize what the law instead condemns. This was also the case for introducing divorce, abortion, and euthanasia.
“In the ecclesial sphere, the subverters of doctrine and morality put forward the (false) pretext of understanding the Rites in order to introduce the vernacular language into the Liturgy, or the (false) pretext of ecumenical dialogue to water down Catholic Truths. Bergoglio resorted to the same trick for the death penalty, with the (false) pretext that it is contrary to the spirit of the Gospel, and today his minions use the (false) pretext of discrimination against adulterers, concubines, and perverts to legitimize adultery, concubinage, and sodomy.
“This happens when the vicarious authority of those who govern society or the Church does not limit itself, as it should, to acting in the Name of God, but presumes that it has something to teach even God Himself, Who is said [to] not be able to legislate with justice, and that He imposes precepts that are impossible to observe.
“And this is the same accusation with which Satan rebelled against God, and his main argument to convince us to disobey Him. That civil rulers do this is painful and very serious; but that the one who, sitting on the Throne of Peter, dares to make these recriminations his own ― in order to adulterate the Deposit of Faith and lead souls to eternal damnation ― is scandalous and unheard of.”
► BISHOP ATHANASIUS SCHNEIDER, on June 29th, 2023, wrote a critique of the then forthcoming Synod on Synodality. Here are some key extracts:
“Many questions have arisen about the current “synodal process,” and therefore, in order to be of service to Christ’s flock, I would like to address some important points of the Instrumentum Laboris for the October 2023 Session of the Synod on Synodality. This Working Document or Instrumentum appears to undermine the Divine constitution and the Apostolic character of the life and mission of the Catholic Church, substituting for them an invented “synodal church,” inspired predominantly by Protestant, social and anthropocentric categories.
(1) The episcopal authority is undermined by demanding a greater involvement of all the Faithful and thus a less exclusive exercise of the Bishops’ role, and by fostering a community discernment process. Second, by making episcopal authority dependent on and accountable to non-hierarchical advisory bodies.
(2) Papal authority is undermined by suggesting that local institutions in different regions may adopt different approaches to those of the Bishop of Rome, which he ought to accept.
(3) The hierarchical structure of the Church is undermined by an ambiguous use of the word “ministry,” which is attributed to both the ordained and the non-ordained. The hierarchical structure of the Church is also undermined by calling for the issue of women’s participation in governance, decision-making, mission and ministries at all levels of the Church.
(4) The unity of the Sacrament of Holy Order is undermined by calling the Church to question the diaconal ordination of women, and calling for the question of women’s inclusion in the diaconate to be considered.
“Divinely revealed moral law is undermined in three principal ways. First, there are grave omissions by the absence of any discussion of sin, the Ten Commandments, and the virtue of chastity. Second, the so-called LGBTQ movement is implicitly promoted, which includes promoting homosexual activity and the current world-wide totalitarian “gender ideology.” Third, immorality regarding marriage is implicitly promoted, when the document laments those who do not feel accepted in the Church, such as the divorced and remarried, people in polygamous marriages; and when it calls the Church to welcome those who feel excluded. . .because of their status or sexuality (for example, remarried divorcees, people in polygamous marriages, etc.).
“The Life and Mission of the Church is undermined. The Apostolic and supernatural character of the life and mission of the Church is undermined in three principal ways. First, there are grave omissions by the absence of a discussion of Eucharistic adoration, the Cross of Christ, and man’s final end in eternity. Second, there is a worldly bureaucratization of the Church, through an increase of structures and meeting sessions, with the key words “consensus-building” and “decision-making” used as if the Church were a human-focused business. Third, there is a subjectivistic “pentecostalization” of the life of the Church by presumptuously attributing to human dialogue, non-official prayers, and mutual exchange of views a vague spiritual quality such as the “conversation in the Spirit,” (cf. nos. 32-42) “called by the Holy Spirit.” “protagonism of the Spirit.”
“Other grave harms are committed. The apostolic law of priestly celibacy in the Latin Church is undermined by calling for a reflection to be opened concerning the discipline on access to the Priesthood for married men, at least in some areas. The Instrumentum Laboris [Working Document] for the October 2023 Session of the Synod on Synodality essentially promotes the same ideas put forward by the German Synodal Path. It substitutes the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church with a fantasy “synodal church” that is worldly, bureaucratic, anthropocentric, neo-Pelagian, and hierarchically and doctrinally vague – all the while masking these features behind unctuous expressions such as “conversation in the spirit.” We do not believe in – nor would anyone give his life for – a “synodal church.” We believe in the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church founded by Our Lord Jesus Christ, and we hold fast to His unchanging divine truth, for which countless Catholic martyrs have shed their blood.”
► BISHOP JOSEPH STRICKLAND of Tyler, Texas, wrote on August 22nd, 2023: “In this time of great turmoil in the Church and in the world, I must … warn you of the evils that threaten us … In St. Paul’s letter to the Galatians, he writes: ‘I am amazed that you are so quickly forsaking the one who called you by [the] grace [of Christ] for a different gospel [not that there is another]. But there are some who are disturbing you and wish to pervert the Gospel of Christ. But even if we or an angel from Heaven should preach [to you] a gospel other than the one that we preached to you, let that one be accursed! As we have said before, and now I say again, if anyone preaches to you a gospel other than the one that you received, let that one be accursed!’ (Galatians 1:6-9) ... The Church exists, not to redefine matters of Faith, but to safeguard the Deposit of Faith as it has been handed down to us from Our Lord Himself through the apostles and the saints and martyrs. …
“Any attempts to pervert the true Gospel message must be categorically rejected as injurious! … The Sacrament of Matrimony is instituted by God. Through Natural Law, God has established marriage as between one man and one woman faithful to each other for life and open to children. Humanity has no right or true ability to redefine marriage. Every human person is created in the image and likeness of God, male or female … Sexual activity outside marriage is always gravely sinful and cannot be condoned … The belief that all men and women will be saved regardless of how they live their lives is false and is dangerous, as it contradicts what Jesus tells us repeatedly in the Gospel ...
“In the weeks and months ahead, many of these truths will be examined as part of the Synod on Synodality. We must hold fast to these truths and be wary of any attempts to present an alternative to the Gospel of Jesus Christ, or to push for a Faith that speaks of dialogue and brotherhood … When we seek to innovate upon what God, we find ourselves upon treacherous ground ... Regrettably, it may be that some will label as schismatics those who disagree with the changes being proposed. Be assured, however, that no one who remains firmly upon the plumb line of our Catholic Faith is a schismatic. We must remain unabashedly and truly Catholic, regardless of what may be brought forth. We must be aware also that it is not leaving the Church to stand firm against these proposed changes ... Standing firm does not mean we are seeking to leave the Church. Instead, those who would propose changes to that which cannot be changed seek to commandeer Christ’s Church, and they are indeed the true schismatics! … Make sure you stand firmly upon the Catholic Faith of the ages!” (Bishop Joseph E. Strickland).
MSGR. RICHARD C. ANTALL wrote: “I worry that the deck is stacked for the synod and am not surprised that its sessions will be closed to the media.”
As one journalist asked: “How is this assembly discerning whether something comes from the Holy Spirit or from another spirit?” Good question, huh?
Article 4
Is This Synod Found in Prophecy?
Is This Synod Found in Prophecy?
Our Lady of Good Success
In her prophecies to Mother Mariana de Jesus Torres, Our Lady of Good Success warned of a great crisis that would explode inside the Church shortly after the middle of the 20th century. She warned that the clergy and religious, even at the very pinnacle of power, would stray from the Divine Compass of the Faith and depart from the good course to the loss of their own souls and the souls of their flocks: “I make it known to you that from the end of the 19th century and from shortly after the middle of the 20th century, the passions will erupt and there will be a total corruption of customs, for Satan will reign almost completely by means of the Masonic Sects! … [Vatican II was announced by Pope John XXIII "shortly after the middle of the 20th century" on January 25th, 1959. The Central Preparatory Commission that co-ordinated and prepared the schemas for the Second Vatican Council, was established by Pope John XXIII on June 5th, 1960. The actual Council began on October 11th, 1962―spanning 4 separate yearly sessions (1962, 1963, 1964 & 1965) for a total of 203 days and ended on December 8th, 1965―and the work and spirit of Vatican II has infected almost all of the Catholic world today―the synods of the various popes merely carry on the work of Vatican II. The supporters of the Synod on Synodality are quick to vehemently stress that this Synod is totally based on Vatican II]. Our Lady of Good Success continues: “Under the appearance of virtue and bad-spirited zeal, many will turn upon the Religion which nourished them at her breast … Many people will rebel against the spirit of the Catholic Church, impelled by the malice of the devil! At the end of the 19th century and throughout the 20th century, various heresies will be propagated [this was time frame in which Modernism appeared and really took root] … As these heresies spread and dominate, the precious light of Faith will be extinguished in souls by the almost total corruption of morals. From the 20th century, there will be many who will not believe! … The Sacred Sacrament of Holy Orders will be ridiculed, oppressed and despised … Many hearts consecrated to God in the priestly and religious state will fall into lukewarmness … Priests will become careless in their sacred duties. They will stray from the road traced by God for the priestly ministry. Many priests will lose their spirit, placing their souls in great danger … and those who should speak out will be silent … The small number of souls who, hidden, will preserve the treasure of the Faith and practice virtue, will suffer a cruel, unspeakable and prolonged martyrdom.” (Our Lady of Good Success).
St. John Bosco
In the 1800s, St. John Bosco prophesied that an Ecumenical Council in the 1900s would bring chaos to the Church: “There will be an Ecumenical Council in the next century, after which there will be chaos in the Church.” The current Synods are merely a continuation of the insidious work of the Second Vatican Council.
Sister Lucia of Fatima
Sister Lucia of Fatima, in speaking of the secrets that Our Lady revealed to the children at Fatima, spoke of terrible destruction in the Church―both physical, material and spiritual―and the Third Secret of Fatima hints at an ever-growing worldwide apostasy from the Faith: “...before reaching there the Holy Father passed through a big city half in ruins and half trembling with halting step, afflicted with pain and sorrow, he prayed for the souls of the corpses he met on his way...”
Those who have read the Third Secret of Fatima, seem to confirm the disasters that will strike the Church and world.
Msgr. Eugenio Pacelli―the future Pope Pius XII (1930s)
The Secretary of State under Pius XI, Msgr. Eugenio Cardinal Pacelli, prior to his elevation to the papacy in 1939 as Pius XII, made the following astonishing prophecy about a coming upheaval in the Church: “Suppose, dear friend, that Communism [one of ‘the errors of Russia’ mentioned in the Message of Fatima] was only the most visible of the instruments of subversion to be used against the Church and the traditions of Divine Revelation … I am worried by the Blessed Virgin’s messages to Lucy of Fatima. This persistence of Mary about the dangers which menace the Church is a divine warning against the suicide of altering the Faith, in Her liturgy, Her theology and Her soul … I hear all around me innovators who wish to dismantle the Sacred Chapel, destroy the universal flame of the Church, reject Her ornaments and make Her feel remorse for Her historical past. A day will come when the civilized world will deny its God, when the Church will doubt as Peter doubted. She will be tempted to believe that man has become God. In our churches, Christians will search in vain for the red lamp where God awaits them. Like Mary Magdalene, weeping before the empty tomb, they will ask: ‘Where have they taken Him?’”
Father Joseph Schweigl (September 1952)
In 1952 Father Joseph Schweigl was entrusted by Pope Pius XII with a secret mission to interview Sister Lucy about the Third Secret. He subsequently stated: “I cannot reveal anything of what I learned at Fatima concerning the Third Secret, but I can say that it has two parts―one concerns the Pope; the other logically (although I must say nothing) would have to be the continuation of the words: ‘In Portugal, the dogma of the Faith will always be preserved.’”
Cardinal Oddi (March 1990)
On March 17th, 1990 Cardinal Oddi―who was a personal friend of Pope John XXIII and who had spoken to him regarding the Secret―gave the following testimony to Italian journalist, Lucio Brunelli, in the journal Il Sabato: “It [the Third Secret] has nothing to do with Gorbachev. The Blessed Virgin was alerting us against apostasy in the Church.”
Cardinal Ciappi
In a personal communication to a Professor Baumgartner in Salzburg, Cardinal Mario Luigi Ciappi―who was the personal papal theologian to Popes John XXIII, Paul VI, John Paul I and John Paul II―revealed: “In the Third Secret it is foretold, among other things, that the great apostasy in the Church will begin at the top.”
Father Malachi Martin (Summer 1998)
In a four-hour interview on the Art Bell radio program, Father Malachi Martin stated that, in February 1960, while he was secretary to Cardinal Bea (who was one of the close advisors to Pope John XXIII), Father Malachi was given the Third of Fatima to read. Bound by oath not to reveal the Secret, he commented on different versions, which callers quoted to him on the program. He stated that Our Lady’s words were dry and specific. In response to a quotation that a pope would be under the control of Satan, he responded, “Yes, it sounds as if they were reading the text of the Third Secret.” He stated that the release of the Secret would provoke strong reactions. He stated that if the Secret were made public, the confessionals and churches would be filled with parishioners on their knees. He also stated that something very relevant to the United States is mentioned in the Secret. He stated that the central element of the Secret is awful, and that it concerns apostasy.
Father Jose Valinho (2000 and 2003)
Finally there is Sister Lucy’s nephew, Father Jose dos Santos Valinho. He related his opinion of the contents of the Third Secret in a book by Renzo and Roberto Allegri, entitled Reportage su Fatima [Milan 2000], which was published — providentially enough — very shortly before the disclosure of the vision purported to be the Third Secret and the publication of booklet, entitled The Message of Fatima, by Cardinal Ratzinger and Archbishop Bertone. Father Valinho stated: “I believe that (the third) part of the secret concerns the Church from within, perhaps doctrinal difficulties, a crisis of unity, rebellion. The last sentence my aunt [Lucia] wrote, which precedes the part that is still unknown, says: ‘In Portugal, the dogma of the Faith will always be preserved, etc.’ … Therefore, people elsewhere in the Church might waver on dogma. But this is just speculation.”
On February 14th, 2003 Father Valinho also spoke about the Third Secret on the program ENIGMA. It was transmitted prime time, nationwide on RAI, the national television network of Italy. Father Valinho stated on this occasion: “I believe that there is a connection between that which is announced in the first part of the Secret, which concerns wars and sufferings which would be everywhere, and the second part which concerns the persecutions and a type of breakdown of the faith. Because where the ellipsis (the three dots, “…”) was placed, it means: ‘Here is the third part, which is not revealed’ and then the conclusion: ‘In Portugal the dogma of the faith will always be preserved etc.’ This suggests to me that there is a relationship between Faith and the third part of the Secret. Therefore, it is something that relates to the Church. It is some kind of universal crisis which affects the whole Church and all of humanity.”
Blessed Anne Catherine Emmerich (1774-1824)
The mystic and stigmatic, Anne Catherine Emmerich, was favored by many visions and revelations concerning the future. One topic of those many visions and revelations was that of the future of the Church. Here is a compilation of the chief elements regarding the future Church that were revealed to her:
“I a long processions of bishops [The four different sessions of the Second Vatican Council, held from 1962 to 1965, had between 2,000 and 2,500 bishops in daily attendance]. Their thoughts and utterances were made known to me through images issuing from their mouths. Their faults towards religion were shown by external deformities ... I saw what I believe to be nearly all the bishops of the world [the Second Vatican Council assembled all the bishops in the world], but only a small number were perfectly sound. A concession was demanded from the clergy which could not be granted. I saw that many pastors allowed themselves to be taken up with ideas that were dangerous to the Church. I saw many older priests, especially one, who wept bitterly. A few younger ones were also weeping. But others, and the lukewarm among them, readily did what was demanded. It was as if people were splitting into two camps ... ... Priests were among them! … Priests allowed everything and said Mass with much irreverence. I saw that few of them were still godly priests ... I saw some good pious bishops; but they were weak and wavering, their cowardice often got the upper hand … The local clergy grew lukewarm, and I saw a great circle of darkness ever widening … I now see that in this place [Rome], the [Catholic] Church is being so cleverly undermined, that there hardly remain a hundred or so priests who have not been deceived. They all work for destruction ― even the clergy ... I see many excommunicated ecclesiastics who do not seem to be concerned about it, nor even aware of it. Yet, they are (ipso facto) excommunicated whenever they cooperate with enterprises, enter into associations, and embrace opinions on which an anathema has been cast [i.e. become Freemasons] … Most priests were lured by the glittering, but false knowledge of modern teachers, and they all contributed to the work of destruction. I saw the secret sect relentlessly undermining the great Church! … A great devastation is now near at hand! …
They were building a large, strange, and extravagant church there in Rome … I did not see a single angel, nor a single saint helping in the work ... There was nothing holy in it. They had preaching and singing, but nothing else [which possibly implies the absence of the true Sacrifice of the Mass in this new church], and only very few attended it. People were kneading bread in the crypt below ... but it would not rise, nor did they receive the Body of our Lord, but only bread. Those who were in error, through no fault of their own―and who piously and ardently longed for the Body of Jesus―were spiritually consoled, but not by their communion ... There―in the strange big church―all the work was being done mechanically according to set rules and formulae. Everything was being done according to human reason ... All in this church belonged to the Earth, returned to the Earth. All was dead, the work of human skill, a church of the latest style, a church of man’s invention like the new heterodox church in Rome … There was something proud, presumptuous, and violent about it, and they seemed very successful. I saw the fatal consequences of this counterfeit church … All sorts of abominations were perpetrated there … I saw how harmful would be the consequences of this false church. I saw it increase in size; I saw heretics of all kinds flocking to the city of Rome.
