As you will be aware, an argument is taking place among Catholics as to the legitimacy of Francis. The issues include heresy, Universi Dominici Gregis, and the alleged flaws in the 'resignation' of Benedict. It is not impossible that the first two of these are simply signs of the last.
However, all three would seem to be legitimate areas for investigation by bishops.
Below this email I have provided a sample of the discussion taking place. Others could be provided if needed.
I believe that Catholics need to know whether to obey instructions issued by Francis, since on their response rests the fate of their souls.
There is a large body of material available. Is it possible to inform the faithful of where the truth lies?
November 2024
Dear Australian Bishops
There are many claims of heresy on the part of Francis. I have so far seen none of them explained as somehow orthodox. Examples appear here, here, here, and here,
Here is one which should be quite easy to address. It appears in Amoris Laetitia, and for context I have included below this email the whole paragraph.
No one can be condemned for ever, because that is not the logic of the Gospel! Here I am not speaking only of the divorced and remarried, but of everyone, in whatever situation they find themselves.
Reading this, I can understand that to the laity Francis is telling us that no one goes to Hell. This seems contradicted by Christ Himself at Matt 26:24: But woe to that man who betrays the Son of Man! It would be better for him if he had not been born.
I should be grateful for an explanation of this apparent heresy.
297. It is a matter of reaching out to everyone, of needing to help each person find his or her proper way of participating in the ecclesial community and thus to experience being touched by an “unmerited, unconditional and gratuitous” mercy. No one can be condemned for ever, because that is not the logic of the Gospel! Here I am not speaking only of the divorced and remarried, but of everyone, in whatever situation they find themselves. Naturally, if someone flaunts an objective sin as if it were part of the Christian ideal, or wants to impose something other than what the Church teaches, he or she can in no way presume to teach or preach to others; this is a case of something which separates from the community (cf. Mt 18:17). Such a person needs to listen once more to the Gospel message and its call to conversion. Yet even for that person there can be some way of taking part in the life of community, whether in social service, prayer meetings or another way that his or her own initiative, together with the discernment of the parish priest, may suggest. As for the way of dealing with different “irregular” situations, the Synod Fathers reached a general consensus, which I support: “In considering a pastoral approach towards people who have contracted a civil marriage, who are divorced and remarried, or simply living together, the Church has the responsibility of helping them understand the divine pedagogy of grace in their lives and offering them assistance so they can reach the fullness of God’s plan for them”,328 something which is always possible by the power of the Holy Spirit.
November 2024
Dear Australian Bishops
The move to declare Francis an Antipope is growing rapidly among Catholics, including clergy.
Given that these illegals are made up largely of Muslims, whose religion requires them to tax, oppress, enslave and kill Christians simply for being Christians, would it not seem appropriate for bishops to warn Catholics of the evil nature of Islam and the grave danger to Catholic souls?
Below is a list of atrocities committed against non-Muslims in the name of Islam. It covers a period of only 30 days.
Is it not time to warn Catholics of the dangers they face in allowing entry to Muslims to a Christian society?
November 2024
Dear Australian Bishops
The number of Catholics expressing doubt about the validity of the claims of Francis to the papacy appears to be growing daily.
I have presented some of the difficulties surrounding the legitimacy of Francis in past emails. What is surprising perhaps is that very few bishops have joined Archbishop Vigano and Bishop Gracida in asking what appear to be legitimate questions.
The article below attempts to examine an aspect of the doubts raised about Francis.
I should be grateful if some public response could be made to help inform Catholics of the true position of Francis in the Church.
The Catholic Church teaches, and Catholics are required to believe, that wives must submit to their husbands.
I have never heard this doctrine taught in any Catholic church. Nor have I heard it taught publicly by an Australian bishop.
Yet from the wording of scripture, wives who disobey their husbands offend God gravely.
One wonders how many Catholic women over the last century have been condemned to eternal damnation because during their lives they rejected the authority of their husbands, and failed to repent before death.
God is merciful, and perhaps some of them will be excused since they have never true Catholic teaching. This leads us to God's justice, and it is not impossible that God will require an accounting from those who failed to inform them (Matt 28:19).
Over the last 60 years, it seems that women have been let down by the lack of teaching on their behaviour. Several generations have grown up perhaps unaware that the Church looks unfavourably on married women who engage in contraception, wear male clothes (one wonders how Almighty God views female extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion who wear trousers while holding the Sacred Host), and who work outside the home.
I have heard nothing about these from priests or bishops, and I am at daily Mass.
There is some discussion among the laity. but this is unlikely to reach Sunday Catholics, or those who have stopped practising.
The Australian Catholic bishops issue formal statements from time to time. Is it not timely for a document encompassing the deterioration of Christian marriage in our society?
Deuteronomy 22:5 The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman's garment: for all that do so areabomination unto the LORD thy God
Gen 3:16: To the woman he said, "I will make your pains in childbearing very severe; with painful labor you will give birth to children. Your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you." Eph. 5:24: “As the Church is subject to Christ, so also let wives be to their husbands in all things.” 1 Cor. 11:3 But I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man, and the head of Christ is God. Col. 3:18 Wives, submit yourselves to your husbands, as is fitting in the LORD. Tit 2:3-5 Likewise, teach the older women to be reverent in the way they live, not to be slanderers or addicted to much wine, but to teach what is good. 4Then they can urge the younger women to love their husbands and children, 5to be self-controlled and pure, to be busy at home, to be kind, and to be subject to their husbands, so that no one will malign the word of God. 1 Pet. 3:1-5 Wives, in the same way submit yourselves to your own husbands so that, if any of them do not believe the word, they may be won over without words by the behavior of their wives, 2when they see the purity and reverence of your lives. 3Your beauty should not come from outward adornment, such as elaborate hairstyles and the wearing of gold jewelry or fine clothes. 4Rather, it should be that of your inner self, the unfading beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, which is of great worth in God's sight. 5For this is the way the holy women of the past who put their hope in God used to adorn themselves. They submitted themselves to their own husbands. Reaction to Lauren Southern and BAD Marriage Prep! w/ @NStumphauzer & Steph Gordon
October 2024
Dear Australian Bishops
Below is an article about the status of Francis. It is one of many which assert that Francis is not a Catholic pope and is a purveyor of heresy.
If accurate, what should our bishops be doing to protect the Catholic laity from the alleged fraudulent activity?
If false, should our bishops be doing something to refute these articles and clarify the situation so that Catholics can know where the truth lies?
There seems to be a storm developing. So many Catholic writers now openly suggest that Francis could be an impostor, giving solid reasons for their claims. In the past I have documented many of these arguments. Now Archbishop Vigano adds his name to the list.
So far I have not been made aware of any defence of the status of Francis.
If Francis is a good and holy pope, is it not fitting that Catholic bishops defend his reputation?
But if Archbishop Vigano's assessment is correct, does this not put the management of the Church in the hands of Satan?
In either event, are Australian Catholics not entitled to know the truth?
August 2024
Dear Australian Bishops
It appears that Francis and some cardinals are working to toward the elimination of the Traditional Latin Mass.