“Everyone was to be admitted in it in order to be united and have equal rights―Evangelicals, Catholics, sects of every description [all of which describes the current false spirit of Ecumenism that invaded the Church at the Council] ... The Protestant doctrine and that of the schismatic Greeks is to spread everywhere! … Then I saw that everything pertaining to Protestantism was gradually gaining the upper hand, and the Catholic religion fell into complete decadence ... I saw all sorts of people, things, doctrines, and opinions ... Then I saw darkness spreading around and people no longer seeking the true Church … The Church is in great danger! It was shown to me that there were almost no Christians left in the old acceptation of the word! … The Church is completely isolated and as if completely deserted. It seems that everyone is running away. Everywhere I see great misery, hatred, treason, rancor, confusion and utter blindness … Then my Guide [Jesus] said: ‘This is Babel’ … I saw very clearly the errors, the aberrations and the countless sins of men. I saw the folly and the wickedness of their actions, against all truth and all reason ...
“I also saw the various regions of the Earth. My Guide [Jesus] named Europe and pointing to a small and sandy region, He uttered these words: ‘Here is Prussia [East Germany], the enemy.’ Then He showed me another place, to the north, and He said: ‘This is Moskva, the land of Moscow, bringing many evils.’ … I saw in all places Catholics oppressed, annoyed, harassed, restricted, and deprived of freedom, churches were closed, and great misery prevailed everywhere with war and bloodshed. In those days, Faith will fall very low, and it will be preserved in some places only, in a few cottages and in a few families which God has protected from disasters and wars.”
“Then I saw an apparition of the Mother of God, and she said that the tribulation would be very great. She added that people must pray fervently with outstretched arms―even if it only be long enough to say three Our Fathers [this does not mean that we must only pray for the length of three Our Fathers, but that our arms must outstretched in the form of a cross for at least as long as it takes to say three Our Fathers―our prayers must be fervent, many and much longer than a mere three Our Fathers]. This was the way her Son prayed for them on the Cross. They must rise at twelve at night, and pray in this manner; and they must keep coming to the Church. They must pray above all for the Church of Darkness to leave Rome … She [the Holy Mother] said a great many others things that it pains me to relate: she said that if only one priest could offer the bloodless sacrifice as worthily and with the same disposition as the Apostles, then he could avert all the disasters [that are to come].”
“I see that when the Second Coming of Christ approaches, a bad priest [Francis?] will do much harm to the Church. When the time of the reign of Antichrist is near, a false religion will appear which will be opposed to the unity of God and His Church. This will cause the greatest schism the world has ever known. The nearer the time of the end, the more the darkness of Satan will spread on Earth, the greater will be the number of the children of corruption, and the number of the just will correspondingly diminish … I see in the future religion falling so low that it will be practiced only here and there in farmhouses and in families protected by God during the horrors of war ... I saw the battle also. The enemies were far more numerous, but the small army of the faithful cut down whole rows of enemy soldiers. During the battle, the Blessed Virgin stood on a hill, wearing a suit of armor. It was a terrible war. At the end, only a few fighters for the just cause survived, but the victory was theirs!”
In her prophecies to Mother Mariana de Jesus Torres, Our Lady of Good Success warned of a great crisis that would explode inside the Church shortly after the middle of the 20th century. She warned that the clergy and religious, even at the very pinnacle of power, would stray from the Divine Compass of the Faith and depart from the good course to the loss of their own souls and the souls of their flocks: “I make it known to you that from the end of the 19th century and from shortly after the middle of the 20th century, the passions will erupt and there will be a total corruption of customs, for Satan will reign almost completely by means of the Masonic Sects! … [Vatican II was announced by Pope John XXIII "shortly after the middle of the 20th century" on January 25th, 1959. The Central Preparatory Commission that co-ordinated and prepared the schemas for the Second Vatican Council, was established by Pope John XXIII on June 5th, 1960. The actual Council began on October 11th, 1962―spanning 4 separate yearly sessions (1962, 1963, 1964 & 1965) for a total of 203 days and ended on December 8th, 1965―and the work and spirit of Vatican II has infected almost all of the Catholic world today―the synods of the various popes merely carry on the work of Vatican II. The supporters of the Synod on Synodality are quick to vehemently stress that this Synod is totally based on Vatican II]. Our Lady of Good Success continues: “Under the appearance of virtue and bad-spirited zeal, many will turn upon the Religion which nourished them at her breast … Many people will rebel against the spirit of the Catholic Church, impelled by the malice of the devil! At the end of the 19th century and throughout the 20th century, various heresies will be propagated [this was time frame in which Modernism appeared and really took root] … As these heresies spread and dominate, the precious light of Faith will be extinguished in souls by the almost total corruption of morals. From the 20th century, there will be many who will not believe! … The Sacred Sacrament of Holy Orders will be ridiculed, oppressed and despised … Many hearts consecrated to God in the priestly and religious state will fall into lukewarmness … Priests will become careless in their sacred duties. They will stray from the road traced by God for the priestly ministry. Many priests will lose their spirit, placing their souls in great danger … and those who should speak out will be silent … The small number of souls who, hidden, will preserve the treasure of the Faith and practice virtue, will suffer a cruel, unspeakable and prolonged martyrdom.” (Our Lady of Good Success).
St. John Bosco
In the 1800s, St. John Bosco prophesied that an Ecumenical Council in the 1900s would bring chaos to the Church: “There will be an Ecumenical Council in the next century, after which there will be chaos in the Church.” The current Synods are merely a continuation of the insidious work of the Second Vatican Council.
Sister Lucia of Fatima
Sister Lucia of Fatima, in speaking of the secrets that Our Lady revealed to the children at Fatima, spoke of terrible destruction in the Church―both physical, material and spiritual―and the Third Secret of Fatima hints at an ever-growing worldwide apostasy from the Faith: “...before reaching there the Holy Father passed through a big city half in ruins and half trembling with halting step, afflicted with pain and sorrow, he prayed for the souls of the corpses he met on his way...”
Those who have read the Third Secret of Fatima, seem to confirm the disasters that will strike the Church and world.
Msgr. Eugenio Pacelli―the future Pope Pius XII (1930s)
The Secretary of State under Pius XI, Msgr. Eugenio Cardinal Pacelli, prior to his elevation to the papacy in 1939 as Pius XII, made the following astonishing prophecy about a coming upheaval in the Church: “Suppose, dear friend, that Communism [one of ‘the errors of Russia’ mentioned in the Message of Fatima] was only the most visible of the instruments of subversion to be used against the Church and the traditions of Divine Revelation … I am worried by the Blessed Virgin’s messages to Lucy of Fatima. This persistence of Mary about the dangers which menace the Church is a divine warning against the suicide of altering the Faith, in Her liturgy, Her theology and Her soul … I hear all around me innovators who wish to dismantle the Sacred Chapel, destroy the universal flame of the Church, reject Her ornaments and make Her feel remorse for Her historical past. A day will come when the civilized world will deny its God, when the Church will doubt as Peter doubted. She will be tempted to believe that man has become God. In our churches, Christians will search in vain for the red lamp where God awaits them. Like Mary Magdalene, weeping before the empty tomb, they will ask: ‘Where have they taken Him?’”
Father Joseph Schweigl (September 1952)
In 1952 Father Joseph Schweigl was entrusted by Pope Pius XII with a secret mission to interview Sister Lucy about the Third Secret. He subsequently stated: “I cannot reveal anything of what I learned at Fatima concerning the Third Secret, but I can say that it has two parts―one concerns the Pope; the other logically (although I must say nothing) would have to be the continuation of the words: ‘In Portugal, the dogma of the Faith will always be preserved.’”
Cardinal Oddi (March 1990)
On March 17th, 1990 Cardinal Oddi―who was a personal friend of Pope John XXIII and who had spoken to him regarding the Secret―gave the following testimony to Italian journalist, Lucio Brunelli, in the journal Il Sabato: “It [the Third Secret] has nothing to do with Gorbachev. The Blessed Virgin was alerting us against apostasy in the Church.”
Cardinal Ciappi
In a personal communication to a Professor Baumgartner in Salzburg, Cardinal Mario Luigi Ciappi―who was the personal papal theologian to Popes John XXIII, Paul VI, John Paul I and John Paul II―revealed: “In the Third Secret it is foretold, among other things, that the great apostasy in the Church will begin at the top.”
Father Malachi Martin (Summer 1998)
In a four-hour interview on the Art Bell radio program, Father Malachi Martin stated that, in February 1960, while he was secretary to Cardinal Bea (who was one of the close advisors to Pope John XXIII), Father Malachi was given the Third of Fatima to read. Bound by oath not to reveal the Secret, he commented on different versions, which callers quoted to him on the program. He stated that Our Lady’s words were dry and specific. In response to a quotation that a pope would be under the control of Satan, he responded, “Yes, it sounds as if they were reading the text of the Third Secret.” He stated that the release of the Secret would provoke strong reactions. He stated that if the Secret were made public, the confessionals and churches would be filled with parishioners on their knees. He also stated that something very relevant to the United States is mentioned in the Secret. He stated that the central element of the Secret is awful, and that it concerns apostasy.
Father Jose Valinho (2000 and 2003)
Finally there is Sister Lucy’s nephew, Father Jose dos Santos Valinho. He related his opinion of the contents of the Third Secret in a book by Renzo and Roberto Allegri, entitled Reportage su Fatima [Milan 2000], which was published — providentially enough — very shortly before the disclosure of the vision purported to be the Third Secret and the publication of booklet, entitled The Message of Fatima, by Cardinal Ratzinger and Archbishop Bertone. Father Valinho stated: “I believe that (the third) part of the secret concerns the Church from within, perhaps doctrinal difficulties, a crisis of unity, rebellion. The last sentence my aunt [Lucia] wrote, which precedes the part that is still unknown, says: ‘In Portugal, the dogma of the Faith will always be preserved, etc.’ … Therefore, people elsewhere in the Church might waver on dogma. But this is just speculation.”
On February 14th, 2003 Father Valinho also spoke about the Third Secret on the program ENIGMA. It was transmitted prime time, nationwide on RAI, the national television network of Italy. Father Valinho stated on this occasion: “I believe that there is a connection between that which is announced in the first part of the Secret, which concerns wars and sufferings which would be everywhere, and the second part which concerns the persecutions and a type of breakdown of the faith. Because where the ellipsis (the three dots, “…”) was placed, it means: ‘Here is the third part, which is not revealed’ and then the conclusion: ‘In Portugal the dogma of the faith will always be preserved etc.’ This suggests to me that there is a relationship between Faith and the third part of the Secret. Therefore, it is something that relates to the Church. It is some kind of universal crisis which affects the whole Church and all of humanity.”
Blessed Anne Catherine Emmerich (1774-1824)
The mystic and stigmatic, Anne Catherine Emmerich, was favored by many visions and revelations concerning the future. One topic of those many visions and revelations was that of the future of the Church. Here is a compilation of the chief elements regarding the future Church that were revealed to her:
“I a long processions of bishops [The four different sessions of the Second Vatican Council, held from 1962 to 1965, had between 2,000 and 2,500 bishops in daily attendance]. Their thoughts and utterances were made known to me through images issuing from their mouths. Their faults towards religion were shown by external deformities ... I saw what I believe to be nearly all the bishops of the world [the Second Vatican Council assembled all the bishops in the world], but only a small number were perfectly sound. A concession was demanded from the clergy which could not be granted. I saw that many pastors allowed themselves to be taken up with ideas that were dangerous to the Church. I saw many older priests, especially one, who wept bitterly. A few younger ones were also weeping. But others, and the lukewarm among them, readily did what was demanded. It was as if people were splitting into two camps ... ... Priests were among them! … Priests allowed everything and said Mass with much irreverence. I saw that few of them were still godly priests ... I saw some good pious bishops; but they were weak and wavering, their cowardice often got the upper hand … The local clergy grew lukewarm, and I saw a great circle of darkness ever widening … I now see that in this place [Rome], the [Catholic] Church is being so cleverly undermined, that there hardly remain a hundred or so priests who have not been deceived. They all work for destruction ― even the clergy ... I see many excommunicated ecclesiastics who do not seem to be concerned about it, nor even aware of it. Yet, they are (ipso facto) excommunicated whenever they cooperate with enterprises, enter into associations, and embrace opinions on which an anathema has been cast [i.e. become Freemasons] … Most priests were lured by the glittering, but false knowledge of modern teachers, and they all contributed to the work of destruction. I saw the secret sect relentlessly undermining the great Church! … A great devastation is now near at hand! …
They were building a large, strange, and extravagant church there in Rome … I did not see a single angel, nor a single saint helping in the work ... There was nothing holy in it. They had preaching and singing, but nothing else [which possibly implies the absence of the true Sacrifice of the Mass in this new church], and only very few attended it. People were kneading bread in the crypt below ... but it would not rise, nor did they receive the Body of our Lord, but only bread. Those who were in error, through no fault of their own―and who piously and ardently longed for the Body of Jesus―were spiritually consoled, but not by their communion ... There―in the strange big church―all the work was being done mechanically according to set rules and formulae. Everything was being done according to human reason ... All in this church belonged to the Earth, returned to the Earth. All was dead, the work of human skill, a church of the latest style, a church of man’s invention like the new heterodox church in Rome … There was something proud, presumptuous, and violent about it, and they seemed very successful. I saw the fatal consequences of this counterfeit church … All sorts of abominations were perpetrated there … I saw how harmful would be the consequences of this false church. I saw it increase in size; I saw heretics of all kinds flocking to the city of Rome.
“Everyone was to be admitted in it in order to be united and have equal rights―Evangelicals, Catholics, sects of every description [all of which describes the current false spirit of Ecumenism that invaded the Church at the Council] ... The Protestant doctrine and that of the schismatic Greeks is to spread everywhere! … Then I saw that everything pertaining to Protestantism was gradually gaining the upper hand, and the Catholic religion fell into complete decadence ... I saw all sorts of people, things, doctrines, and opinions ... Then I saw darkness spreading around and people no longer seeking the true Church … The Church is in great danger! It was shown to me that there were almost no Christians left in the old acceptation of the word! … The Church is completely isolated and as if completely deserted. It seems that everyone is running away. Everywhere I see great misery, hatred, treason, rancor, confusion and utter blindness … Then my Guide [Jesus] said: ‘This is Babel’ … I saw very clearly the errors, the aberrations and the countless sins of men. I saw the folly and the wickedness of their actions, against all truth and all reason ...
“I also saw the various regions of the Earth. My Guide [Jesus] named Europe and pointing to a small and sandy region, He uttered these words: ‘Here is Prussia [East Germany], the enemy.’ Then He showed me another place, to the north, and He said: ‘This is Moskva, the land of Moscow, bringing many evils.’ … I saw in all places Catholics oppressed, annoyed, harassed, restricted, and deprived of freedom, churches were closed, and great misery prevailed everywhere with war and bloodshed. In those days, Faith will fall very low, and it will be preserved in some places only, in a few cottages and in a few families which God has protected from disasters and wars.”
“Then I saw an apparition of the Mother of God, and she said that the tribulation would be very great. She added that people must pray fervently with outstretched arms―even if it only be long enough to say three Our Fathers [this does not mean that we must only pray for the length of three Our Fathers, but that our arms must outstretched in the form of a cross for at least as long as it takes to say three Our Fathers―our prayers must be fervent, many and much longer than a mere three Our Fathers]. This was the way her Son prayed for them on the Cross. They must rise at twelve at night, and pray in this manner; and they must keep coming to the Church. They must pray above all for the Church of Darkness to leave Rome … She [the Holy Mother] said a great many others things that it pains me to relate: she said that if only one priest could offer the bloodless sacrifice as worthily and with the same disposition as the Apostles, then he could avert all the disasters [that are to come].”
“I see that when the Second Coming of Christ approaches, a bad priest [Francis?] will do much harm to the Church. When the time of the reign of Antichrist is near, a false religion will appear which will be opposed to the unity of God and His Church. This will cause the greatest schism the world has ever known. The nearer the time of the end, the more the darkness of Satan will spread on Earth, the greater will be the number of the children of corruption, and the number of the just will correspondingly diminish … I see in the future religion falling so low that it will be practiced only here and there in farmhouses and in families protected by God during the horrors of war ... I saw the battle also. The enemies were far more numerous, but the small army of the faithful cut down whole rows of enemy soldiers. During the battle, the Blessed Virgin stood on a hill, wearing a suit of armor. It was a terrible war. At the end, only a few fighters for the just cause survived, but the victory was theirs!”
Article 5
Synod Psyches and Psychology
Synod Psyches and Psychology
If It Walks Like a Duck…
You have probably heard of the “Duck Test” ― which says: “If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, walks like duck and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck!” You could say the same for Modernists!
The term “Modernism” is usually a critical term that is used by the critics of Modernism, but is rarely used today by the Modernists as describing themselves. Modernism owes its origins to Liberalism (and Liberalism comes out of Rationalism). The term “Liberal Catholicism” originally described the current of thought within the Catholic Church in the 19th century, particularly in France, that aimed to reconcile the Church with Liberal Democracy that had come out of the aftermath of the 1789 French Revolution.
The Will of the People! Public Opinion!
In 1864 Pope Pius IX issued the encyclical Quanta Cura, lamenting the significant errors afflicting the modern age. It condemned certain propositions such as: “the people’s will, manifested by what is called public opinion ... constitutes a supreme law, free from all divine and human control.” Attached to the encyclical was the Syllabus Errorum (Syllabus of Errors), listing errors that Catholicism must condemn. The Syllabus attacked not only modern atheism, materialism, and agnosticism, but also Liberal Catholicism and the new critical study of the Bible.
The World Infiltrates the Church
In 1881, the Belgian economist Charles Périn, a Conservative Catholic layman, published a volume titled Le Modernisme dans l’Église (Modernism in the Church). Périn was the first author to use the term Modernism in a Catholic context. For Périn, Modernism was a label for the attempts of Liberal Catholics to reconcile Catholicism with the ideals of the French Revolution and of Democracy in general. He saw a danger that ideas and tendencies in secular society would be received within the Catholic Church. Périn’s usage of the term Modernism was accepted by various Catholic authorities and organizations―including the Roman Journal of the Jesuits, the Civiltà Cattolica, which added to this definition of Modernism the aspect of an exaggerated trust in modern science.
There was a great bandwidth of different opinions within the Modernist movement―ranging from people deeply immersed in Rationalism to those desiring a mild religious reformism, even including traditional neo-scholastic theologians. This image of a broad all-embracing movement―ranging from Left to Right, from Liberal to Conservative―was already shaped by the Modernists themselves. Although the so-called Modernists did not form a uniform movement, they responded to a common grouping of religious problems which afflicted the Church around 1900.
Questioning the Unquestionable―Believing What You Want
First of all was the problem of a new idea of “historicism”, which seemed to hold all previously historical forms of unchangeable Faith and Tradition as no longer being unchangeable, but being merely something that is relative and subjective―from this we get the so-called erroneous and heretical idea of “the evolution of dogma” or that dogmas can change with time. Secondly, through the acceptance and glorification of modern philosophers―like Immanuel Kant, Maurice Blondel, and Henri Bergson―the neo-scholastic philosophical and theological framework set up by Pope Leo XIII had become fragile.
The Modernist assertion that objective truth is received subjectively, is a fundamental aspect for the entire controversy. What does that mean? It means that even though everyone sees the same thing/object/event/preaching/teaching/book/Bible/etc. each person will interpret everything in his or her own way―and that interpretation will be “true” for them, even though it will not be “true” for someone else―yet everyone is entitled to his or her own “truth”. From this comes the staunch insistence that everyone must adhere to his or her own conscience―even though that conscience is erroneous! Pope Francis in an interview with the atheist Italian journalist, Eugenio Scalfari, in Rome’s daily newspaper, La Repubblica, promoted this a dangerous Modernist relativism. Here is the relevant extract from that interview:
► EUGENIO SCALFARI: “Your Holiness, is there is a single vision of the Good? And who decides what it is?”
► POPE FRANCIS: “Each of us has a vision of good and of evil. We have to encourage people to move towards what they think is Good.”
► EUGENIO SCALFARI: “Your Holiness, you wrote that in your letter to me. ‘The conscience is autonomous’, you said, ‘and everyone must obey his conscience.’ I think that is one of the most courageous steps taken by a pope!”
► POPE FRANCIS: “And I repeat it here. Everyone has his own idea of good and evil and must choose to follow the good and fight evil as he conceives them. That would be enough to make the world a better place.”
Modernist Ireland in America
Pope Francis would have loved the American Liberal and Modernist Archbishop (1888 to 1918), John Ireland of Saint Paul, Minnesota, with his slogan “Church and Age unite!” Archbishop Ireland stepped out of his religious parameters and was increasingly involved in civil matters. Such tendencies alarmed Pope Leo XIII, who condemned them, at the urging of Archbishop Ireland’s old opponent from Minnesota, Archbishop Zardetti, in the Apostolic Letter, Testem Benevolentiae Nostrae (1899). Archbishop Ireland had to be extremely careful to avoid condemnation for his Liberal and Modernist views. Following the issuing of Pope St. Pius X’s Pascendi, despite his support for modernization, Archbishop Ireland actively campaigned against Modernism―this apparently inconsistent behavior stemmed from Ireland’s concept of a “golden mean” (or sitting on the fence) between “Ultra-Conservatism” and “Ultra-Liberalism.”
Pope Pius X and Modernism
The label of “Modernism” came to prominence with Pope St. Pius X in his 1907 encyclical, Pascendi Dominici Gregis, which condemned Modernism as embracing every heresy. Pope St. Pius X condemned Modernism as “the synthesis of all heresies.” The encyclical describes the Modernists as enemies of scholastic philosophy and theology and as being resistant to the teachings of the Magisterium of the Church; their moral qualities are curiosity, arrogance, ignorance, and falsehood. Modernists deceive the simple believers by not presenting their entire system, but only parts of it. They also hide their erroneous heretical doctrines behind confusing words and long-winded obscure and dense explanations (we can see this in the Synod documents). Therefore, Pope St. Pius X’s encyclical wanted to reveal the secret system of Modernism.
The Modernism of Francis’ Synthesis Report
Today―November 2023―we have Pope Francis’ “Synthesis Report” on his Synod on Synodality (Part 1―the second part will take place in October of 2024). It would be tempting to say that the “Synthesis Report” is “the synthesis of all heresies”―but would that be a gross exaggeration? Nevertheless, it is no gross exaggeration―and not even a slight exaggeration―to say that the “Synthesis Report” is loaded with Modernism, with the language of Modernism, with the tactical layout of Modernism, with the goal of eventually leading the Church―lock, stock and barrel―totally into Modernism.
Modernism Introduces Revolution into the Church
Writing in the Catholic Encyclopedia in 1911, the Jesuit Arthur Vermeersch gave a definition of Modernism in the perspective of the Catholic heresiology [the theology of heresies] of his time: “In general, we may say that Modernism aims at that radical transformation of human thought in relation to God, man, the world, and life―both here and hereafter―which was prepared by Humanism and eighteenth-century philosophy, and solemnly promulgated at the French Revolution.”
► CARDINAL SUENENS, a Liberal and Modernist, admitted after the Second Vatican Council: “Vatican II is the French Revolution in the Church! … One cannot understand the French Revolution or the Russian Revolution unless one knows something of the old regimes which they brought to an end … It is the same in Church affairs―a reaction can only be judged in relation to the state of things that preceded it … The Second Vatican Council marked the end of an epoch; and, if we stand back from it a little more, we see it marked the end of a series of epochs, the end of an age!” Presumably, the Second Vatican Council has ushered in a New Age! An age of Modernism.
► FR. EDWARD SCHILLEBEECKX, a Liberal and Modernist of the Dominican Order and one of the most active theologians at the Second Vatican Council, admitted: “We have used ambiguous terms during the Council and we know how we shall interpret them afterwards.” These “ambiguous terms” have been called “liturgical time bombs” that have been specially prepared for “timed-release”―and we have seen them released one-after-the-other over the last 60 years. The tactic of “ambiguous terms” has been the bread-and-butter of the Modernist movement ever since!
► FR. YVES CONGAR, another Liberal and Modernist of the Dominican Order, one of the chief architects of the reforms of the Second Vatican Council, similarly said: “The Church has had, peacefully, its October Revolution!” [referring to the October Revolution, also known as the “Russian Revolution”]. Fully aware of the radical thing he had said, he added “The Declaration on Religious Liberty states the opposite of the Syllabus!” The “Syllabus of Errors” is the name given to a document issued by the Holy See under Pope Pius IX in 1864, which condemns a total of 80 propositions that the pope considered as errors or heresies. Fr. Congar―by his above statement―is implying that the Church no longer condemns those errors or heresies and that the doors of the Church have now been opened to those and future errors and heresies.
Anything Goes
The fact that this is true can clearly be seen in this pontificate of Pope Francis, where “anything goes” and “everything and everyone is welcome” and “everyone is our friend” and “we will listen to everyone” for “everyone has a right to speak and a right to be heard.” The visions granted by God to the Blessed Anne Catherine Emmerich simply confirm and compound the reality of what is happening in the Church today: “I saw a long processions of bishops. Their thoughts and utterances were made known to me through images issuing from their mouths. Their faults towards religion were shown by external deformities ... I saw what I believe to be nearly all the bishops of the world, but only a small number were perfectly sound. A concession was demanded from the clergy which could not be granted. I saw that many pastors allowed themselves to be taken up with ideas that were dangerous to the Church. Most priests were lured by the glittering, but false knowledge of modern teachers, and they all contributed to the work of destruction. I saw the secret sect relentlessly undermining the great Church! … A great devastation is now near at hand! … I saw many older priests, especially one, who wept bitterly. A few younger ones were also weeping. But others, and the lukewarm among them, readily did what was demanded. It was as if people were splitting into two camps ... ... Priests were among them! …
“They were building a large, strange, and extravagant church there in Rome … There―in the strange big church―all the work was being done mechanically according to set rules and formulae. Everything was being done according to human reason ... All in this church belonged to the Earth, returned to the Earth. All was dead, the work of human skill, a church of the latest style, a church of man’s invention like the new heterodox church in Rome … There was something proud, presumptuous, and violent about it, and they seemed very successful. I saw the fatal consequences of this counterfeit church … All sorts of abominations were perpetrated there … I saw how harmful would be the consequences of this false church. I saw it increase in size; I saw heretics of all kinds flocking to the city of Rome …
“Everyone was to be admitted in it in order to be united and have equal rights―Evangelicals, Catholics, sects of every description [all of which describes the current false spirit of Ecumenism that invaded the Church at the Second Vatican Council] ... The Protestant doctrine and that of the schismatic Greeks is to spread everywhere! … Then I saw that everything pertaining to Protestantism was gradually gaining the upper hand, and the Catholic religion fell into complete decadence ... I saw all sorts of people, things, doctrines, and opinions ... Then I saw darkness spreading around and people no longer seeking the true Church … The Church is in great danger! It was shown to me that there were almost no Christians left in the old acceptation of the word! … The Church is completely isolated and as if completely deserted! It seems that everyone is running away! Everywhere I see great misery, hatred, treason, rancor, confusion and utter blindness! When the time of the reign of Antichrist is near, a false religion will appear which will be opposed to the unity of God and His Church. This will cause the greatest schism the world has ever known. The nearer the time of the end, the more the darkness of Satan will spread on Earth, the greater will be the number of the children of corruption, and the number of the just will correspondingly diminish.”
You have probably heard of the “Duck Test” ― which says: “If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, walks like duck and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck!” You could say the same for Modernists!
The term “Modernism” is usually a critical term that is used by the critics of Modernism, but is rarely used today by the Modernists as describing themselves. Modernism owes its origins to Liberalism (and Liberalism comes out of Rationalism). The term “Liberal Catholicism” originally described the current of thought within the Catholic Church in the 19th century, particularly in France, that aimed to reconcile the Church with Liberal Democracy that had come out of the aftermath of the 1789 French Revolution.
The Will of the People! Public Opinion!
In 1864 Pope Pius IX issued the encyclical Quanta Cura, lamenting the significant errors afflicting the modern age. It condemned certain propositions such as: “the people’s will, manifested by what is called public opinion ... constitutes a supreme law, free from all divine and human control.” Attached to the encyclical was the Syllabus Errorum (Syllabus of Errors), listing errors that Catholicism must condemn. The Syllabus attacked not only modern atheism, materialism, and agnosticism, but also Liberal Catholicism and the new critical study of the Bible.
The World Infiltrates the Church
In 1881, the Belgian economist Charles Périn, a Conservative Catholic layman, published a volume titled Le Modernisme dans l’Église (Modernism in the Church). Périn was the first author to use the term Modernism in a Catholic context. For Périn, Modernism was a label for the attempts of Liberal Catholics to reconcile Catholicism with the ideals of the French Revolution and of Democracy in general. He saw a danger that ideas and tendencies in secular society would be received within the Catholic Church. Périn’s usage of the term Modernism was accepted by various Catholic authorities and organizations―including the Roman Journal of the Jesuits, the Civiltà Cattolica, which added to this definition of Modernism the aspect of an exaggerated trust in modern science.
There was a great bandwidth of different opinions within the Modernist movement―ranging from people deeply immersed in Rationalism to those desiring a mild religious reformism, even including traditional neo-scholastic theologians. This image of a broad all-embracing movement―ranging from Left to Right, from Liberal to Conservative―was already shaped by the Modernists themselves. Although the so-called Modernists did not form a uniform movement, they responded to a common grouping of religious problems which afflicted the Church around 1900.
Questioning the Unquestionable―Believing What You Want
First of all was the problem of a new idea of “historicism”, which seemed to hold all previously historical forms of unchangeable Faith and Tradition as no longer being unchangeable, but being merely something that is relative and subjective―from this we get the so-called erroneous and heretical idea of “the evolution of dogma” or that dogmas can change with time. Secondly, through the acceptance and glorification of modern philosophers―like Immanuel Kant, Maurice Blondel, and Henri Bergson―the neo-scholastic philosophical and theological framework set up by Pope Leo XIII had become fragile.
The Modernist assertion that objective truth is received subjectively, is a fundamental aspect for the entire controversy. What does that mean? It means that even though everyone sees the same thing/object/event/preaching/teaching/book/Bible/etc. each person will interpret everything in his or her own way―and that interpretation will be “true” for them, even though it will not be “true” for someone else―yet everyone is entitled to his or her own “truth”. From this comes the staunch insistence that everyone must adhere to his or her own conscience―even though that conscience is erroneous! Pope Francis in an interview with the atheist Italian journalist, Eugenio Scalfari, in Rome’s daily newspaper, La Repubblica, promoted this a dangerous Modernist relativism. Here is the relevant extract from that interview:
► EUGENIO SCALFARI: “Your Holiness, is there is a single vision of the Good? And who decides what it is?”
► POPE FRANCIS: “Each of us has a vision of good and of evil. We have to encourage people to move towards what they think is Good.”