I seek to determine whether Francis or anyone else actually has the power to do this. The question arises, if a pope issues an instruction or matter of belief valid for all time, does a future pope have the authority to reverse this?
Perhaps this could be presented like this: if one pope declares that the Blessed Trinity comprises three Persons, can a following pope change this to four?
In 1570 Pope St Pius V issued Quo Primum. This included the following statements:
We grant and concede in perpetuity that, for the chanting or reading of the Mass in any church whatsoever, this Missal is hereafter to be followed absolutely, without any scruple of conscience or fear of incurring any penalty, judgment, or censure, and may freely and lawfully be used. Nor are superiors, administrators, canons, chaplains, and other secular priests, or religious, of whatever title designated, obliged to celebrate the Mass otherwise than as enjoined by Us
Therefore, no one whosoever is permitted to alter this notice of Our permission, statute, ordinance, command, precept, grant, indult, declaration, will, decree, and prohibition. Would anyone, however, presume to commit such an act, he should know that he will incur the wrath of Almighty God and of the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul.
So there is no doubt that a Pope has issued an instruction that the Traditional Latin Mass must be followed for all time. What needs to be determined is whether his order can be countermanded by a successor.
As Catholics we believe that the Pope has primacy, and must be obeyed on matters of faith and morals. Although this has always been believed, the Pope's primacy was detailed at Vatican 1: Dogmatic Constitution I on the Church of Christ. This would appear to regard all popes as having primacy over the Church.
So if a pope issues an instruction valid for all time, and a later pope says the opposite, the first pope had no primacy at all. It seems to me that the primacy of the pope fails, and Vatican 1 was in error. Yet Pius V is a canonised saint, so surely he needs to be taken seriously.
There have been many discussions on the infallibility of the Pope, as established in Vatican 1, but not so much on the primacy of the Pope. This document comes from Cardinal Ratzinger, before he became pope. And here is a second explanatory document.
So here is my question. No pope can reverse any item of dogma issued by a previous pope, since this would destroy the infallibility of the pope. Similarly, is it not impossible for a succeeding pope to reverse a formal command issued to be effective for all time, and for the same reason, since it would make null the primacy of the pope?
And if so, why has this primacy not been raised as a question for the Vatican's attempt to limit, perhaps abolish, the Traditional Latin Mass?
August 2024
Dear Australian Bishops
Please find attached a list of Catholic authors documenting the heresies of Francis.
So far I have seen no serious attempt by bishops to explain them or excuse them.
If Francis continues obstinately on this path, he will surely arrive in Hell. I cannot imagine that any bishop wants that to happen. Eternal punishment for ordinary people is a dreadful concept. But for someone elected to a papal office, it is beyond imagination.
I believe that what Francis needs is for bishops who want to save his soul to reach out to him, courteously and respectfully, pointing out what is blindingly obvious to ordinary laypeople, that denial or doubt of authentic Catholic teaching, especially from someone tasked with teaching the faith, is greatly offensive to God. And being on the wrong side of God is not something anyone should take lightly.
Now if I am wrong here, please point out my error, and I'll apologise. But if I am correct, then what steps should be taken now to stop the flood of heresies which lead the faithful astray?
As you can see from the information below, Catholics are starting to question the behaviour of Church authorities during the last moments of the life of Cardinal Pell.
Would our bishops be interested in a thorough investigation as to what really happened? An inside job? Who would need to be involved?
Perhaps it could include finding out about corruption among Victoria's police and possible perjury on the part of witnesses. And maybe the transfer of significant funds from the Vatican to Australia which occurred at a most curious time. Can we now be confident that there is no more corruption in the Vatican financial system?
Is it unreasonable to suspect that Cardinal Pell knew too much for his own safety?
When a counterfeiter prints imitation dollar bills and sells or launders them, his free goods are gained at the higher cost of goods purchased by genuine spenders. That is, the counterfeiter steals the extra cost of goods that honest people are forced to pay as a result of inflation. Counterfeiting is theft, a serious crime, and brings severe punishment.
But when a government prints money, there are no consequences for the perpetrators, because governments make their own printing legal. Ordinary people, however suffer the same result as if the offender was an ordinary counterfeiter, except that this theft is on a grander scale.
We see prices increase, and sometimes the consequences are significant. For example, mortgages can rise to the point where home-owning families can and do find themselves living under bridges.
This is particularly galling when the money printed is wasted, or used to transfer grants to favoured organisations and activists. That is, where the government is using money belonging to the people for its own evil purposes, such as buying votes.
The Australian bishops issue documents on lots of topics, such as health, the environment, sport and illegal immigration.
It could be argued that such enormous theft and waste might be of interest to Catholics. For example, every year about $40 billion of our money goes to the Aboriginal Industry. If this could be shared out among aborigines living in poverty, it could provide up to half a million a year for every such man, woman and child.
An aboriginal family living in poverty would then have more than a million dollars each year, enough to buy a new house every year, with plenty left over. But perhaps there are some problems that governments do not want solved.
We see evidence of so much poverty among aborigines that it would seem that the $40 billion is going elsewhere. And this is just one example.
Below I have provided a few links which might be used should the bishops decide to investigate and address this great injustice.
You have issued many formal statements on topics, such as sport, illegal immigration, health, the environment, aborigines, racism, prisons and world poverty.
But I am not aware of any statement on the evils of Islam, and its destruction of souls.
To this email I have attached a list of links from the last seven days, which describe Islam's preoccupation with rape and murder of innocents. None of these crimes can be shown to be against the teachings of Islam.
The only reference to Islam that I can find on the part of an Australian bishop, falsely claims that the word 'Islam' means 'peace'. This cannot be reconciled with the activities of its adherents.
I believe that Islam's goal is the destruction of souls, which means that the religion is satanic.
I should be grateful if you could let Catholics know the dangers of this evil belief.
May 2024
Dear Australian Bishops
There have been many documents published by the Australian Bishops. Topics include engagement with Aborigines, mental health, immigration, aging, sport, prisons, affluence, peace and the environment.
So far is I can determine, there has been less attention to evils which cry out for attention. In particular one sin which the Church teaches cries out to Heaven for vengeance.
Australia is not immune to this evil. The overwhelming majority of child sexual abuse carried out by Australian priests and religious involved young boys. Some priests molested both boys and girls.
Sodomy is such a great evil that God destroyed whole cities. Yet I have not heard a priest or bishop mention it from the pulpit or in a publication for maybe 60 years. This lack of teaching gives the impression to Catholics that it is not such a big deal.
This problem reaches to the Vatican, and cardinals as well as bishops are mentioned in news outlets as being involved.
Now that sodomy has been giving social acceptance, the forces of darkness feel that they can move on to the next abomination. We see a famous TV program introducing an unnatural character, and a cross-dresser appointed an admiral.
The Bible refers to cross-dressers (the people, not the sin) as an 'abomination. Deuteronomy 22:5 - The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman’s garment; for all who do so are abomination unto the Lord thy God.
Finally, there are reports in the Argentine media which I believe need to be addressed.
Our bishops have issued documentation on many topics, including some (eg sport) which do not seem to be aimed at saving souls. I have not seen serious attention given to the evils of sodomy and its effect on those young boys whose lives have been ruined by priests.
If I have said anything incorrect or unjust, I should be grateful for your correction.
PS I have embedded links in the text to avoid deletion by those in the chain of communication who may object to the content.
May 2024
Dear Archbishop Coleridge
A few years ago the census showed about 12 000 Catholics living in a parish north of Brisbane. The four Masses celebrated on Saturday evening and Sunday morning brought about 400 people. I remarked to the priest after Mass that only about 3.5% of parishioners attended Sunday Mass.
He replied, "I think it's closer to 4%."
Today the percentage will no doubt be higher, since each census shows a declining number of those claiming to be Catholic. Perhaps this will be offset by the age of parishioners, many of whom will not be around in five years.
But it also indicates that, if other parishes are not significantly better, something like 95% or more of the Catholics in the archdiocese will end up in Hell for eternity.
I do not know the answer, but I suspect that the lack of teaching of the faith might be a contributor. I have not heard from the pulpit or Catholic publications any serious teaching about the commandments, the sacraments, the rosary, the scapular, sin, Hell, abortion, euthanasia, contraception, modesty, or the evils of sodomy for perhaps more than 50 years. There will be other factors, but the lack of teaching must surely be an influence.
In the old days, each year the Redemptorists would visit my parish and for a week we heard about the dangers of Hell. My parish church in those days had four confessionals, and every day all four had queues which filled the pews around them (and Mass attendance was 80%). Today it seems there are no more sinners, as only a tiny number of parishioners goes to confession.
I should be grateful for your advice.
May 2024
Dear Catholic Bishops
Please find attached a small sample of links expressing current thinking among many Catholic laymen.
Now being raised is the claim that Cardinals (and presumably bishops also) may be offending God by not addressing the errors of Francis, on the grounds that there is a possibility that souls may be lost as a result of the false teaching coming from the Vatican.
I am not sure where the truth lies, but the general feeling among a considerable number of laymen is that all is not well.
I should be grateful for a statement from Australian bishops making it clear one way or the other.
May 2024
Dear Archbishop Coleridge
Attached please find a list of Catholic news items starting from 1 May.
Below is an article from akacatholic, and also the document the article on which it is based. My own view does not necessarily coincide with these, but it seems to me that they have a point. They indicate that there is a growing movement of laymen with serious knowledge of the faith, who believe that Francis is promoting the accommodation of false teachings.
Given the large amount of credible evidence of stubborn heresy on the part of Francis, is it becoming urgent for bishops to at least advise parishioners of the danger of documents issued by Francis to their souls?
I attach a list of links for Catholic news during the month of May so far.
They describe a significant amount of evil apparently going on at high levels in the Catholic Church, and indicate that Francis is issuing documents which oppose the teachings of the Church. And they provide evidence of apparent ongoing heresy, sufficient to excommunicate Francis. This would leave the Church without a pope, since the idea of a non-Catholic pope would set an unusual precedent.
Further, there is controversy in Argentina about Francis and his performance there. Not reported outside South America are open claims of serious misbehaviour. Argentines have predicted that Francis will not willingly visit his home country.
Over the years there have been many social justice statements from the Australian Bishops. Topics include poverty, violence, indigenous justice, racism, the environment, illegal immigrants, sport and climate change.
Some of these are worthy issues directly affecting Catholic souls. Others not so much.
However, there is a threat to souls which in my view is far more dangerous than any of those above. We now have a Muslim population which exceeds 3%, getting close to a million believers.
But how peaceful are Muslims? Surveys worldwide indicate that about two thirds of Muslims support Islamic supremacy.
In Australia this would seem to amount to about half a million who, given the opportunity, would happily overturn the Australian government and introduce sharia law, bringing us the novelties (approved in Islamis regimes) of honour killings, polygamy, female genital mutilation, slavery, taqiyya, the drinking of camel urine, the verses of the sword, the beheading of unbelievers, the elimination of Jews and other claimed benefits.
I have prepared a list of headlines from the last ten days. There is a large amount of material for your use, should you wish to present a social justice paper on the evil nature of Islam. If needed I can provide headlines for more than 1 000 days.
I have placed these in an attached document. If I listed them below, this email would likely be blocked.
If I have said anything which is incorrect or uncharitable, I should be grateful if you would correct me.
Below this email I have listed documents issued by Francis, and also comments by Catholic writers. This list is small, but I believe sufficient to enable clarification of the situation in the Vatican. If needed, I can provide many more.
If these writers are correct, then it appears logical that Francis is a heretic, and thus no longer Catholic. He does not need to be excommunicated. The excommunication is automatic. But it needs to be announced publicly to ensure that Catholics are aware of the dangers of these documents.
This places bishops in a difficult position. A non-Catholic pope is a contradiction. And since Francis continues to issue documents which, on the basis of the documents below, are heretical and thus leading Catholic souls astray, I believe that a great responsibility lies with the bishops of the world to ensure the safety of Catholic souls.
That is, it seems to me that, if these writers are correct, all bishops of the world have the grave task of announcing to the Catholic public that the heretical documents are null and void, and that Francis needs to be removed from the Vatican so that souls can be protected.
However, I might be wrong, and perhaps my fear for the safety of souls is not well-founded. There might be innocent explanations for what seems to me to be heresy. But I doubt that I am the only Catholic to find a serious problem with the writings of Francis and his prefect of the DDF. Please tell me where the truth lies.
March 2024
Dear Australian Bishops
You have released statements defending illegal immigrants, referring to them as asylum-seekers.
An asylum-seeker is an 'immigrant who is making a claim to have been forcibly displaced and might have fled their home country because of war or other factors harming them or their family'.
As I understand it, many if not most illegal immigrants to Australia are Muslims. Their story often involves going to the airline or travel agency desk in their home country, and buying a ticket to Indonesia, a Muslim country, where they presumably have attained asylum and thus cease to be asylum-seekers (if they ever were).
There they pay a people-smuggler to put them on a boat to Australia. On the way they destroy any documentation in order to make processing difficult. Those who take this route are not asylum-seekers, but law-breakers, and should be returned speedily to their countries of origin, or to Indonesia. They comprise mostly men of military age, perhaps illiterate and unemployable.
Because many of these Muslims have succeeded, we now have in Australia a significant Muslim population, which has no intention of integrating with Australian culture, but instead intends to grow in population until they become a large minority or majority. When that happens, Christianity is in danger, as we have seen in Lebanon, which failed to defend itself against an influx of Palestinian 'asylum-seekers'.
Islam survives because it threatens death to any Muslim who wishes to leave. If we could find a way to overcome this threat, Islam would disappear.
But Islam presents another threat. Muslim men can marry Christian women, but if a Muslima tries to marry a Christian man, she will be killed. These murders are referred to as 'honour killings'.
There is no doubt that many Muslim girls, who know what they face with a Muslim husband, would much prefer to have the choice to marry outside their faith. But they can do nothing, because they are aware of the consequences.
No woman should be forced to marry against her will. But we turn a blind eye to this injustice.
I believe that if our society could provide a means of enforcing a woman's right to choose her husband, Islam would be gone from the world in a single generation.