► EUGENIO SCALFARI: “Your Holiness, you wrote that in your letter to me. ‘The conscience is autonomous’, you said, ‘and everyone must obey his conscience.’ I think that is one of the most courageous steps taken by a pope!”
► POPE FRANCIS: “And I repeat it here. Everyone has his own idea of good and evil and must choose to follow the good and fight evil as he conceives them. That would be enough to make the world a better place.”
Modernist Ireland in America
Pope Francis would have loved the American Liberal and Modernist Archbishop (1888 to 1918), John Ireland of Saint Paul, Minnesota, with his slogan “Church and Age unite!” Archbishop Ireland stepped out of his religious parameters and was increasingly involved in civil matters. Such tendencies alarmed Pope Leo XIII, who condemned them, at the urging of Archbishop Ireland’s old opponent from Minnesota, Archbishop Zardetti, in the Apostolic Letter, Testem Benevolentiae Nostrae (1899). Archbishop Ireland had to be extremely careful to avoid condemnation for his Liberal and Modernist views. Following the issuing of Pope St. Pius X’s Pascendi, despite his support for modernization, Archbishop Ireland actively campaigned against Modernism―this apparently inconsistent behavior stemmed from Ireland’s concept of a “golden mean” (or sitting on the fence) between “Ultra-Conservatism” and “Ultra-Liberalism.”
Pope Pius X and Modernism
The label of “Modernism” came to prominence with Pope St. Pius X in his 1907 encyclical, Pascendi Dominici Gregis, which condemned Modernism as embracing every heresy. Pope St. Pius X condemned Modernism as “the synthesis of all heresies.” The encyclical describes the Modernists as enemies of scholastic philosophy and theology and as being resistant to the teachings of the Magisterium of the Church; their moral qualities are curiosity, arrogance, ignorance, and falsehood. Modernists deceive the simple believers by not presenting their entire system, but only parts of it. They also hide their erroneous heretical doctrines behind confusing words and long-winded obscure and dense explanations (we can see this in the Synod documents). Therefore, Pope St. Pius X’s encyclical wanted to reveal the secret system of Modernism.
The Modernism of Francis’ Synthesis Report
Today―November 2023―we have Pope Francis’ “Synthesis Report” on his Synod on Synodality (Part 1―the second part will take place in October of 2024). It would be tempting to say that the “Synthesis Report” is “the synthesis of all heresies”―but would that be a gross exaggeration? Nevertheless, it is no gross exaggeration―and not even a slight exaggeration―to say that the “Synthesis Report” is loaded with Modernism, with the language of Modernism, with the tactical layout of Modernism, with the goal of eventually leading the Church―lock, stock and barrel―totally into Modernism.
Modernism Introduces Revolution into the Church
Writing in the Catholic Encyclopedia in 1911, the Jesuit Arthur Vermeersch gave a definition of Modernism in the perspective of the Catholic heresiology [the theology of heresies] of his time: “In general, we may say that Modernism aims at that radical transformation of human thought in relation to God, man, the world, and life―both here and hereafter―which was prepared by Humanism and eighteenth-century philosophy, and solemnly promulgated at the French Revolution.”
► CARDINAL SUENENS, a Liberal and Modernist, admitted after the Second Vatican Council: “Vatican II is the French Revolution in the Church! … One cannot understand the French Revolution or the Russian Revolution unless one knows something of the old regimes which they brought to an end … It is the same in Church affairs―a reaction can only be judged in relation to the state of things that preceded it … The Second Vatican Council marked the end of an epoch; and, if we stand back from it a little more, we see it marked the end of a series of epochs, the end of an age!” Presumably, the Second Vatican Council has ushered in a New Age! An age of Modernism.
► FR. EDWARD SCHILLEBEECKX, a Liberal and Modernist of the Dominican Order and one of the most active theologians at the Second Vatican Council, admitted: “We have used ambiguous terms during the Council and we know how we shall interpret them afterwards.” These “ambiguous terms” have been called “liturgical time bombs” that have been specially prepared for “timed-release”―and we have seen them released one-after-the-other over the last 60 years. The tactic of “ambiguous terms” has been the bread-and-butter of the Modernist movement ever since!
► FR. YVES CONGAR, another Liberal and Modernist of the Dominican Order, one of the chief architects of the reforms of the Second Vatican Council, similarly said: “The Church has had, peacefully, its October Revolution!” [referring to the October Revolution, also known as the “Russian Revolution”]. Fully aware of the radical thing he had said, he added “The Declaration on Religious Liberty states the opposite of the Syllabus!” The “Syllabus of Errors” is the name given to a document issued by the Holy See under Pope Pius IX in 1864, which condemns a total of 80 propositions that the pope considered as errors or heresies. Fr. Congar―by his above statement―is implying that the Church no longer condemns those errors or heresies and that the doors of the Church have now been opened to those and future errors and heresies.
Anything Goes
The fact that this is true can clearly be seen in this pontificate of Pope Francis, where “anything goes” and “everything and everyone is welcome” and “everyone is our friend” and “we will listen to everyone” for “everyone has a right to speak and a right to be heard.” The visions granted by God to the Blessed Anne Catherine Emmerich simply confirm and compound the reality of what is happening in the Church today: “I saw a long processions of bishops. Their thoughts and utterances were made known to me through images issuing from their mouths. Their faults towards religion were shown by external deformities ... I saw what I believe to be nearly all the bishops of the world, but only a small number were perfectly sound. A concession was demanded from the clergy which could not be granted. I saw that many pastors allowed themselves to be taken up with ideas that were dangerous to the Church. Most priests were lured by the glittering, but false knowledge of modern teachers, and they all contributed to the work of destruction. I saw the secret sect relentlessly undermining the great Church! … A great devastation is now near at hand! … I saw many older priests, especially one, who wept bitterly. A few younger ones were also weeping. But others, and the lukewarm among them, readily did what was demanded. It was as if people were splitting into two camps ... ... Priests were among them! …
“They were building a large, strange, and extravagant church there in Rome … There―in the strange big church―all the work was being done mechanically according to set rules and formulae. Everything was being done according to human reason ... All in this church belonged to the Earth, returned to the Earth. All was dead, the work of human skill, a church of the latest style, a church of man’s invention like the new heterodox church in Rome … There was something proud, presumptuous, and violent about it, and they seemed very successful. I saw the fatal consequences of this counterfeit church … All sorts of abominations were perpetrated there … I saw how harmful would be the consequences of this false church. I saw it increase in size; I saw heretics of all kinds flocking to the city of Rome …
“Everyone was to be admitted in it in order to be united and have equal rights―Evangelicals, Catholics, sects of every description [all of which describes the current false spirit of Ecumenism that invaded the Church at the Second Vatican Council] ... The Protestant doctrine and that of the schismatic Greeks is to spread everywhere! … Then I saw that everything pertaining to Protestantism was gradually gaining the upper hand, and the Catholic religion fell into complete decadence ... I saw all sorts of people, things, doctrines, and opinions ... Then I saw darkness spreading around and people no longer seeking the true Church … The Church is in great danger! It was shown to me that there were almost no Christians left in the old acceptation of the word! … The Church is completely isolated and as if completely deserted! It seems that everyone is running away! Everywhere I see great misery, hatred, treason, rancor, confusion and utter blindness! When the time of the reign of Antichrist is near, a false religion will appear which will be opposed to the unity of God and His Church. This will cause the greatest schism the world has ever known. The nearer the time of the end, the more the darkness of Satan will spread on Earth, the greater will be the number of the children of corruption, and the number of the just will correspondingly diminish.”
Article 6
The Prophecies Are Coming True
The Prophecies Are Coming True
Prophecy Has Come True and Is Still Coming True!
The above visions granted to Blessed Anne Catherine Emmerich have been coming true over the last 60 years―and the end is not yet in sight. Prior to the Second Vatican Council these “eggs” of Modernism were partially hidden and incubated―so to speak. The Liberals and Modernists did not feel that the “temperature” and “climate” of the Church was quite right and ready for them to start “hatching” their “Modernist eggs” universally. However, the Second Vatican Council produced the right “temperature” and “climate” for that “universal hatching” to take place―and we have witnessed the unparalleled “birth” of “Modernist birds” ever since.
The last 60 years have brought about exactly what Blessed Anne Catherine Emmerich was shown:
(1) Out of “nearly all the bishops of the world, only a small number were perfectly sound.”
(2) “Many pastors allow themselves to be taken up with ideas that were dangerous to the Church.
(3) “Most priests are lured by the false knowledge of modern teachers, and they all contribute to the work of destruction.
(4) “The secret sect relentlessly undermining the great Church!”
(5) “People are splitting into two camps ― Priests are among them.”
(6) “They were building a large, strange, extravagant and counterfeit church there in Rome … All sorts of abominations were perpetrated there … All was dead, the work of human skill, a church of the latest style, a church of man’s invention like the new heterodox church in Rome.”
(7) “I saw heretics of all kinds flocking to the city of Rome … I saw all sorts of people, things, doctrines, and opinions ... Everyone was to be admitted in it in order to be united and have equal rights―Evangelicals, Catholics, sects of every description ... The Protestant doctrine and that of the schismatic Greeks is to spread everywhere! … Then I saw that everything pertaining to Protestantism was gradually gaining the upper hand, and the Catholic religion fell into complete decadence.”
(8) “It was shown to me that there were almost no Christians left in the old acceptation of the word! … The nearer the time of the end, the more the darkness of Satan will spread on Earth, the greater will be the number of the children of corruption, and the number of the just will correspondingly diminish.”
(9) “When the time of the reign of Antichrist is near, a false religion will appear which will be opposed to the unity of God and His Church. This will cause the greatest schism the world has ever known.”
Let us examine those nine points and you will see how true they are today.
(1) Out of “nearly all the bishops of the world, only a small number were perfectly sound.”
An observer of the Second Vatican Council, Xavier Rynne (the pseudonym of Fr. Francis X. Murphy, 1914-2002, a Liberal Redemptorist theology professor) wrote a series of “Letters from Vatican City” published in the New Yorker. The Council, according to Rynne, was an epic battle between stuck-in-the-chancel Conservative bishops and enlightened Liberal bishops who were striving mightily to bring a tradition-bound Catholicism into the light of the modern world. All the observers are in total agreement that the majority of the bishops attending the Council were Liberals. Since that time, the post-Vatican II popes―Paul VI, John-Paul II, Benedict XVI and Francis―have continued to add more and more Liberal bishops and cardinals. The obvious result is that there are less and less cardinals and bishops who are doctrinally sound these days. The key to understanding the Council is the Italian word “aggiornamento”—usually translated as “an updating”. Rynne―and the thousands of reporters who followed his lead―left no doubt that the Second Vatican Council was a great Liberal triumph. In the decades following the Second Vatican Council, many Liberals made no secret of their belief that “aggiornamento” was a mandate for radical change, even revolution. They excitedly described and hailed as “renewal” what others saw as destabilization and confusion. Around 100 years beforehand, St. John Bosco had prophesied “There will be an Ecumenical Council in the next century, after which there will be chaos in the Church.”
(2) “Many pastors allow themselves to be taken up with ideas that were dangerous to the Church.”
Pope St. Pius X strove to eliminate those “ideas that were dangerous to the Church” with his repeated and strenuous attacks against Liberalism and Modernism. On September 8th, 1907, Pope Saint Pius X published the encyclical letter Pascendi Dominici Gregis, in which he condemned the heresy of Modernism. Later, he instituted the Oath against Modernism on September 1st, 1910, which had to be sworn each time that a member of the Catholic Church received a sacred order or a pastoral ministry―such as bishop of a diocese, pastor of a parish, seminary professor, preacher, religious superior, official of a diocese or of the Holy See, or to receive an ecclesiastical degree. But around the time of the Second Vatican Council, the requirement to take this oath was suppressed by the Holy See on July 17th, 1967, and it has never been seen again. It will do no harm to read the entire Oath Against Modernism below, for it explicitly mentions many of the errors that have contaminated the Church today. Here it is in its entirety:
► THE OATH AGAINST MODERNISM
Given by His Holiness, Pope St. Pius X, September 1st, 1910.
To be sworn to by all clergy, pastors, confessors, preachers, religious superiors, and professors in philosophical-theological seminaries.
“I firmly embrace and accept each and every definition that has been set forth and declared by the unerring teaching authority of the Church, especially those principal truths which are directly opposed to the errors of this day.
And first of all, I profess that God, the origin and end of all things, can be known with certainty by the natural light of reason from the created world (see Romans 1:90), that is, from the visible works of creation, as a cause from its effects, and that, therefore, His existence can also be demonstrated:
Secondly, I accept and acknowledge the external proofs of Revelation, that is, Divine acts and especially miracles and prophecies as the surest signs of the Divine origin of the Christian religion and I hold that these same proofs are well adapted to the understanding of all eras and all men, even of this time.
Thirdly, I believe with equally firm Faith that the Church, the guardian and teacher of the revealed word, was personally instituted by the real and historical Christ when He lived among us, and that the Church was built upon Peter, the prince of the Apostolic hierarchy, and his successors for the duration of time.
Fourthly, I sincerely hold that the doctrine of Faith was handed down to us from the Apostles through the orthodox Fathers, in exactly the same meaning and always in the same purport. Therefore, I entirely reject the heretical misrepresentation that dogmas evolve and change from one meaning to another, different from the one which the Church held previously. I also condemn every error according to which, in place of the Divine deposit which has been given to the spouse of Christ to be carefully guarded by her, there is put a philosophical figment or product of a human conscience that has gradually been developed by human effort and will continue to develop indefinitely.
Fifthly, I hold with certainty and sincerely confess that Faith is not a blind sentiment of religion welling up from the depths of the subconscious under the impulse of the heart and the motion of a will trained to morality; but Faith is a genuine assent of the intellect to truth received by hearing from an external source. By this assent, because of the authority of the supremely truthful God, we believe to be true that which has been revealed and attested to by a personal God, our Creator and Lord.
Furthermore, with due reverence, I submit and adhere with my whole heart to the condemnations, declarations, and all the prescripts contained in the encyclical Pascendi and in the decree Lamentabili, especially those concerning what is known as the history of dogmas. I also reject the error of those who say that the Faith held by the Church can contradict history, and that Catholic dogmas, in the sense in which they are now understood, are irreconcilable with a more realistic view of the origins of the Christian religion. I also condemn and reject the opinion of those who say that a well-educated Christian assumes a dual personality—that of a believer and at the same time of a historian, as if it were permissible for a historian to hold things that contradict the faith of the believer, or to establish premises which, provided there be no direct denial of dogmas, would lead to the conclusion that dogmas are either false or doubtful. Likewise, I reject that method of judging and interpreting Sacred Scripture which, departing from the tradition of the Church, the analogy of Faith, and the norms of the Apostolic See, embraces the misrepresentations of the rationalists and with no prudence or restraint adopts textual criticism as the one and supreme norm.
Furthermore, I reject the opinion of those who hold that a professor lecturing or writing on a historico-theological subject should first put aside any preconceived opinion about the supernatural origin of Catholic Tradition or about the Divine promise of help to preserve all revealed truth forever; and that they should then interpret the writings of each of the Fathers solely by scientific principles, excluding all Sacred authority, and with the same liberty of judgment that is common in the investigation of all ordinary historical documents.
Finally, I declare that I am completely opposed to the error of the Modernists, who hold that there is nothing Divine in Sacred Tradition; or, what is far worse, say that there is, but in a pantheistic sense, with the result that there would remain nothing but this plain simple fact—one to be put on a par with the ordinary facts of history—the fact, namely, that a group of men by their own labor, skill, and talent have continued through subsequent ages a school begun by Christ and His Apostles. I firmly hold, then, and shall hold to my dying breath the belief of the Fathers in the charism of truth, which certainly is, was, and always will be in the succession of the episcopacy from the Apostles. The purpose of this is, then, not that dogma may be tailored according to what seems better and more suited to the culture of each age; rather, that the absolute and immutable truth preached by the Apostles from the beginning may never be believed to be different, may never be understood in any other way.
I promise that I shall keep all these articles faithfully, entirely, and sincerely, and guard them inviolate, in no way deviating from them in teaching or in any way in word or in writing. Thus I promise, this I swear, so help me God.”