This right is surely a worthy cause, since it could enable the saving of souls. It is a matter of Catholic faith that there are no Muslims in Heaven.
There are now, thanks to illegal immigration, many Australian Muslimas who need to be advised that in Australian society they have rights which cannot be exercised.
I should be grateful if you could advise what action should be taken for their safety.
There are now so many public examples of men dressing as women. Their manner demands that we accept their abnormality as somehow legitimate. And they seem determined to target children.
I believe that normal people are disgusted by the sight of men wearing female clothing, and it seems that God agrees, calling such a person an 'abomination'.
Deuteronomy 22:5: The apparel of a man shall not be on a woman, neither shall a man put on a woman's dress; for every one that does these things is an abomination to the Lord thy God.
So far I have not heard a priest or bishop condemn this evil. Nor have I heard a priest or bishop condemn women for wearing men's clothes. At Mass we are often faced with a female extraordinary minister of Holy Communion distributing the Host while wearing trousers. It seems to me that this also is an abomination.
My concern is that if this evil is not pointed out, people will regard it as a harmless habit. Is it possible that men and women who offend against this evil will lose their souls if unrepentant? If so, should those in authority in the Church in Australia be warning the offenders?
March 2024
Most Rev Kenneth Howell Bishop of Toowoomba
Dear Bishop Howell
You will see from the photocopy below that once more there is no weekday Mass at Stanthorpe. Mass cancellations are a fairly frequent event up here.
I have approached the parish priest and he advised me that on occasion he is required to attend a meeting of priests in Toowoomba or elsewhere, or he must participate in a retreat. i have asked if it is possible to have Mass before he leaves, but it seems that he must leave very early.
Over the years I have lived in many parishes in Australia and elsewhere. I have never experienced this problem of cancelled Masses. It means that those who wish to attend daily Mass must drive to Warwick or Brisbane, which can be quite tiring and expensive.
It may be possible to schedule meetings a bit later so that Father can say Mass before he leaves, but this does not help when Father is away for four consecutive days.
Now it is possible that you already have in preparation a solution to this problem. If so, I should be grateful if you could give some idea of when relief is likely to come.
March 2024
Dear Australian Bishops
Please see the links below.
The debate among Catholics around the legitimacy of two recent Vatican documents, Fiducia Supplicans and Traditionis Custodes, does not seem to be going away.
There is no doubt that Fiducia Supplicans permits the blessing of homosexual couples, whereby I believe that the priest calls upon God to bless the union. It appears that the homosexuals then continue with their union.
Until now I had assumed that the Church's position on homosexual couples was summarised by St Peter Damian's Book of Gomorrah.
In the case of Traditionis Custodes, the situation with the Traditional Latin Mass appeared set in stone by Pope St Pius V and Quo Primum. Yet Francis seems determined to totally eradicate the ancient Mass.
In an attempt to address the two conundra, I have tried asking two questions.
1 Who would be more likely to approve the blessing of a (presumably unrepentant, since a repentant homosexual couple would no longer be a couple) homosexual couple, God or Satan?
2 Who would be more likely to approve the elimination of the Traditional Latin Mass, and its replacement by the Novus Ordo, God or Satan?
It is my hope that the answer to these two questions will clarify the true situation.
Art. 1. The liturgical books promulgated by Saint Paul VI and Saint John Paul II, in conformity with the decrees of Vatican Council II, are the unique expression of the lex orandi of the Roman Rite.
Art. 3. The bishop of the diocese in which until now there exist one or more groups that celebrate according to the Missal antecedent to the reform of 1970: § 1. is to determine that these groups do not deny the validity and the legitimacy of the liturgical reform, dictated by Vatican Council II and the Magisterium of the Supreme Pontiffs;
Everything that I have declared in this Apostolic Letter in the form of Motu Proprio, I order to be observed in all its parts, anything else to the contrary notwithstanding, even if worthy of particular mention, and I establish that it be promulgated by way of publication in “L’Osservatore Romano”, entering immediately in force and, subsequently, that it be published in the official Commentary of the Holy See, Acta Apostolicae Sedis.
However, back in 1570, Pope St Pius V ordered that the Traditional Latin Mass, which Francis wants gone, must be kept in perpetuity, and in doing so used very strong words:
Furthermore, by these presents [this law], in virtue of Our Apostolic authority, We grant and concede in perpetuity that, for the chanting or reading of the Mass in any church whatsoever, this Missal is hereafter to be followed absolutely, without any scruple of conscience or fear of incurring any penalty, judgment, or censure, and may freely and lawfully be used. Nor are superiors, administrators, canons, chaplains, and other secular priests, or religious, of whatever title designated, obliged to celebrate the Mass otherwise than as enjoined by Us. We likewise declare and ordain that no one whosoever is forced or coerced to alter this Missal, and that this present document cannot be revoked or modified, but remain always valid and retain its full force notwithstanding the previous constitutions and decrees of the Holy See, as well as any general or special constitutions or edicts of provincial or synodal councils, and notwithstanding the practice and custom of the aforesaid churches, established by long and immemorial prescription – except, however, if more than two hundred years’ standing.
Therefore, no one whosoever is permitted to alter this notice of Our permission, statute, ordinance, command, precept, grant, indult, declaration, will, decree, and prohibition. Would anyone, however, presume to commit such an act, he should know that he will incur the wrath of Almighty God and of the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul.
This raises some difficult questions.
1 Is it possible for a Pope to order that the Traditional Latin Mass be kept for all time and never replaced?
2 Given that Pius V is a saint, this means that all his writings were examined and found free from error during the process of canonisation. Does this not give authenticity to his words?
3 If Francis is overturning Quo Primum, is he not claiming a higher authority than a saint?
4 What is so harmful about the Traditional Latin Mass that it must be extinguished?
5 If the warnings of Quo Primum are authentic, are not all those working toward the removal of the Traditional Latin Mass endangering their souls and the souls of others affected?
February 2024
Dear Australian Bishops
We hear all the time about domestic violence, where the father or husband is always the villain and the wife is the victim.
But there seems to be no information from the Church about false claims of domestic violence, generated by a large industry which includes lawyers, counsellors and social justice agencies.
I believe that it is time for the reality to be exposed. I have seen many cases where divorce has been initiated using false claims of violence. Here is an example which has become all too common..
I should be grateful if you could provide some balance by showing how Satan uses false domestic violence claims to destroy marriage.
February 2024
Please watch this video. Below this email I have copied the text of the letter and also some comments to verify that there are many Catholics who agree with the sentiments expressed.
Attached to this email are some additional relevant documents.
There is a growing movement on the part of lay Catholics, who are prepared to speak out on the unchristian teachings and behaviour among clerics in the Vatican, which are now becoming quite evident. But no clarification so far from bishops and priests.
I should be grateful for your advice on where the truth lies, what should be done about it, and who should take action to return Church leaders to Catholic orthodoxy.
The persistent silence of the College of Cardinals and the Bishops signifies their cowardice and neutrality. They invoke omerta in the face of the Bergoglio Borgata which has knee-capped the Catholic Church, decimating it with modernism and secular populism. The Cardinals seemingly choke with fear as Francis supplants the Magisterium with his own doctrinal brand of liberation theology. They watch silently as he guts the FFI, the Knights of Malta, the Pontifical Academies, and stacks the College of Cardinals with his liberal lackeys to ensure that Francis minions dominate the Chair of Peter for generations.
How often have we heard cardinals, bishops and priests whisper, 'we will wait Francis out, he is old, and has only one lung.'
How’s that strategy working?
How much more destruction are you willing to endure, silently watching, remaining neutral in this time of moral crisis in the Catholic Church?
Remember the words of St. Cajetan, “you must resist the Pope who openly destroys the Church.”
While the clerics sit on the sidelines, the laity is not content to watch Rome burn during this papacy, knowing that the true scandal is not the vociferous criticism of Francis; the real scandal is the papacy of Jorge Bergoglio and the complicit silence of the hierarchy.
And, questions persist about the hierarchy.
Is there a real man left in the Vatican to speak up and save Holy Mother Church from this disastrous papacy ?
Is it too much to ask you to lay down your riches, titles, and honor, at the end of your earthly lives, for Holy Mother Church?
Are you content to be made a laughingstock with your Dubia Demand which goes ignored and unanswered for nearly 9 months?
Are there any men in the College of Cardinals left who are willing to fight for Holy Mother Church, like the legions of men in the traditional Catholic blogoshere?
Knowing that the St. Gallen Mafia plotted and schemed the spurious election of Bergoglio, why would you, Cardinals passively condone his scandalous appointments, his heretical pronouncements, and his tyrannical firings, without speaking out in united protest?
It’s time to break the code of silence. ‘Show up Time’ has long past. Time to put on your big boy pants and blow the lid off this modernist and heretical papacy. The Resistance is upon us.
What does the Resistance look like?
The Rome Midnight Poster Brigade was a good first start.
The Dubia Demand offered hope and clarity, but unanswered remains a hollow threat.
Creativity, bravery, and prayer are required to launch an offensive to SAVE OUR CHURCH.
Bergoglio is increasingly vulnerable, exposed, and obviously flawed. The time is long over to stop protecting this papal wrecking ball who scandalizes the faithful every time he opens his mouth.
Who could forget the merciful Francis who haughtily chastised Cardinal Mueller, “I am the Pope, I don’t have to give you reasons for firing your 3 best priests at the CDF.” Hardly the conciliatory and humble words of a man who espouses dialogue and consultation. As Aesop cautioned, “any excuse will serve a tyrant.”
Time to shed the comfort of your mitre, your title, and your coat of arms.
Have you forgotten that Dante warned that “the darkest places in hell are reserved for those who maintain their neutrality in times of moral crisis?”
In the words of St Catherine of Siena, “Proclaim the truth and don’t be silent through fear.”Pray an Our Father now for reparation for the sins committed because of Francis's Amoris Laetitia. Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church as well as the Triumph of the Kingdom of the Sacred Heart and the Immaculate Heart of Mary. Stop for a moment of silence, ask Jesus Christ what He wants you to do now and next. In this silence remember God, Father, Son and Holy Ghost - Three Divine Persons yet One God, has an ordered universe where you can know truth and falsehood as well as never forget that He wants you to have eternal happiness with Him as his son or daughter by grace. Make this a practice. By doing this you are doing more good than reading anything here or anywhere else on the Internet.
"I love Cardinal Burke, but I've run out of patience": A Vatican expert who has met Francis & wishes to remain anonymous gave The Catholic Monitor an impassioned statement for Cardinal Burke & the faithful bishops: End the Bergoglio Borgata
In memoirs, ex Pope Benedict says Vatican 'gay lobby' tried to wield power: report | Reuters
"End the Bergoglio Borgata": "Is there a Real Man left in the Vatican to speak up and save Holy Mother Church?" (thecatholicmonitor.com)
Open letter to Cardinal Burke - Wijngaards Institute for Catholic Research
Fed Up Catholics Issue Open Letter To Cardinal Burke | Listen Notes
January 2024
Dear Catholic Bishops
Please see the links below.
The Vatican, which should be one of the holiest places on earth, seems to have taken on the appearance of a sewer of perversion.
I do not believe that the activities documented below are pleasing to God.
If God expects us to do something to call these men to account, who should take on this responsibility?
Is any statement planned informing the Catholics of Australia of the danger to souls of those responsible?
Vatican Scandal Exposed: Did Cardinal have a Secret Sex Book?
Let’s Call Out Dirty Old Men Again
The Dark Side of Cardinal Fernandez is worse than you thought
Pope Francis: Hell is Empty, Marxism is Catholic?
More Bad News For Francis' Satanic Blessings As Influential Bishops Reject Decree
How Pope Francis is working to guarantee that Cardinal Burke be the Next Pope by Br. Alexis Bugnolo
The Case for Antipope Francis w/ Patrick Coffin | Trad Chat 11 (youtube.com)
Seven Pieces of Evidence That Francis Is an Antipope - Patrick Coffin Media
Patrick Coffin Responds to his Critics
Key Catholic Organization Surrenders To Rome Over Evil Blessings
Good Bishop Pleads With Faithful To Stay In The Church While Francis Hurls Insults
Unveiling the Controversy: Pope Francis and Father Guidetti's Excommunication
Francis welcomes and praised globalist fascist Klaus Schwab and the WEF!
Another Scandalous Fernández Book Unearthed: DDF Prefect Published Blasphemous Porn in 1998
More Porn Written By High-Ranking Catholic Official Emerges
A pornographic book allegedly written by Cardinal-designate Victor Manuel Fernandez, archbishop of La Plata, eme...
Pope Francis Knew His Doctrine Chief was an Erotic Author
Catholic Church Turning Into Dante’s Inferno
Tucho’s Porn-Theology: Orgasm Like Paradise
Send in the Clowns
[FRANCIS] RESISTANCE CONTINUES TO SPREAD! 51 priests of the Prelature of Moyobamba, in the Peruvian jungle, expressed support for Bishop Escudero, who rejected the declaration issued by the Holy See in December expressly prohibiting blessings to SSA couples
Pope Francis, from gay blessings to porn books. The scandals at Fazio
The Vatican Now Trains Priests For Evil Blessings As Schism Looms
More Confusion About Same-Sex Blessings | John Finnis, Robert P. George,?Peter Ryan, S.J.
The Time of Magical Thinking
The Emperor’s New Theologian
Hell, Communism, & Perverts
‘Anti-pope.’ ‘Blasphemous.’ Criticism of Francis comes in strident terms
Dutch bishop blasts 'cowardly' Fiducia Supplicans, urges scandalized Catholics not to leave Church
The astonishing revelation recorded in St. Faustina's diary on the day of Pope Francis' birth
Should We Hope Hell is Empty?
Pope Francis likes 'to think of an empty hell
Pope Francis, "I like to think of hell as empty"
Why Did the Pope Invite Marxists to the Vatican?