► DOCTRINAL DISASTERS
The results of this rejection of the Oath Against Modernism by the modern-day Holy See has led to disastrous consequences in the field of Catholic teaching and acceptance of the authority of unchanging dogmas. We have degenerated from a Church of Apostolic Tradition to a Church of Anything Goes. Increasing numbers of priests are teaching what they want to teach, rather than teaching pure, unadulterated Catholic doctrine. Many heresies and doctrinal and moral errors coming from the theology faculties at Catholic colleges. The faithful are poorly-catechized―and the clerics and religious of the Church come from the laity. Therefore many priests, deacons, religious and even some bishops are poorly-catechized. They lack the understanding of basic Catholic teaching to recognize and refute the most popular theological errors being promoted, mainly on the internet, often by anonymous persons.
The Pope, the Vatican Congregations, the Bishops’ Conferences, and the individual Bishops should be replying to the many various errors that are being spread among the faithful, by issuing magisterial documents explaining the true teaching of the Church, and the reasons why certain modern Catholic teaching are unacceptable errors―but they do not take these disciplinary measures. The condemnation of grave doctrinal errors by the Bishops should include condemnation of specific heresies, with an explanation in a magisterial document as to why these ideas are heretical. Persons who continue to promote or teach these condemned heresies should be excommunicated, and all Catholic organizations should be prohibited from hiring them and from promoting their heretical claims. It is already the case that anyone who commits formal heresy or formal schism is automatically excommunicated. But this condemnation is not taken seriously by most persons. Catholics who openly teach obvious heresy, laugh at the idea that they are automatically excommunicated. Their fellow Catholics do not reject their false teachings. These promoters of error and heresy have no difficulty being hired by Catholic publications to spread their false claims and teachings about Faith and Morals.
Bishops today have become mainly administrators; they seldom teach because they do not know their Faith very well―as the saying goes: “You cannot give what you have not got!” And the recent papal documents have not focused on refuting popular errors among the faithful.
So what are some these “ideas that are dangerous to the Church” that Blessed Anne Catherine Emmerich spoke of as a result of the visions that God granted to her? Today―to anyone with a true Catholic sense―they are pretty obvious. The acceptance of a false ecumenism, whereby it is imagined that all religions can lead us to God. As a consequence of this false idea, the Pope and many bishops and priests implicitly or explicitly are increasingly showing acceptance and are cooperating with non-Catholic religions. It is often heard that non-Catholics who wish to convert to Catholicism are told that they are fine where they are and that they will save their souls if they remain as they are!
Another derivative of this is the practice of inter-religious communion―whereby non-Catholics are allowed to receive Catholic Holy Communion in a Catholic church. Additionally, it has also been noted that some ministers of Protestant Churches were invited to concelebrate the Holy Mass in modern-Catholic churches during “Unity Week” and even receive the Consecrated bread and wine into Body and Blood of Christ. “Unity Week” is the Week of Prayer for Christian Unity―an ecumenical Christian observance in the Christian calendar that is celebrated internationally.
Another “idea dangerous to the Church” is that of a false acceptance of LGBTQ+ people in the Church which demands that the Church bless the immoral “marriages” or sinful unions of those who are in clear opposition to the Law of God―and that they be allowed to receive Holy Communion in their sinful state. Likewise, the demand that divorcees who have entered a second invalid marriage and are living in sin, be allowed to receive Holy Communion. Other ideas and attitudes see nothing wrong with cohabitation without marriage; or masturbation; or contraception; or even abortion. Some think that they be “good” Catholics even if they do not regularly attend Sunday Mass. Others call for women priests and for permission for priests to marry. These are just the tip of the iceberg of these “ideas that are dangerous to the Church” that Blessed Anne Catherine Emmerich spoke of as a result of the visions that God granted to her.
► GERMAN SYNOD SINFUL
If you want everything wrapped-up in one heretical package, then the current German Synodal Way is a perfect example of that. The participants in the current German Synodal Way have expressed views and ratified proposals that contradict Catholic doctrines and practices in areas such as the male-only priesthood, sexual morality, and authority in the Church. The following Motion was accepted by the German Synod by a vote of 18 YES and 3 NO:
“The Synodal Assembly calls on the bishops to officially allow blessing ceremonies in their dioceses for couples who love each other, but to whom sacramental marriage is not accessible, or who do not see themselves at a point of entering into a sacramental marriage. This also applies to same-sex couples on the basis of a re-evaluation of homosexuality as a norm variant of human sexuality. These are couples who have bound themselves, for example, through a civil marriage. The German dioceses will establish such blessing ceremony as a diocesan liturgy … The Synod Assembly proposes that a manual for such blessing celebrations be prepared … The manual includes suggested forms for blessing ceremonies in the context of Services of the Word [Holy Mass] or the Eucharist, as well as suggestions for addressing the various couple situations (such as remarried divorcees, same-sex couples, couples after civil marriage).
“Such a ceremony may be presided over by ordained ministers, or persons with an episcopal mandate to worship. No pastor who conducts such a blessing ceremony will face disciplinary consequences in Germany. An obligation to lead such a ceremony is not imposed on anyone. Those who, for reasons of conscience, do not wish to preside over such a celebration, refer the couple to colleagues or a diocesan contact person who will assist the couple in finding a person to lead the ceremony. - For all interested couples, preparatory talks with pastors and, if necessary, seminars are planned. Here the joint life situation may be taken into consideration.
“Many people long for commitment and love in binding [sinful] partnerships. They choose to express commitment in their [sinful] relationship in different ways. It has become a common experience, in pastoral practice, that same-sex loving couples ask for a blessing for their partnership. So do civilly remarried couples who dare to make a new start in a new partnership. Couples who do not yet consider themselves ready for the sacrament of marriage also do so. Often, they want to meet the interests of a partnership in which only one partner is a believer, or is close to the Catholic Church. Increasingly, unbaptized couples are asking for a blessing. A blessing for all these partnerships is not currently provided for. The [German] Synod of Bishops has shown that the view of homosexuality is not considered sufficient in many places and needs further theological development. The refusal to bless the relationship of two people who want to live their [sinful] partnership in [sinful] love, commitment and responsibility to each other and to God proves to be merciless or even discriminatory in a society that has achieved human dignity and free self-determination as maxims of moral standardization. This is all the more serious because such a refusal cannot be convincingly justified in terms of the theology of grace. Pope Francis’ letter [Amoris Laetitiae] says “it can no longer simply be said that all those in any “irregular” situation are living in a state of mortal sin and are deprived of sanctifying grace.” (AL §301) …
“The subject of this resolution is a blessing ceremony. The blessing reinforces what already exists in the couple relationship in terms of love, commitment and mutual responsibility. The offer of a blessing ceremony is based on a primal human need. People are in need of blessings. They long for salvation, protection, happiness and fulfillment in their lives ... Often same-sex couples and remarried divorcees have experienced exclusion and depreciation in our Church. The possibility of publicly placing their [sinful] partnership under God’s blessing does not make up for these experiences. However, it offers the Church the opportunity to show appreciation for the love and values that exist in these [sinful] relationships and thus ask for forgiveness and make reconciliation possible. The blessing is a sign for many couples and their children to be accepted in this Church and the congregations are encouraged to welcome them.”
Hopefully that gives you some indication of the fulfillment of the prophecy from the vision of Blessed Anne Catherine Emmerich with regards to “many pastors allowing themselves to be taken up with ideas that are dangerous to the Church.”
(3) “Most priests are lured by the false knowledge of modern teachers, and they all contribute to the work of destruction.”
The Second Vatican Council generated new theological viewpoints and approaches that were more in harmony with the world today than the Church of yesterday. As a result of this “letting your hair down” attitude, tens of thousands of priests abandoned their ministries; convents were emptied as sisters embraced the freedoms of the secular world; Gregorian Chant was replaced by songs like “Kumbaya”; the respectful spirituality of the Latin Mass was replaced with the banal attitude of the New Mass―even to the point of having the so-called “Clown Masses” and rock bands and country-music styles to replace traditional hymns; the number of seminarians preparing for priesthood plummeted; and not a few of the priests who remained in the priesthood decided on their own that celibacy was optional.
Unsurprisngly, a majority of Catholics stopped going to Mass every week and decided, or were given to understand by progressive priests that moral truths taught from the beginning of the Church are, at best, only advisory and not obligatory in nature.
We are seeing this very thing happening in the German Synodal Way (see more above). Bishop Georg Bätzing, the President of the German Bishops Conference, said recently: “We want to be Catholic in a different way.” What kind of different way? In September 2022 the German Synodal Forum approved these following statements which directly contradict Catholic teaching:
● “Since a homosexual orientation is part of being a human as created by God, this orientation is not to be judged differently in ethical terms than a heterosexual orientation.
● “Same-sex sexuality – also practiced in sexual acts – is thus not a sin that separates a person from God, and it is not to be judged as bad in itself.
● “The status in the human sciences is: Homosexuality and bisexuality are neither diseases nor disorders nor something that can be chosen. Rather, they represent natural minority variants of people’s sexual preference structures. These sexual preferences ... are ... not changeable .... Homosexuality ... is a variant of the norm and not a minus of this variant. As a normal case, it belongs to God’s good creation.”
These erroneous and heretical statements are seen by the German bishops as being progressive changes that rectify the Church’s earlier misunderstanding of the Gospel and the Natural Law. What the German Synod is doing is merely symptomatic of the erroneous beliefs and heresies that are increasingly inundating the Church around the world.
(4) “The secret sect relentlessly undermining the great Church!”
What is “the secret sect”? It is Freemasonry. The Catholic Church first condemned Freemasonry and prohibited Catholics from membership in Masonic organizations and other secret societies in 1738. Since then, at least eleven popes have made pronouncements about the incompatibility of Catholic doctrines and Freemasonry. From 1738 until 1983, Catholics who publicly associated with, or publicly supported, Masonic organizations were censured with automatic excommunication.
Although there was some confusion about membership following the 1962-1965 Second Vatican Council (Vatican II), the Church continues to prohibit membership in Freemasonry because it believes that Masonic principles and rituals are irreconcilable with Catholic doctrines. The current norm, the 1983 Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith's (CDF) Declaration on Masonic associations, states that “faithful who enroll in Masonic associations are in a state of grave sin and may not receive Holy Communion” and membership in Masonic associations is prohibited.
The most recent official Holy See documents about the “incompatibility of Freemasonry with the Catholic faith” were issued in 1985, and recently, in November 2023, in responding to a question from a Filipino Bishop, the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, in a document signed by the Prefect, Cardinal Victor Fernandéz, and approved by Pope Francis, has reaffirmed the incompatibility between the Catholic Faith and Freemasonry, stating that Catholics are forbidden from joining Masonic lodges.
Our Lady of Good Success had warned us of Masonic persecution: “Satan will reign almost completely by means of the Masonic sects ... These years, during which the evil sect of Masonry will take control of the civil government, will see a cruel persecution of all religious communities … During this epoch the Church will find herself attacked by terrible assaults from the Masonic sect … Masonry, which will then be in power, will enact iniquitous laws with the objective, making it easy for everyone to live in sin.”
Since the Second Vatican Council there have been several exposés and lists published that have listed the names of Masons among the clergy―even the clergy in the Vatican. They are there―that much is certain―but who exactly is a Mason is not always that easy to know. They do not advertize themselves. Nevertheless, one Conservative bishop in the 1990s said that there were four Masonic lodges for the higher clergy (cardinals and bishops) in the Vatican. Additionally, read what the Freemasons said about the election of Francis to the papacy―it is mind boggling (read here).
(5) “People are splitting into two camps ― Priests are among them.”
There have always been divisions, heresies and schisms within the Church―that is nothing new―and there always will be as long as Satan is around seeking to divide, conquer and devour. Yet we are living at a time when it is prophesied that the Catholic Church will experience the greatest schism in her entire history. The encroachment of Rationalism, Liberalism and Modernism into the Church since the time of the Protestant Reformation is now coming to a crescendo. The Liberalism of the 19th century, which gave birth to Modernism in the later 19th and early 20th century, has now―like the proverbial mustard seed―grown into a large tree to which most Catholics have flocked to nest.
► OUR LADY, as usual, has already warned us of this mammoth division within the Church of our times: “I make it known to you that from the end of the 19th century and from shortly after the middle of the 20th century [Vatican II was announced by Pope John XXIII on January 25th, 1959, and took place from 1962-1965], the passions will erupt and there will be a total corruption of morals, for Satan will reign almost completely by means of the Masonic Sects” (O.L. of Good Success) … “The work of the devil will infiltrate even into the Church in such a way that one will see cardinals opposing cardinals, bishops against bishops. The Church will be full of those who accept compromises!” (O. L. of Akita). “Many will turn upon Religion! Many people will rebel against the spirit of the Catholic Church, impelled by the malice of the devil!” (O.L. of Good Success) … “Lucifer, together with a large number of demons, will be unloosed from Hell; they will put an end to Faith, little by little, even in those dedicated to God! … God will allow the old serpent to cause divisions among those who reign in every society and in every family … Several religious institutions will lose all Faith and will lose many souls!” (O. L. of La Salette).
► BLESSED ANNE CATHERINE EMMERICH (1774-1824), saw in one of the visions that God granted her, that “a false religion will appear which will be opposed to the unity of God and His Church. This will cause the greatest schism the world has ever known.”
► ST. FRANCIS OF ASSISI (1181-1226) had a gift of prophecy about a future Church crisis such as ours. He described a corrupt pontificate where Our Lord had placed a “non-canonically elected destroyer” into the visible seat. St. Francis warns: “The devils will have unusual … At the time of this tribulation a man, not canonically elected, will be raised to the Pontificate, who, by his cunning, will endeavor to draw many into error and death. Then scandals will be multiplied, our Order will be divided, and many others will be entirely destroyed, because they will consent to error instead of opposing it. There will be such diversity of opinions and schisms among the people, the religious and the clergy … Those who preserve their fervor and adhere to virtue with love and zeal for the truth, will suffer injuries and, persecutions as rebels and schismatics; for their persecutors, urged on by the evil spirits, will say they are rendering a great service to God by destroying such pestilent men from the face of the Earth. But the Lord will save all who trust in Him. Choosing to obey God rather than man, they will fear nothing, and they will prefer to perish [physically] rather than consent to falsehood and perfidy. Some preachers will keep silence about the truth, and others will trample it under foot and deny it. Sanctity of life will be held in derision even by those who outwardly profess it, for in those days Jesus Christ will send them not a true Pastor, but a destroyer.” (St. Francis of Assisi Prophecies cited in the above excerpt come from the “Works of the Seraphic Father St. Francis Of Assisi“, Imprimatur, pp. 248-250).
Ever since Francis was elected to the papacy, there has been ever increasing division in the Catholic Church. We are not just talking about the earlier divisions between Traditionalists and the mainstream Liberal/Modernist Church ― we are now talking about divisions regarding Francis and his statements, actions and policies starting to erupt among the moderate Liberals in the Church! Talk of a potential schism―something that would have been unthinkable several decades ago―is now even being talked about in moderate Liberal circles!
► FR. THOMAS G. WEINANDY: One Liberal-Conservative (or Conservative-Liberal) priest, Fr. Thomas G. Weinandy, OFM, Cap., wrote in 2019 (we will then post what he wrote 4 years later, in 2023): “The Church, in her long history, has never been confronted with the situation like the one in which she now finds herself. Pope Francis recently spoke of a possible schism within the Church, a schism that does not frighten him. We have had many schisms in the past, he says, and there will be schisms in the future. So, there is nothing to fear in the present. However, it is the nature of the present possible schism that is new, and this unprecedented new schism is frightening. One cannot help but think that Francis is referring to members of the Church in the United States. Francis receives, from America, his most theologically challenging and pastorally concerned criticism―which centers on a questionable remaking of the Faith and of the Church [by Francis].
“What Francis does not realize (and his close associates fail to grasp) is that the overwhelming majority of his American critics would never initiate a schism. That is not going to happen, because those critical bishops, priests, theologians, commentators, and laity (more laity than Francis will admit) know that what they believe and uphold is in accordance with Scripture, the Church Councils, the ever-living Magisterium, and the saints. As has been often noted, Pope Francis and his cohort never engage in theological dialogue―the reason is that they know they cannot win on that front.