Two More Bishops Conference Fall In Line Behind Francis' Evil Decree
The Pope, the WHO, and the Next Lockdown
"Conscience First!" Priests in San Fran refuse to bless same-sex couples
Pope Francis Hopes Jesus Was Wrong
Pornocracy, pt. 2: the Coming Reign of Antichrist
Pornocracy, pt. 3: Good out of Evil Papal Corruption
The Third Pornocracy: the Current Crisis in the Church
Former PiusX Superior General: Fernández has come a long way
He [Tucho] relates a story of a 16 year old girl describing sexual thoughts about Christ...
Is the Vatican Full of Sex-Obsessed Men? Pornofaggot Really Is A Sick Bastard, Or: Yes, It Gets Worse Francis's #2, Cardinal "TOUCHO" Writes Child P*rn (Francis KNEW) Tucho and the Rise of "Porntheology" Catholic Doctrine Chief's Secret Sex Book Exposed Bad Takes on Fernandez's Demon Lust Book | David L. Gray The Reason Francis Gave This Evil Man The Most Important Job In The Vatican FRANCIS BERGOGLIO'S "GAY BLESSING" CARDINAL "TUCHO'' FERNANDEZ AUTHORED PORNOGRAPHIC BOOK EQUATING AN ORGASM WITH SAINTLY EXCTASY AND THAT "GOD IS IN THE COUPLE'S ORGASM!" Pope's righthand man, Cardinal Fernandez, authored another X-rated book, this one hidden until now More Erotic Musings from Vatican Head of Doctrine Does Pornographic Author & Francis's Chief Doctrine Guardian's reassertion magically make anything that follows suddenly sensible?: "Marriage is between one man and one woman, and Jesus of Nazareth is only a man, not God." "Marriage is between one man and one woman, and it is all right to rob a bank." "Marriage is between one man and one woman, and your goldfish is the reincarnation of Elvis Presley." Pope Francis Is Right: Pornography Consumption Opens a Gate to the Demonic When there isn’t enough outrage at porn being written as theology by the head of what used to be the Holy Office by so called “Catholic” faithful to throw him out on his ear, you know we are in a state of unprecedented apostasy. DDF’s Fernández: We are not heretical Fernández the author of disgusting porno-theology who normalises sodomy..the ghost writer of Amoris Laetitia..justifying all kinds of morally abhorrent acts..Perverts rule the Church Pope’s new doctrine chief in hot water over unearthed orgasm book Bless Sodom and Gomorrah and to Hell with Children Counterfeited Christianity & the Lie of Fiducia Supplicans Catholic Unscripted 48 - 'Fiducia Supplicans V chastity Same Sex Blessings: Clarity in the Confusion [Ralph Martin] Pope Blesses Same Sex Relationships Pope Francis Contradicts Divine Revelation, Doctrine & Practice of The Catholic Church The Apostasy In The Church Is Manifesting In Two Clear Sides The Clergy Scandals Continue... Bishop Vigano calls for the ARREST of Pope Francis and Cardinal Fernandez by the Swiss Guard Francis Allies Demand CARDINAL SARAH RESIGN After He Accused Francis Of Heresy Archbishop Charles Chaput weighs the cost of Pope Francis decade of making a mess If there are any journalists left, someone should look into Tucho Fernandez’ “friendship” with Antipope Bergoglio’s young new personal secretary, Padre Daniel Pellizzòn The Enemies Of The Church Now DEMAND 'Blessing Certificates'
The Dark Side of Cardinal Fernandez is worse than you thought
The Bonus Scandal in Tucho’s Book
Heal Us With Your Disappearing: Cardinal Porno Pendejo Has To Go
More Erotic Musings from Vatican Head of Doctrine
Rediscovered book by Cardinal Fernández features graphic erotic passages on ‘spirituality and sensuality’
The Reason Francis Gave This Evil Man The Most Important Job In The Vatican
Vatican Scandal Exposed: Did Cardinal have a Secret Sex Book? Pope's righthand man, Cardinal Fernandez, authored another X-rated book, this one hidden until now FRANCIS BERGOGLIO'S "GAY BLESSING" CARDINAL "TUCHO'' FERNANDEZ AUTHORED PORNOGRAPHIC BOOK EQUATING AN ORGASM WITH SAINTLY EXCTASY AND THAT "GOD IS IN THE COUPLE'S ORGASM!" Fiducia Supplicans & Bank Robbery: Cognitive Dissonance in the Life of the Church Here is the worst of Cardinal Fernandez’ latest scandal – VIEWER DISCRETION ADVISED Latest Vatican Scandal "This document damages the communion of the Church, for such blessings directly and seriously contradict Divine Revelation": Strongest and clearest episcopal reaction yet from +Rafael Escudero López-Brea BISHOPS REFUSE TO OBEY: Globalist Pope Faces Massive Resistance Worldwide Same sex couples cannnot be denied a blessing, says Catholic Archbishop of Dublin Mysticism, Sex, and Justification for Sin: A Rediscovered 1998 Publication by Victor Manuel Fernández — Full text of chapters 7-9 More Bad News For Francis' Satanic Blessings As Influential Bishops Reject Decree Lessons about Francis (The Destroyer) from St. Robert Bellarmine’s Objections to Protestants Pope Francis Signaled Openness to Same-Sex Blessings The Case for Antipope Francis w/ Patrick Coffin | Trad Chat 11 Fernández the author of disgusting porno-theology who normalises sodomy..the ghost writer of Amoris Laetitia..justifying all kinds of morally abhorrent acts..Perverts rule the Church Hey! Remember when FOUR Canonists raised the alarm about the invalidity of Pope Benedict’s attempted partial resignation within DAYS of his February 11th announcement in ARSH 2013? Antipope "Francis" Bergoglio: The Freemasonic Conspiracy to Destroy the Papacy
High-ranking priest caught in cocaine-fueled gay orgy in Vatican apartment
New Vatican Scandal: Priests’ Apartments above Italy’s Biggest Gay Sauna
January 2024
Dear Archbishop Coleridge
Below please find recent Catholic news.
If the information is accurate, it seems that we have an open promoter of sodomy knowingly appointed by Francis as the Church's authority on the faith.
I should be grateful if you could refute the information. Alternatively, if correct, then would it be appropriate to inform Catholics of the danger to their souls?
Another Scandalous Fernández Book Unearthed: DDF Prefect Published Blasphemous Porn in 1998
More Porn Written By High-Ranking Catholic Official Emerges
Pope Francis Knew His Doctrine Chief was an Erotic Author
Catholic Church Turning Into Dante’s Inferno
Tucho’s Porn-Theology: Orgasm Like Paradise
Send in the Clowns
[FRANCIS] RESISTANCE CONTINUES TO SPREAD! 51 priests of the Prelature of Moyobamba, in the Peruvian jungle, expressed support for Bishop Escudero, who rejected the declaration issued by the Holy See in December expressly prohibiting blessings to SSA couples
Pope Francis, from gay blessings to porn books. The scandals at Fazio
The Vatican Now Trains Priests For Evil Blessings As Schism Looms
More Confusion About Same-Sex Blessings | John Finnis, Robert P. George, ?Peter Ryan, S.J.
The Time of Magical Thinking
The Emperor’s New Theologian
Hell, Communism, & Perverts
‘Anti-pope.’ ‘Blasphemous.’ Criticism of Francis comes in strident terms
Dutch bishop blasts 'cowardly' Fiducia Supplicans, urges scandalized Catholics not to leave Church
The astonishing revelation recorded in St. Faustina's diary on the day of Pope Francis' birth
Should We Hope Hell is Empty?
Pope Francis likes 'to think of an empty hell
Pope Francis, "I like to think of hell as empty"
Why Did the Pope Invite Marxists to the Vatican?
Two More Bishops Conference Fall In Line Behind Francis' Evil Decree
The Pope, the WHO, and the Next Lockdown
"Conscience First!" Priests in San Fran refuse to bless same-sex couples
Pornocracy, pt. 3: Good out of Evil Papal Corruption
The Third Pornocracy: the Current Crisis in the Church
Former PiusX Superior General: Fernández has come a long way
He [Tucho] relates a story of a 16 year old girl describing sexual thoughts about Christ...
January 2024
Dear Australian Bishops
Please see the links below, taken from news items this morning.
It is very difficult to avoid the possibility that the Catholic Church is being run by sodomites.
I do not believe that God intended this type of management for His Church.
I should be grateful if you could refute the claims. But if they are true, what is to be done?
If there are any journalists left, someone should look into Tucho Fernandez’ “friendship” with Antipope Bergoglio’s young new personal secretary, Padre Daniel Pellizzòn
The Enemies Of The Church Now DEMAND 'Blessing Certificates'
The Dark Side of Cardinal Fernandez is worse than you thought
The Bonus Scandal in Tucho’s Book
Heal Us With Your Disappearing: Cardinal Porno Pendejo Has To Go
More Erotic Musings from Vatican Head of Doctrine
Rediscovered book by Cardinal Fernández features graphic erotic passages on ‘spirituality and sensuality’
The Reason Francis Gave This Evil Man The Most Important Job In The Vatican
Vatican Scandal Exposed: Did Cardinal have a Secret Sex Book?
Pope's righthand man, Cardinal Fernandez, authored another X-rated book, this one hidden until now
FRANCIS BERGOGLIO'S "GAY BLESSING" CARDINAL "TUCHO'' FERNANDEZ AUTHORED PORNOGRAPHIC BOOK EQUATING AN ORGASM WITH SAINTLY EXCTASY AND THAT "GOD IS IN THE COUPLE'S ORGASM!"
Fiducia Supplicans & Bank Robbery: Cognitive Dissonance in the Life of the Church
Here is the worst of Cardinal Fernandez’ latest scandal – VIEWER DISCRETION ADVISED
Latest Vatican Scandal
"This document damages the communion of the Church, for such blessings directly and seriously contradict Divine Revelation": Strongest and clearest episcopal reaction yet from +Rafael Escudero López-Brea
BISHOPS REFUSE TO OBEY: Globalist Pope Faces Massive Resistance Worldwide
Same sex couples cannnot be denied a blessing, says Catholic Archbishop of Dublin
Mysticism, Sex, and Justification for Sin: A Rediscovered 1998 Publication by Victor Manuel Fernández — Full text of chapters 7-9
More Bad News For Francis' Satanic Blessings As Influential Bishops Reject Decree
Lessons about Francis (The Destroyer) from St. Robert Bellarmine’s Objections to Protestants
Pope Francis Signaled Openness to Same-Sex Blessings
The Case for Antipope Francis w/ Patrick Coffin | Trad Chat 11
Fernández the author of disgusting porno-theology who normalises sodomy..the ghost writer of Amoris Laetitia..justifying all kinds of morally abhorrent acts..Perverts rule the Church
Hey! Remember when FOUR Canonists raised the alarm about the invalidity of Pope Benedict’s attempted partial resignation within DAYS of his February 11th announcement in ARSH 2013?
Antipope "Francis" Bergoglio: The Freemasonic Conspiracy to Destroy the Papacy
Dr. Taylor Marshall: "3 Days of Darkness is Almost Here"
The Pope Francis End-Time Apostasy | Jonathan Cahn Prophetic
The Vatican Wants YOU To Participate In More Pointless Synodal Meetings
Priest's Painful Brutal Truth About The State Of The Church
The Death Stare
The Reason Why MOST People Will Go To Hell | R.C. Sproul
And then there’s this… whatever the fresh hell this is. | Fr. Z's Blog
A parish in Vigo organizes a "feminist Christology" course and they announce it with the image of a Christ converted into a woman
January 2024
Dear Archbishop Coleridge
Please see below this email quotations from Fiducia Supplicans.
There seems no doubt that Francis intends that God be called upon to give His blessing to homosexual couples, rather than separated and repentant homosexual individuals.
It is not easy to overcome the idea that blessing same sex couples is a direct challenge to God. Sodomy is a sin which is considered to 'cry out to heaven for vengeance'.
What are the four sins that cry to heaven for vengeance? – EWTN Global Catholic Television Network
There are many reports of the promotion of sodomy under Francis. So much that there are claims that Francis and Cardinal Fernandez themselves are homosexuals.
Given that unrepentant homosexual acts lead to eternal damnation, it might be argued that attempting to call God's blessing on unnatural acts also leads to damnation.
If what Francis and Cardinal Fernandez has issued is evil, should Catholics not be warned of the danger to souls?
1 Sample of articles connecting Francis with sodomy.
Henry Sire: Bergoglio has always protected Sodomites & punished the chaste | From Rome
Motus in Fine Velocior: Antipope Bergoglio appoints raging sodomite Tucho Fernandez to attempt to trick the world into thinking that the Catholic Church has been completely destroyed | Barnhardt
Tucho Fernandez, satanic monster faggot, writer of homoerotic grooming poetry book, will be given a Cardinalatial Red Hat on September 30th by Antipope Bergoglio | Barnhardt
Same-sex blessing, the ‘kissing book’ and abuse: Why Pope Francis’ new head of doctrine is already causing controversy | America Magazine
The Father Rupnik Affair Is Really Bad for Pope Francis | National Review
Fr Hunwicke's Mutual Enrichment: TUCHO ... it's worse than you think (liturgicalnotes.blogspot.com)
Bergoglio finally outed for condoning sodomy - Crisis in the Church - Catholic Info (cathinfo.com)
Bergoglio restores Sodomite-Network Bishop who was suspended by Pope Benedict XVI | From Rome
LGBTQ Bergoglio sends handwritten letter of praise to director of sodomite ministries. | Page 2 | CARM Forums
Under Bergoglio, Sodomite desecrate the house of God with impunity (youtube.com)
Nick Donnelly on X: "The whole purpose of Jorge Bergoglio's Synod on Synodality is to force us to say wrong is right The Bergoglians intend to force us to say: Sodomite unions are blessed by God women can be ordained adulterers, fornicators & sodomites can receive the sacraments False religions… https://t.co/7AJ7JIb8N2" / X (twitter.com)
Is Antipope Bergoglio a Sodomite? I Dunno, But His Child-Pimping Boyfriend Sure As Hell Is. | Barnhardt
Antipope Bergoglio’s Pet Name for His Child Pimp Boyfriend Gustavo Vera: “God’s Trotsky” | Barnhardt
2 Intention to bless homosexual couples
Declaration Fiducia Supplicans On the Pastoral Meaning of Blessings (18 December 2023) (vatican.va)
It is precisely in this context that one can understand the possibility of blessing couples in irregular situations and same-sex couples without officially validating their status or changing in any way the Church’s perennial teaching on marriage.