“Now, as many commentators have already pointed out, the German Church is more likely to go into schism. The German bishops are proposing a two-year “binding” synod that, if what is proposed is enacted, would introduce beliefs and practices contrary to the universal tradition of the Church. I believe, however, that such a German schism will not formally happen either. While Pope Francis may stop them from doing something egregiously contrary to the Church’s teaching, he will allow them to do things that are ambiguously contrary, for such ambiguous teaching and pastoral practice would be in accord with Francis’ own [ambiguous teaching and pastoral practice]. One must likewise take into account the many theologically dubious cardinals, bishops, priests, and theologians whom Francis supports and promotes to high ecclesial positions.
“With all of this in mind, we perceive a situation, ever-growing in intensity, in which on the one hand, a majority of the world’s faithful – clergy and laity alike – are critical of his pontificate, and, on the other hand, a large contingent of the world’s faithful – clergy and laity alike – enthusiastically support Francis precisely because he allows and fosters their ambiguous teaching and ecclesial practice.
“The only phrase that I can find to describe this situation is “internal papal schism,” for the pope, even as pope, will effectively be the leader of a segment of the Church that through its doctrine, moral teaching, and ecclesial structure, is for all practical purposes schismatic. This is the real schism that is in our midst and must be faced, but I do not believe Pope Francis is in any way afraid of this schism. As long as he is in control, he will, I fear, welcome it, for he sees the schismatic element as the new “paradigm” for the future Church.” (Fr. Thomas G. Weinandy, OFM, Cap., “Pope Francis and Schism,” in The Catholic Thing on October 8th, 2019).
Four years later, on the occasion of the October 2023 Synod on Synodality, the same FR. THOMAS G. WEINANDY wrote the following: “Much has happened since I first published my original article, “Pope Francis and Schism,” in The Catholic Thing on October 8th, 2019. What has taken place in the intervening years has confirmed many of the points I made then. First, Pope Francis’ dislike for and criticisms of the Catholic Church in the United States have intensified. As I noted in the earlier column, the American Catholic Church is the foremost critic of Francis’ often theologically ambiguous statements. Over the past four years, as Francis’ ambiguities have proliferated―often given in mid-flight and off-the-cuff―so has criticism of his statements and ecclesial policies mounted.
“This ever-growing critical response, from multiple outlets and spokespersons, comes, not so much from the American clergy, but from the American Catholic laity. In no other country is there such an educated laity, men and women who are faithful to the Church, as in the United States. Francis has found it impossible to respond to this theological and philosophical challenge from American lay Catholics ― other than by calling them rigid and backward-looking. But the American Catholic laity have not been, are not now, and will not in the future be bullied into silence. Such verbal ridicule is merely a sign that this pontificate is not intellectually prepared to engage the issues, and so has already lost the scholarly battle.
“When I wrote my original piece four years ago, I was quite concerned that it could lead to a German schism. That German synodal path has now been completed. And there is, for all practical purposes, a schism. What it has proposed is not in accord with the Church’s unchanging magisterial tradition – particularly concerning sexual morality, and the ordaining of women and married priests. Though the Vatican’s Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith has expressed its concerns, nothing substantial has taken place to rectify the doctrinal and moral issues. Moreover, while Francis criticizes the American Church, he remains all but silent concerning the Church in Germany. As predicted, whether Pope Francis wanted it or not, this German synodal path has now become a kind of template for the Synod on Synodality … [which] may very well be a covert way for Pope Francis’ theological and ecclesial ideological agenda to be affirmed and enacted.” (Fr. Thomas G. Weinandy, OFM, Cap., “Pope Francis and Schism Re-Visited,” in The Catholic Thing on October 2nd, 2023).
► FR. GERALD E. MURRAY: Another Liberal-Conservative (or Conservative-Liberal) priest and canon lawyer, Fr. Gerald E. Murray, wrote concerning the 2022 Synod on Synodality: “The Working Document for the Continental Stage of the Synod for a Synodal Church last week [October 2022]. It unapologetically calls into question various Catholic doctrines under the guise of listening to the Holy Spirit who, remarkably, is somehow speaking through the complaints and criticisms of those who reject what the Church teaches and has always taught … The teaching of the Church, given to her by Christ, is the problem. The Church is being asked to seriously discuss discarding teachings that contradict the beliefs and desires of :
– those living in adulterous second “marriages,”
– men who have two or three or more wives,
– homosexuals and bisexuals
– people who believe they are not the sex they were born as
– women who want to be ordained deacons and priests,
– lay people who want the authority given by God to bishops and priests.
“Does anything here strengthen or promote fidelity to Christ’s teachings? Of course not! It’s about changing the Church. Someone from the UK made the most pertinent comment in the entire document: “I distrust the Synod! I think it has been called to bring about further change to Christ’s teachings and wound his Church further!” Did any, for instance, lament: the loss of Faith in the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist; the lack of priestly vocations in the developed world; the steep decline in Mass attendance, baptisms, and church weddings; the scandal of bishops and cardinals repeatedly contradicting Church teaching in public; the loss of Catholic faithful to evangelical churches; the collapse of the Catholic school system in the developed world; the widespread phenomenon of liturgical abuses while the celebration of the Traditional Latin Mass is harshly curtailed or even forbidden; the collapse of religious orders due to secularization and the rejection of doctrinal fidelity and ascetical living. There is plainly an open revolution going on in the Church today, an attempt to convince us that an embrace of heresy and immorality is not sinful, but rather a response to the voice of the Holy Spirit speaking through people who feel marginalized by a Church that has, up to now, been unfaithful to its mission.” (Fr. Gerald E. Murray, “A Self-Destructive Synod”, in The Catholic Thing on October 31st, 2022).
Four months later, on the occasion of the build-up to the 2023 Synod on Synodality, the same FR. GERALD E. MURRAY wrote the following: “The situation of the Catholic Church at present is one of grave disorder, due in large part to the willingness of Pope Francis to say, do, and tolerate things that no pope in history has ever said, done, or tolerated. His recent off-the-cuff remarks instructing priests not to deny absolution to anyone who comes to Confession, for instance. This is in direct contradiction to the teaching of the Church concerning the requisite dispositions required for the valid reception of God’s pardon in the sacrament of penance. Penitents who, for whatever reason, refuse to repent of the sins they may accuse themselves of in confession cannot be absolved. It would have seemed unthinkable that Pope Francis would say they should be absolved anyway. But he did. He returned to this theme on his recent trip to Africa. He told the bishops of Congo: “Always. Always forgive in the Sacrament of Reconciliation.” In a similar vein, in 2021, he said that he has never denied Holy Communion to anyone.
“Pope Francis wants priests in the confessional to follow his example when they are faced with an unrepentant sinner. In such a scenario, Confession is turned into a meaningless charade. An obstinate sinner should never be given absolution for an offense for which he is not repentant. His refusal to abjure his sins renders him incapable of receiving God’s sacramental pardon. What is the logic of absolving someone who clings to his sins? The unholy farce of attempting to absolve an unrepentant sinner who intends to keep sinning is a grave violation of the priest’s duty to guide the faithful in Christ’s path of virtue and grace, not the destructive path of sin and spiritual death. Yet that is what Pope Francis told priests they should do. This moral laxism is accompanied by a regrettable hesitancy to defend, vigorously and publicly, the Church’s teaching on matters of sexual morality when that teaching is openly repudiated by Cardinals, bishops, and priests.
“Courageous defenders of the Church’s moral teachings are unfairly vilified as ideologues, pharisees, rigorists, propagators of rigidity, “backwardists.” Critics of those teachings, such as Cardinals Hollerich, Marx, McElroy, Bishop Bätzing. and Fr. James Martin, S.J. are given papal favor and influential roles. There is no meaningful papal rebuke or discipline for their persistent campaigns to overthrow the moral and anthropological teachings of the Church. No one is being fired for attempting to change the Church’s unchangeable teaching that God created us male and female; that the only morally good use of the sexual faculty is the physical union of man and wife in marriage, in view of propagating the human race in a faithful, loving, and permanent marital bond. We are incessantly bombarded with propaganda asserting that God made some people with “same-sex” attraction and therefore He must intend for them to act upon their sexual desires; that sodomy is as good and holy a use of the sexual faculty as marital intercourse, and thus unions based on sodomy deserve the Church’s blessing; that God made some people to have a male body who are really female, and vice versa. This intolerable wave of doctrinal error is sweeping over the Church while Pope Francis remains largely passive and silent.
“Tolerance of doctrinal error is not part of the mandate given by Our Lord to St. Peter and the Apostles and their successors. If those successors fail in their duty, they inflict harm upon the faithful. Souls are put at risk by those shepherds who teach men to love sin and reject virtue. It is completely beyond the power of any pope, Cardinal or bishop to change the unchangeable moral teachings of the Church. It’s false and reprehensible to claim that there are no such things as unchangeable teachings, or that what was considered unchangeable in times past can become changeable in more “enlightened” times. When error and immorality are propagated by those charged by Christ with refuting error and discouraging immorality, our duty is to call out those shepherds, rebuking them with the charity of truth.
“If the Church is to avoid a completely avoidable disaster, the Synod on Synodality must not become a moment of self-destructive questioning of the Church’s teaching on sexual morality and other contested matters. Cardinals and bishops rightly horrified by where they see this process leading should make their protest known to the Holy Father. Pope Francis’ manifest neglect of his duty to defend the Church’s teaching in the face of grave errors urgently calls for a “tough love,” i.e., intervention in which courageous Cardinals and bishops, setting aside customary politeness and deference, frankly tell the pope that this madness must be stopped! Now!” (Fr. Gerald E. Murray, “Pope Francis Must Stop the Madness”, in The Catholic Thing on February 18th, 2023).
Tip of the Iceberg
These two Liberal-Conservative (or Conservative-Liberal) priests merely represent the proverbial “tip of the iceberg” of dissatisfaction or disgust with the words, actions and policies of Francis. Never before―in living memory―have we had such a widespread scenario in the Church. The supporters of Francis applaud him all the more and the critics of Francis criticize him all the more. The schismatic cracks have already appeared―all that remains is for the schismatic chasm to widen.
(6) “They were building a large, strange, extravagant and counterfeit church there in Rome … All sorts of abominations were perpetrated there … All was dead, the work of human skill, a church of the latest style, a church of man’s invention like the new heterodox church in Rome.”
When Our Lord says―in the Book of the Apocalypse (21:5) ― “Behold, I make all things new!” ― you can be sure that He did not mean that He was going to change the teaching of the Church on Faith and Morals! Yet, ever since the Second Vatican Council, we have witnessed new things everywhere! We have the New Mass; the new rite of Baptism; the new rite of Confession; the new rite of Confirmation; the new rite of Holy Orders in ordaining priests and consecrating bishops; the new rite of Extreme Unction; the new rite of exorcism; the new Code of Canon Law; the new Catechism of the Catholic Church; the new Divine Office; the new rite for Holy Week; the new altars; the new sanctuaries; the new liturgical calendar; the new laws of fasting and abstinence; the way of receiving Holy Communion; the new location for the Blessed Sacrament; the new mysteries of the Holy Rosary; the new way of dressing for clergy and religious; new dress code for attending Mass; new hymns in liturgy; etc. It has been a universal change in so many important and crucial domains―out with the old, in with the new.
As Our Lord said: “By their fruits you shall know them. Every good tree brings forth good fruit, and the evil tree brings forth evil fruit. A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can an evil tree bring forth good fruit. Wherefore by their fruits you shall know them” (Matthew 7:16-20). What are fruits of the Second Vatican Council? Two thousand six hundred bishops from all around the world met in Rome for three years, on and off in four different sessions, to reinvent the Church for the modern age. When they had finished, the largest religious denomination in the world was quite unrecognizable. After the universal healthy growth in the pre-Vatican II days, in the 10 years after the Council around 100,000 men left the priesthood worldwide. There were just over 1 million Catholic nuns and religious sisters in 1970, and that fell to 619,000 in 2020―a drop of almost 40%. Numbers of seminarians has fallen drastically and their number is insufficient to replace the number of priests that die each year. The 1970s also an explosion of child abuse, as would emerge from later figures. Daring theologians began to question papal infallibility.
The above visions granted to Blessed Anne Catherine Emmerich have been coming true over the last 60 years―and the end is not yet in sight. Prior to the Second Vatican Council these “eggs” of Modernism were partially hidden and incubated―so to speak. The Liberals and Modernists did not feel that the “temperature” and “climate” of the Church was quite right and ready for them to start “hatching” their “Modernist eggs” universally. However, the Second Vatican Council produced the right “temperature” and “climate” for that “universal hatching” to take place―and we have witnessed the unparalleled “birth” of “Modernist birds” ever since.
The last 60 years have brought about exactly what Blessed Anne Catherine Emmerich was shown:
(1) Out of “nearly all the bishops of the world, only a small number were perfectly sound.”
(2) “Many pastors allow themselves to be taken up with ideas that were dangerous to the Church.
(3) “Most priests are lured by the false knowledge of modern teachers, and they all contribute to the work of destruction.
(4) “The secret sect relentlessly undermining the great Church!”
(5) “People are splitting into two camps ― Priests are among them.”
(6) “They were building a large, strange, extravagant and counterfeit church there in Rome … All sorts of abominations were perpetrated there … All was dead, the work of human skill, a church of the latest style, a church of man’s invention like the new heterodox church in Rome.”
(7) “I saw heretics of all kinds flocking to the city of Rome … I saw all sorts of people, things, doctrines, and opinions ... Everyone was to be admitted in it in order to be united and have equal rights―Evangelicals, Catholics, sects of every description ... The Protestant doctrine and that of the schismatic Greeks is to spread everywhere! … Then I saw that everything pertaining to Protestantism was gradually gaining the upper hand, and the Catholic religion fell into complete decadence.”
(8) “It was shown to me that there were almost no Christians left in the old acceptation of the word! … The nearer the time of the end, the more the darkness of Satan will spread on Earth, the greater will be the number of the children of corruption, and the number of the just will correspondingly diminish.”
(9) “When the time of the reign of Antichrist is near, a false religion will appear which will be opposed to the unity of God and His Church. This will cause the greatest schism the world has ever known.”
Let us examine those nine points and you will see how true they are today.
(1) Out of “nearly all the bishops of the world, only a small number were perfectly sound.”
An observer of the Second Vatican Council, Xavier Rynne (the pseudonym of Fr. Francis X. Murphy, 1914-2002, a Liberal Redemptorist theology professor) wrote a series of “Letters from Vatican City” published in the New Yorker. The Council, according to Rynne, was an epic battle between stuck-in-the-chancel Conservative bishops and enlightened Liberal bishops who were striving mightily to bring a tradition-bound Catholicism into the light of the modern world. All the observers are in total agreement that the majority of the bishops attending the Council were Liberals. Since that time, the post-Vatican II popes―Paul VI, John-Paul II, Benedict XVI and Francis―have continued to add more and more Liberal bishops and cardinals. The obvious result is that there are less and less cardinals and bishops who are doctrinally sound these days. The key to understanding the Council is the Italian word “aggiornamento”—usually translated as “an updating”. Rynne―and the thousands of reporters who followed his lead―left no doubt that the Second Vatican Council was a great Liberal triumph. In the decades following the Second Vatican Council, many Liberals made no secret of their belief that “aggiornamento” was a mandate for radical change, even revolution. They excitedly described and hailed as “renewal” what others saw as destabilization and confusion. Around 100 years beforehand, St. John Bosco had prophesied “There will be an Ecumenical Council in the next century, after which there will be chaos in the Church.”
(2) “Many pastors allow themselves to be taken up with ideas that were dangerous to the Church.”
Pope St. Pius X strove to eliminate those “ideas that were dangerous to the Church” with his repeated and strenuous attacks against Liberalism and Modernism. On September 8th, 1907, Pope Saint Pius X published the encyclical letter Pascendi Dominici Gregis, in which he condemned the heresy of Modernism. Later, he instituted the Oath against Modernism on September 1st, 1910, which had to be sworn each time that a member of the Catholic Church received a sacred order or a pastoral ministry―such as bishop of a diocese, pastor of a parish, seminary professor, preacher, religious superior, official of a diocese or of the Holy See, or to receive an ecclesiastical degree. But around the time of the Second Vatican Council, the requirement to take this oath was suppressed by the Holy See on July 17th, 1967, and it has never been seen again. It will do no harm to read the entire Oath Against Modernism below, for it explicitly mentions many of the errors that have contaminated the Church today. Here it is in its entirety:
► THE OATH AGAINST MODERNISM
Given by His Holiness, Pope St. Pius X, September 1st, 1910.
To be sworn to by all clergy, pastors, confessors, preachers, religious superiors, and professors in philosophical-theological seminaries.
“I firmly embrace and accept each and every definition that has been set forth and declared by the unerring teaching authority of the Church, especially those principal truths which are directly opposed to the errors of this day.
And first of all, I profess that God, the origin and end of all things, can be known with certainty by the natural light of reason from the created world (see Romans 1:90), that is, from the visible works of creation, as a cause from its effects, and that, therefore, His existence can also be demonstrated:
Secondly, I accept and acknowledge the external proofs of Revelation, that is, Divine acts and especially miracles and prophecies as the surest signs of the Divine origin of the Christian religion and I hold that these same proofs are well adapted to the understanding of all eras and all men, even of this time.
Thirdly, I believe with equally firm Faith that the Church, the guardian and teacher of the revealed word, was personally instituted by the real and historical Christ when He lived among us, and that the Church was built upon Peter, the prince of the Apostolic hierarchy, and his successors for the duration of time.
Fourthly, I sincerely hold that the doctrine of Faith was handed down to us from the Apostles through the orthodox Fathers, in exactly the same meaning and always in the same purport. Therefore, I entirely reject the heretical misrepresentation that dogmas evolve and change from one meaning to another, different from the one which the Church held previously. I also condemn every error according to which, in place of the Divine deposit which has been given to the spouse of Christ to be carefully guarded by her, there is put a philosophical figment or product of a human conscience that has gradually been developed by human effort and will continue to develop indefinitely.
Fifthly, I hold with certainty and sincerely confess that Faith is not a blind sentiment of religion welling up from the depths of the subconscious under the impulse of the heart and the motion of a will trained to morality; but Faith is a genuine assent of the intellect to truth received by hearing from an external source. By this assent, because of the authority of the supremely truthful God, we believe to be true that which has been revealed and attested to by a personal God, our Creator and Lord.
Furthermore, with due reverence, I submit and adhere with my whole heart to the condemnations, declarations, and all the prescripts contained in the encyclical Pascendi and in the decree Lamentabili, especially those concerning what is known as the history of dogmas. I also reject the error of those who say that the Faith held by the Church can contradict history, and that Catholic dogmas, in the sense in which they are now understood, are irreconcilable with a more realistic view of the origins of the Christian religion. I also condemn and reject the opinion of those who say that a well-educated Christian assumes a dual personality—that of a believer and at the same time of a historian, as if it were permissible for a historian to hold things that contradict the faith of the believer, or to establish premises which, provided there be no direct denial of dogmas, would lead to the conclusion that dogmas are either false or doubtful. Likewise, I reject that method of judging and interpreting Sacred Scripture which, departing from the tradition of the Church, the analogy of Faith, and the norms of the Apostolic See, embraces the misrepresentations of the rationalists and with no prudence or restraint adopts textual criticism as the one and supreme norm.
Furthermore, I reject the opinion of those who hold that a professor lecturing or writing on a historico-theological subject should first put aside any preconceived opinion about the supernatural origin of Catholic Tradition or about the Divine promise of help to preserve all revealed truth forever; and that they should then interpret the writings of each of the Fathers solely by scientific principles, excluding all Sacred authority, and with the same liberty of judgment that is common in the investigation of all ordinary historical documents.
Finally, I declare that I am completely opposed to the error of the Modernists, who hold that there is nothing Divine in Sacred Tradition; or, what is far worse, say that there is, but in a pantheistic sense, with the result that there would remain nothing but this plain simple fact—one to be put on a par with the ordinary facts of history—the fact, namely, that a group of men by their own labor, skill, and talent have continued through subsequent ages a school begun by Christ and His Apostles. I firmly hold, then, and shall hold to my dying breath the belief of the Fathers in the charism of truth, which certainly is, was, and always will be in the succession of the episcopacy from the Apostles. The purpose of this is, then, not that dogma may be tailored according to what seems better and more suited to the culture of each age; rather, that the absolute and immutable truth preached by the Apostles from the beginning may never be believed to be different, may never be understood in any other way.
I promise that I shall keep all these articles faithfully, entirely, and sincerely, and guard them inviolate, in no way deviating from them in teaching or in any way in word or in writing. Thus I promise, this I swear, so help me God.”
► DOCTRINAL DISASTERS
The results of this rejection of the Oath Against Modernism by the modern-day Holy See has led to disastrous consequences in the field of Catholic teaching and acceptance of the authority of unchanging dogmas. We have degenerated from a Church of Apostolic Tradition to a Church of Anything Goes. Increasing numbers of priests are teaching what they want to teach, rather than teaching pure, unadulterated Catholic doctrine. Many heresies and doctrinal and moral errors coming from the theology faculties at Catholic colleges. The faithful are poorly-catechized―and the clerics and religious of the Church come from the laity. Therefore many priests, deacons, religious and even some bishops are poorly-catechized. They lack the understanding of basic Catholic teaching to recognize and refute the most popular theological errors being promoted, mainly on the internet, often by anonymous persons.
The Pope, the Vatican Congregations, the Bishops’ Conferences, and the individual Bishops should be replying to the many various errors that are being spread among the faithful, by issuing magisterial documents explaining the true teaching of the Church, and the reasons why certain modern Catholic teaching are unacceptable errors―but they do not take these disciplinary measures. The condemnation of grave doctrinal errors by the Bishops should include condemnation of specific heresies, with an explanation in a magisterial document as to why these ideas are heretical. Persons who continue to promote or teach these condemned heresies should be excommunicated, and all Catholic organizations should be prohibited from hiring them and from promoting their heretical claims. It is already the case that anyone who commits formal heresy or formal schism is automatically excommunicated. But this condemnation is not taken seriously by most persons. Catholics who openly teach obvious heresy, laugh at the idea that they are automatically excommunicated. Their fellow Catholics do not reject their false teachings. These promoters of error and heresy have no difficulty being hired by Catholic publications to spread their false claims and teachings about Faith and Morals.
Bishops today have become mainly administrators; they seldom teach because they do not know their Faith very well―as the saying goes: “You cannot give what you have not got!” And the recent papal documents have not focused on refuting popular errors among the faithful.
So what are some these “ideas that are dangerous to the Church” that Blessed Anne Catherine Emmerich spoke of as a result of the visions that God granted to her? Today―to anyone with a true Catholic sense―they are pretty obvious. The acceptance of a false ecumenism, whereby it is imagined that all religions can lead us to God. As a consequence of this false idea, the Pope and many bishops and priests implicitly or explicitly are increasingly showing acceptance and are cooperating with non-Catholic religions. It is often heard that non-Catholics who wish to convert to Catholicism are told that they are fine where they are and that they will save their souls if they remain as they are!
Another derivative of this is the practice of inter-religious communion―whereby non-Catholics are allowed to receive Catholic Holy Communion in a Catholic church. Additionally, it has also been noted that some ministers of Protestant Churches were invited to concelebrate the Holy Mass in modern-Catholic churches during “Unity Week” and even receive the Consecrated bread and wine into Body and Blood of Christ. “Unity Week” is the Week of Prayer for Christian Unity―an ecumenical Christian observance in the Christian calendar that is celebrated internationally.
Another “idea dangerous to the Church” is that of a false acceptance of LGBTQ+ people in the Church which demands that the Church bless the immoral “marriages” or sinful unions of those who are in clear opposition to the Law of God―and that they be allowed to receive Holy Communion in their sinful state. Likewise, the demand that divorcees who have entered a second invalid marriage and are living in sin, be allowed to receive Holy Communion. Other ideas and attitudes see nothing wrong with cohabitation without marriage; or masturbation; or contraception; or even abortion. Some think that they be “good” Catholics even if they do not regularly attend Sunday Mass. Others call for women priests and for permission for priests to marry. These are just the tip of the iceberg of these “ideas that are dangerous to the Church” that Blessed Anne Catherine Emmerich spoke of as a result of the visions that God granted to her.
► GERMAN SYNOD SINFUL
If you want everything wrapped-up in one heretical package, then the current German Synodal Way is a perfect example of that. The participants in the current German Synodal Way have expressed views and ratified proposals that contradict Catholic doctrines and practices in areas such as the male-only priesthood, sexual morality, and authority in the Church. The following Motion was accepted by the German Synod by a vote of 18 YES and 3 NO:
“The Synodal Assembly calls on the bishops to officially allow blessing ceremonies in their dioceses for couples who love each other, but to whom sacramental marriage is not accessible, or who do not see themselves at a point of entering into a sacramental marriage. This also applies to same-sex couples on the basis of a re-evaluation of homosexuality as a norm variant of human sexuality. These are couples who have bound themselves, for example, through a civil marriage. The German dioceses will establish such blessing ceremony as a diocesan liturgy … The Synod Assembly proposes that a manual for such blessing celebrations be prepared … The manual includes suggested forms for blessing ceremonies in the context of Services of the Word [Holy Mass] or the Eucharist, as well as suggestions for addressing the various couple situations (such as remarried divorcees, same-sex couples, couples after civil marriage).
“Such a ceremony may be presided over by ordained ministers, or persons with an episcopal mandate to worship. No pastor who conducts such a blessing ceremony will face disciplinary consequences in Germany. An obligation to lead such a ceremony is not imposed on anyone. Those who, for reasons of conscience, do not wish to preside over such a celebration, refer the couple to colleagues or a diocesan contact person who will assist the couple in finding a person to lead the ceremony. - For all interested couples, preparatory talks with pastors and, if necessary, seminars are planned. Here the joint life situation may be taken into consideration.
“Many people long for commitment and love in binding [sinful] partnerships. They choose to express commitment in their [sinful] relationship in different ways. It has become a common experience, in pastoral practice, that same-sex loving couples ask for a blessing for their partnership. So do civilly remarried couples who dare to make a new start in a new partnership. Couples who do not yet consider themselves ready for the sacrament of marriage also do so. Often, they want to meet the interests of a partnership in which only one partner is a believer, or is close to the Catholic Church. Increasingly, unbaptized couples are asking for a blessing. A blessing for all these partnerships is not currently provided for. The [German] Synod of Bishops has shown that the view of homosexuality is not considered sufficient in many places and needs further theological development. The refusal to bless the relationship of two people who want to live their [sinful] partnership in [sinful] love, commitment and responsibility to each other and to God proves to be merciless or even discriminatory in a society that has achieved human dignity and free self-determination as maxims of moral standardization. This is all the more serious because such a refusal cannot be convincingly justified in terms of the theology of grace. Pope Francis’ letter [Amoris Laetitiae] says “it can no longer simply be said that all those in any “irregular” situation are living in a state of mortal sin and are deprived of sanctifying grace.” (AL §301) …
“The subject of this resolution is a blessing ceremony. The blessing reinforces what already exists in the couple relationship in terms of love, commitment and mutual responsibility. The offer of a blessing ceremony is based on a primal human need. People are in need of blessings. They long for salvation, protection, happiness and fulfillment in their lives ... Often same-sex couples and remarried divorcees have experienced exclusion and depreciation in our Church. The possibility of publicly placing their [sinful] partnership under God’s blessing does not make up for these experiences. However, it offers the Church the opportunity to show appreciation for the love and values that exist in these [sinful] relationships and thus ask for forgiveness and make reconciliation possible. The blessing is a sign for many couples and their children to be accepted in this Church and the congregations are encouraged to welcome them.”
Hopefully that gives you some indication of the fulfillment of the prophecy from the vision of Blessed Anne Catherine Emmerich with regards to “many pastors allowing themselves to be taken up with ideas that are dangerous to the Church.”
(3) “Most priests are lured by the false knowledge of modern teachers, and they all contribute to the work of destruction.”
The Second Vatican Council generated new theological viewpoints and approaches that were more in harmony with the world today than the Church of yesterday. As a result of this “letting your hair down” attitude, tens of thousands of priests abandoned their ministries; convents were emptied as sisters embraced the freedoms of the secular world; Gregorian Chant was replaced by songs like “Kumbaya”; the respectful spirituality of the Latin Mass was replaced with the banal attitude of the New Mass―even to the point of having the so-called “Clown Masses” and rock bands and country-music styles to replace traditional hymns; the number of seminarians preparing for priesthood plummeted; and not a few of the priests who remained in the priesthood decided on their own that celibacy was optional.
Unsurprisngly, a majority of Catholics stopped going to Mass every week and decided, or were given to understand by progressive priests that moral truths taught from the beginning of the Church are, at best, only advisory and not obligatory in nature.
We are seeing this very thing happening in the German Synodal Way (see more above). Bishop Georg Bätzing, the President of the German Bishops Conference, said recently: “We want to be Catholic in a different way.” What kind of different way? In September 2022 the German Synodal Forum approved these following statements which directly contradict Catholic teaching:
● “Since a homosexual orientation is part of being a human as created by God, this orientation is not to be judged differently in ethical terms than a heterosexual orientation.
● “Same-sex sexuality – also practiced in sexual acts – is thus not a sin that separates a person from God, and it is not to be judged as bad in itself.
● “The status in the human sciences is: Homosexuality and bisexuality are neither diseases nor disorders nor something that can be chosen. Rather, they represent natural minority variants of people’s sexual preference structures. These sexual preferences ... are ... not changeable .... Homosexuality ... is a variant of the norm and not a minus of this variant. As a normal case, it belongs to God’s good creation.”
These erroneous and heretical statements are seen by the German bishops as being progressive changes that rectify the Church’s earlier misunderstanding of the Gospel and the Natural Law. What the German Synod is doing is merely symptomatic of the erroneous beliefs and heresies that are increasingly inundating the Church around the world.
(4) “The secret sect relentlessly undermining the great Church!”
What is “the secret sect”? It is Freemasonry. The Catholic Church first condemned Freemasonry and prohibited Catholics from membership in Masonic organizations and other secret societies in 1738. Since then, at least eleven popes have made pronouncements about the incompatibility of Catholic doctrines and Freemasonry. From 1738 until 1983, Catholics who publicly associated with, or publicly supported, Masonic organizations were censured with automatic excommunication.
Although there was some confusion about membership following the 1962-1965 Second Vatican Council (Vatican II), the Church continues to prohibit membership in Freemasonry because it believes that Masonic principles and rituals are irreconcilable with Catholic doctrines. The current norm, the 1983 Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith's (CDF) Declaration on Masonic associations, states that “faithful who enroll in Masonic associations are in a state of grave sin and may not receive Holy Communion” and membership in Masonic associations is prohibited.
The most recent official Holy See documents about the “incompatibility of Freemasonry with the Catholic faith” were issued in 1985, and recently, in November 2023, in responding to a question from a Filipino Bishop, the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, in a document signed by the Prefect, Cardinal Victor Fernandéz, and approved by Pope Francis, has reaffirmed the incompatibility between the Catholic Faith and Freemasonry, stating that Catholics are forbidden from joining Masonic lodges.
Our Lady of Good Success had warned us of Masonic persecution: “Satan will reign almost completely by means of the Masonic sects ... These years, during which the evil sect of Masonry will take control of the civil government, will see a cruel persecution of all religious communities … During this epoch the Church will find herself attacked by terrible assaults from the Masonic sect … Masonry, which will then be in power, will enact iniquitous laws with the objective, making it easy for everyone to live in sin.”
Since the Second Vatican Council there have been several exposés and lists published that have listed the names of Masons among the clergy―even the clergy in the Vatican. They are there―that much is certain―but who exactly is a Mason is not always that easy to know. They do not advertize themselves. Nevertheless, one Conservative bishop in the 1990s said that there were four Masonic lodges for the higher clergy (cardinals and bishops) in the Vatican. Additionally, read what the Freemasons said about the election of Francis to the papacy―it is mind boggling (read here).
(5) “People are splitting into two camps ― Priests are among them.”
There have always been divisions, heresies and schisms within the Church―that is nothing new―and there always will be as long as Satan is around seeking to divide, conquer and devour. Yet we are living at a time when it is prophesied that the Catholic Church will experience the greatest schism in her entire history. The encroachment of Rationalism, Liberalism and Modernism into the Church since the time of the Protestant Reformation is now coming to a crescendo. The Liberalism of the 19th century, which gave birth to Modernism in the later 19th and early 20th century, has now―like the proverbial mustard seed―grown into a large tree to which most Catholics have flocked to nest.
► OUR LADY, as usual, has already warned us of this mammoth division within the Church of our times: “I make it known to you that from the end of the 19th century and from shortly after the middle of the 20th century [Vatican II was announced by Pope John XXIII on January 25th, 1959, and took place from 1962-1965], the passions will erupt and there will be a total corruption of morals, for Satan will reign almost completely by means of the Masonic Sects” (O.L. of Good Success) … “The work of the devil will infiltrate even into the Church in such a way that one will see cardinals opposing cardinals, bishops against bishops. The Church will be full of those who accept compromises!” (O. L. of Akita). “Many will turn upon Religion! Many people will rebel against the spirit of the Catholic Church, impelled by the malice of the devil!” (O.L. of Good Success) … “Lucifer, together with a large number of demons, will be unloosed from Hell; they will put an end to Faith, little by little, even in those dedicated to God! … God will allow the old serpent to cause divisions among those who reign in every society and in every family … Several religious institutions will lose all Faith and will lose many souls!” (O. L. of La Salette).
► BLESSED ANNE CATHERINE EMMERICH (1774-1824), saw in one of the visions that God granted her, that “a false religion will appear which will be opposed to the unity of God and His Church. This will cause the greatest schism the world has ever known.”
► ST. FRANCIS OF ASSISI (1181-1226) had a gift of prophecy about a future Church crisis such as ours. He described a corrupt pontificate where Our Lord had placed a “non-canonically elected destroyer” into the visible seat. St. Francis warns: “The devils will have unusual … At the time of this tribulation a man, not canonically elected, will be raised to the Pontificate, who, by his cunning, will endeavor to draw many into error and death. Then scandals will be multiplied, our Order will be divided, and many others will be entirely destroyed, because they will consent to error instead of opposing it. There will be such diversity of opinions and schisms among the people, the religious and the clergy … Those who preserve their fervor and adhere to virtue with love and zeal for the truth, will suffer injuries and, persecutions as rebels and schismatics; for their persecutors, urged on by the evil spirits, will say they are rendering a great service to God by destroying such pestilent men from the face of the Earth. But the Lord will save all who trust in Him. Choosing to obey God rather than man, they will fear nothing, and they will prefer to perish [physically] rather than consent to falsehood and perfidy. Some preachers will keep silence about the truth, and others will trample it under foot and deny it. Sanctity of life will be held in derision even by those who outwardly profess it, for in those days Jesus Christ will send them not a true Pastor, but a destroyer.” (St. Francis of Assisi Prophecies cited in the above excerpt come from the “Works of the Seraphic Father St. Francis Of Assisi“, Imprimatur, pp. 248-250).
Ever since Francis was elected to the papacy, there has been ever increasing division in the Catholic Church. We are not just talking about the earlier divisions between Traditionalists and the mainstream Liberal/Modernist Church ― we are now talking about divisions regarding Francis and his statements, actions and policies starting to erupt among the moderate Liberals in the Church! Talk of a potential schism―something that would have been unthinkable several decades ago―is now even being talked about in moderate Liberal circles!
► FR. THOMAS G. WEINANDY: One Liberal-Conservative (or Conservative-Liberal) priest, Fr. Thomas G. Weinandy, OFM, Cap., wrote in 2019 (we will then post what he wrote 4 years later, in 2023): “The Church, in her long history, has never been confronted with the situation like the one in which she now finds herself. Pope Francis recently spoke of a possible schism within the Church, a schism that does not frighten him. We have had many schisms in the past, he says, and there will be schisms in the future. So, there is nothing to fear in the present. However, it is the nature of the present possible schism that is new, and this unprecedented new schism is frightening. One cannot help but think that Francis is referring to members of the Church in the United States. Francis receives, from America, his most theologically challenging and pastorally concerned criticism―which centers on a questionable remaking of the Faith and of the Church [by Francis].
“What Francis does not realize (and his close associates fail to grasp) is that the overwhelming majority of his American critics would never initiate a schism. That is not going to happen, because those critical bishops, priests, theologians, commentators, and laity (more laity than Francis will admit) know that what they believe and uphold is in accordance with Scripture, the Church Councils, the ever-living Magisterium, and the saints. As has been often noted, Pope Francis and his cohort never engage in theological dialogue―the reason is that they know they cannot win on that front.
“Now, as many commentators have already pointed out, the German Church is more likely to go into schism. The German bishops are proposing a two-year “binding” synod that, if what is proposed is enacted, would introduce beliefs and practices contrary to the universal tradition of the Church. I believe, however, that such a German schism will not formally happen either. While Pope Francis may stop them from doing something egregiously contrary to the Church’s teaching, he will allow them to do things that are ambiguously contrary, for such ambiguous teaching and pastoral practice would be in accord with Francis’ own [ambiguous teaching and pastoral practice]. One must likewise take into account the many theologically dubious cardinals, bishops, priests, and theologians whom Francis supports and promotes to high ecclesial positions.
“With all of this in mind, we perceive a situation, ever-growing in intensity, in which on the one hand, a majority of the world’s faithful – clergy and laity alike – are critical of his pontificate, and, on the other hand, a large contingent of the world’s faithful – clergy and laity alike – enthusiastically support Francis precisely because he allows and fosters their ambiguous teaching and ecclesial practice.
“The only phrase that I can find to describe this situation is “internal papal schism,” for the pope, even as pope, will effectively be the leader of a segment of the Church that through its doctrine, moral teaching, and ecclesial structure, is for all practical purposes schismatic. This is the real schism that is in our midst and must be faced, but I do not believe Pope Francis is in any way afraid of this schism. As long as he is in control, he will, I fear, welcome it, for he sees the schismatic element as the new “paradigm” for the future Church.” (Fr. Thomas G. Weinandy, OFM, Cap., “Pope Francis and Schism,” in The Catholic Thing on October 8th, 2019).
Four years later, on the occasion of the October 2023 Synod on Synodality, the same FR. THOMAS G. WEINANDY wrote the following: “Much has happened since I first published my original article, “Pope Francis and Schism,” in The Catholic Thing on October 8th, 2019. What has taken place in the intervening years has confirmed many of the points I made then. First, Pope Francis’ dislike for and criticisms of the Catholic Church in the United States have intensified. As I noted in the earlier column, the American Catholic Church is the foremost critic of Francis’ often theologically ambiguous statements. Over the past four years, as Francis’ ambiguities have proliferated―often given in mid-flight and off-the-cuff―so has criticism of his statements and ecclesial policies mounted.
“This ever-growing critical response, from multiple outlets and spokespersons, comes, not so much from the American clergy, but from the American Catholic laity. In no other country is there such an educated laity, men and women who are faithful to the Church, as in the United States. Francis has found it impossible to respond to this theological and philosophical challenge from American lay Catholics ― other than by calling them rigid and backward-looking. But the American Catholic laity have not been, are not now, and will not in the future be bullied into silence. Such verbal ridicule is merely a sign that this pontificate is not intellectually prepared to engage the issues, and so has already lost the scholarly battle.
“When I wrote my original piece four years ago, I was quite concerned that it could lead to a German schism. That German synodal path has now been completed. And there is, for all practical purposes, a schism. What it has proposed is not in accord with the Church’s unchanging magisterial tradition – particularly concerning sexual morality, and the ordaining of women and married priests. Though the Vatican’s Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith has expressed its concerns, nothing substantial has taken place to rectify the doctrinal and moral issues. Moreover, while Francis criticizes the American Church, he remains all but silent concerning the Church in Germany. As predicted, whether Pope Francis wanted it or not, this German synodal path has now become a kind of template for the Synod on Synodality … [which] may very well be a covert way for Pope Francis’ theological and ecclesial ideological agenda to be affirmed and enacted.” (Fr. Thomas G. Weinandy, OFM, Cap., “Pope Francis and Schism Re-Visited,” in The Catholic Thing on October 2nd, 2023).
► FR. GERALD E. MURRAY: Another Liberal-Conservative (or Conservative-Liberal) priest and canon lawyer, Fr. Gerald E. Murray, wrote concerning the 2022 Synod on Synodality: “The Working Document for the Continental Stage of the Synod for a Synodal Church last week [October 2022]. It unapologetically calls into question various Catholic doctrines under the guise of listening to the Holy Spirit who, remarkably, is somehow speaking through the complaints and criticisms of those who reject what the Church teaches and has always taught … The teaching of the Church, given to her by Christ, is the problem. The Church is being asked to seriously discuss discarding teachings that contradict the beliefs and desires of :
– those living in adulterous second “marriages,”
– men who have two or three or more wives,
– homosexuals and bisexuals
– people who believe they are not the sex they were born as
– women who want to be ordained deacons and priests,
– lay people who want the authority given by God to bishops and priests.
“Does anything here strengthen or promote fidelity to Christ’s teachings? Of course not! It’s about changing the Church. Someone from the UK made the most pertinent comment in the entire document: “I distrust the Synod! I think it has been called to bring about further change to Christ’s teachings and wound his Church further!” Did any, for instance, lament: the loss of Faith in the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist; the lack of priestly vocations in the developed world; the steep decline in Mass attendance, baptisms, and church weddings; the scandal of bishops and cardinals repeatedly contradicting Church teaching in public; the loss of Catholic faithful to evangelical churches; the collapse of the Catholic school system in the developed world; the widespread phenomenon of liturgical abuses while the celebration of the Traditional Latin Mass is harshly curtailed or even forbidden; the collapse of religious orders due to secularization and the rejection of doctrinal fidelity and ascetical living. There is plainly an open revolution going on in the Church today, an attempt to convince us that an embrace of heresy and immorality is not sinful, but rather a response to the voice of the Holy Spirit speaking through people who feel marginalized by a Church that has, up to now, been unfaithful to its mission.” (Fr. Gerald E. Murray, “A Self-Destructive Synod”, in The Catholic Thing on October 31st, 2022).
Four months later, on the occasion of the build-up to the 2023 Synod on Synodality, the same FR. GERALD E. MURRAY wrote the following: “The situation of the Catholic Church at present is one of grave disorder, due in large part to the willingness of Pope Francis to say, do, and tolerate things that no pope in history has ever said, done, or tolerated. His recent off-the-cuff remarks instructing priests not to deny absolution to anyone who comes to Confession, for instance. This is in direct contradiction to the teaching of the Church concerning the requisite dispositions required for the valid reception of God’s pardon in the sacrament of penance. Penitents who, for whatever reason, refuse to repent of the sins they may accuse themselves of in confession cannot be absolved. It would have seemed unthinkable that Pope Francis would say they should be absolved anyway. But he did. He returned to this theme on his recent trip to Africa. He told the bishops of Congo: “Always. Always forgive in the Sacrament of Reconciliation.” In a similar vein, in 2021, he said that he has never denied Holy Communion to anyone.
“Pope Francis wants priests in the confessional to follow his example when they are faced with an unrepentant sinner. In such a scenario, Confession is turned into a meaningless charade. An obstinate sinner should never be given absolution for an offense for which he is not repentant. His refusal to abjure his sins renders him incapable of receiving God’s sacramental pardon. What is the logic of absolving someone who clings to his sins? The unholy farce of attempting to absolve an unrepentant sinner who intends to keep sinning is a grave violation of the priest’s duty to guide the faithful in Christ’s path of virtue and grace, not the destructive path of sin and spiritual death. Yet that is what Pope Francis told priests they should do. This moral laxism is accompanied by a regrettable hesitancy to defend, vigorously and publicly, the Church’s teaching on matters of sexual morality when that teaching is openly repudiated by Cardinals, bishops, and priests.
“Courageous defenders of the Church’s moral teachings are unfairly vilified as ideologues, pharisees, rigorists, propagators of rigidity, “backwardists.” Critics of those teachings, such as Cardinals Hollerich, Marx, McElroy, Bishop Bätzing. and Fr. James Martin, S.J. are given papal favor and influential roles. There is no meaningful papal rebuke or discipline for their persistent campaigns to overthrow the moral and anthropological teachings of the Church. No one is being fired for attempting to change the Church’s unchangeable teaching that God created us male and female; that the only morally good use of the sexual faculty is the physical union of man and wife in marriage, in view of propagating the human race in a faithful, loving, and permanent marital bond. We are incessantly bombarded with propaganda asserting that God made some people with “same-sex” attraction and therefore He must intend for them to act upon their sexual desires; that sodomy is as good and holy a use of the sexual faculty as marital intercourse, and thus unions based on sodomy deserve the Church’s blessing; that God made some people to have a male body who are really female, and vice versa. This intolerable wave of doctrinal error is sweeping over the Church while Pope Francis remains largely passive and silent.
“Tolerance of doctrinal error is not part of the mandate given by Our Lord to St. Peter and the Apostles and their successors. If those successors fail in their duty, they inflict harm upon the faithful. Souls are put at risk by those shepherds who teach men to love sin and reject virtue. It is completely beyond the power of any pope, Cardinal or bishop to change the unchangeable moral teachings of the Church. It’s false and reprehensible to claim that there are no such things as unchangeable teachings, or that what was considered unchangeable in times past can become changeable in more “enlightened” times. When error and immorality are propagated by those charged by Christ with refuting error and discouraging immorality, our duty is to call out those shepherds, rebuking them with the charity of truth.
“If the Church is to avoid a completely avoidable disaster, the Synod on Synodality must not become a moment of self-destructive questioning of the Church’s teaching on sexual morality and other contested matters. Cardinals and bishops rightly horrified by where they see this process leading should make their protest known to the Holy Father. Pope Francis’ manifest neglect of his duty to defend the Church’s teaching in the face of grave errors urgently calls for a “tough love,” i.e., intervention in which courageous Cardinals and bishops, setting aside customary politeness and deference, frankly tell the pope that this madness must be stopped! Now!” (Fr. Gerald E. Murray, “Pope Francis Must Stop the Madness”, in The Catholic Thing on February 18th, 2023).
Tip of the Iceberg
These two Liberal-Conservative (or Conservative-Liberal) priests merely represent the proverbial “tip of the iceberg” of dissatisfaction or disgust with the words, actions and policies of Francis. Never before―in living memory―have we had such a widespread scenario in the Church. The supporters of Francis applaud him all the more and the critics of Francis criticize him all the more. The schismatic cracks have already appeared―all that remains is for the schismatic chasm to widen.
(6) “They were building a large, strange, extravagant and counterfeit church there in Rome … All sorts of abominations were perpetrated there … All was dead, the work of human skill, a church of the latest style, a church of man’s invention like the new heterodox church in Rome.”
When Our Lord says―in the Book of the Apocalypse (21:5) ― “Behold, I make all things new!” ― you can be sure that He did not mean that He was going to change the teaching of the Church on Faith and Morals! Yet, ever since the Second Vatican Council, we have witnessed new things everywhere! We have the New Mass; the new rite of Baptism; the new rite of Confession; the new rite of Confirmation; the new rite of Holy Orders in ordaining priests and consecrating bishops; the new rite of Extreme Unction; the new rite of exorcism; the new Code of Canon Law; the new Catechism of the Catholic Church; the new Divine Office; the new rite for Holy Week; the new altars; the new sanctuaries; the new liturgical calendar; the new laws of fasting and abstinence; the way of receiving Holy Communion; the new location for the Blessed Sacrament; the new mysteries of the Holy Rosary; the new way of dressing for clergy and religious; new dress code for attending Mass; new hymns in liturgy; etc. It has been a universal change in so many important and crucial domains―out with the old, in with the new.
As Our Lord said: “By their fruits you shall know them. Every good tree brings forth good fruit, and the evil tree brings forth evil fruit. A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can an evil tree bring forth good fruit. Wherefore by their fruits you shall know them” (Matthew 7:16-20). What are fruits of the Second Vatican Council? Two thousand six hundred bishops from all around the world met in Rome for three years, on and off in four different sessions, to reinvent the Church for the modern age. When they had finished, the largest religious denomination in the world was quite unrecognizable. After the universal healthy growth in the pre-Vatican II days, in the 10 years after the Council around 100,000 men left the priesthood worldwide. There were just over 1 million Catholic nuns and religious sisters in 1970, and that fell to 619,000 in 2020―a drop of almost 40%. Numbers of seminarians has fallen drastically and their number is insufficient to replace the number of priests that die each year. The 1970s also an explosion of child abuse, as would emerge from later figures. Daring theologians began to question papal infallibility.