2. Encouraged by such a great and consoling truth, this Dicastery has considered several questions of both a formal and an informal nature about the possibility of blessing same-sex couples and—in light of Pope Francis’ fatherly and pastoral approach—of offering new clarifications on the Responsum ad dubium[2] that the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith published on 22 February 2021.
II. Blessings of Couples in Irregular Situations and of Couples of the Same Sex 31. Within the horizon outlined here appears the possibility of blessings for couples in irregular situations and for couples of the same sex, the form of which should not be fixed ritually by ecclesial authorities to avoid producing confusion with the blessing proper to the Sacrament of Marriage.
3 References lead back to Francis [1] Francis, Catechesis on Prayer: The Blessing (2 December 2020). [2] Cf. Congregatio pro Doctrina Fidei, «Responsum» ad «dubium» de benedictione unionem personarum eiusdem sexus et Nota esplicativa (15 March 2021): AAS 113 (2021), 431-434. [3] Francis, Ap. Exhort. Evangelii Gaudium (24 November 2013), no. 42: AAS 105 (2013), 1037-1038. [4] Cf. Francis, Respuestas a los Dubia propuestos por dos Cardenales (11 July 2023). [5] Ibid., ad dubium 2, c. [6] Ibid., ad dubium 2, a. [7] Cfr. Rituale Romanum ex decreto Sacrosancti Oecumenici Concilii Vaticani II instauratum auctoritate Ioannis Pauli PP. II promulgatum, De Benedictionibus, Praenotanda, Editio typica, Libreria Editrice Vaticana, Città del Vaticano 2013, no. 12. [8] Ibid., no. 11: “Quo autem clarius hoc pateat, antiqua ex traditione, formulae benedictionum eo spectant ut imprimis Deum pro eius donis glorificent eiusque impetrent beneficia atque maligni potestatem in mundo compescant.” [9] Ibid., no. 15: “Quare illi qui benedictionem Dei per Ecclesiam expostulant, dispositiones suas ea fide confirment, cui omnia sunt possibilia; spe innitantur, quae non confundit; caritate praesertim vivificentur, quae mandata Dei servanda urget.” [10] Ibid., no. 13: “Semper ergo et ubique occasio praebetur Deum per Christum in Spiritu Sancto laudandi, invocandi eique gratias reddendi, dummodo agatur de rebus, locis, vel adiunctis quae normae vel spiritui Evangelii non contradicant.” [11] Francis, Respuestas a los Dubia propuestos por dos Cardenales, ad dubium 2, d. [12] Ibid., ad dubium 2, e. [13] Francis, Ap. Exhort. C’est la Confiance (15 October 2023), nos. 2, 20, 29. [14] Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, Directory on Popular Piety and the Liturgy. Principles and Guidelines (9 April 2002), no. 12. [15] Ibid., no. 13. [16] Francis, Exhort. Ap. Evangelii Gaudium (24 November 2013), no. 94: AAS 105 (2013), 1060. [17] Francis, Respuestas a los Dubia propuestos por dos Cardenales, ad dubium 2, e. [18] Ibid., ad dubium 2, f. [19] Francis, Catechesis on Prayer: The Blessing (2 December 2020). [20] De Benedictionibus, no. 258: “Haec benedictio ad hoc tendit ut ipsi senes a fratribus testimonium accipiant reverentiae grataeque mentis, dum simul cum ipsis Domino gratias reddimus pro beneficiis ab eo acceptis et pro bonis operibus eo adiuvante peractis.” [21] Francis, Respuestas a los Dubia propuestos por dos Cardenales, ad dubium 2, g. [22] Cf. Francis, Post-Synodal Ap. Exhort. Amoris Laetitia (19 March 2016), no. 250: AAS 108 (2016), 412-413. [23] Cf. Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, Directory on Popular Piety and the Liturgy (9 April 2002), no. 13: “The objective difference between pious exercises and devotional practices should always be clear in expressions of worship. [...] Acts of devotion and piety are external to the celebration of the Holy Eucharist, and of the other sacraments.” [24] Francis, Respuestas a los Dubia propuestos por dos Cardenales, ad dubium 2, g. [25] Francis, Post-Synodal Ap. Exhort. Amoris Laetitia (19 March 2016), no. 304: AAS 108 (2016), 436. [26] Cf. ibid. [27]Officium Divinum ex decreto Sacrosancti Oecumenici Concilii Vaticani II instauratum auctoritate Pauli PP. VI promulgatum, Liturgia Horarum iuxta Ritum Romanum, Institutio Generalis de Liturgia Horarum, Editio typica altera, Libreria Editrice Vaticana, Città del Vaticano 1985, no. 17: “Itaque non tantum caritate, exemplo et paenitentiae operibus, sed etiam oratione ecclesialis communitas verum erga animas ad Christum adducendas maternum munus exercet.” [28] Francis, Ap. Exhort. Evangelii Gaudium (24 November 2013), no. 44: AAS 105 (2013), 1038-1039. [29] Ibid., no. 36: AAS 105 (2013), 1035. [30] Benedict XVI, Homily on the Solemnity of Mary, Mother of God. 45th World Day of Peace, Vatican Basilica (1 January 2012): Insegnamenti VIII, 1 (2012), 3. [31] Francis, Catechesis on Prayer: The Blessing
Catholics in Australia can be divided into three groups. One believes that Francis is really pope. The second believes that Francis is an antipope. The third and perhaps the biggest group is not comfortable about Francis, and is not really sure where the truth lies, but waits for the situation to explain itself. As time passes, it seems that. the third group is losing members to the second.
The arguments of the NeverPope group are three.
1 The resignation of Benedict was not lawful.
2 The election of Francis offended against Universi Dominici Gregis.
3 Francis is a heretic.
The first two arguments have been explained at length by people who know their faith and have the facts at their disposal. The third is easier to explain.
Can. 751 Heresy is the obstinate denial or obstinate doubt after the reception of baptism of some truth which is to be believed by divine and Catholic faith; apostasy is the total repudiation of the Christian faith; schism is the refusal of submission to the Supreme Pontiff or of communion with the members of the Church subject to him.
Can. 1364 — § 1. An apostate from the faith, a heretic or a schismatic incurs a latae sententiaeexcommunication, without prejudice to the provision of can. 194 § 1 n. 2; he or she may also be punished with the penalties mentioned in can. 1336 §§ 2-4.
Here are claims of heresy. They include three sets of dubia submitted by cardinals, so they need to be taken seriously. Some of these claims are more than 7 years old, without any serious attempt to address them. That is, the alleged heresies of Francis indicate obstinacy.
Among the heresies addressed in the links above are denial of the eternity of Hell, the claim that the Church opposes capital punishment, insisting that wives do not need to submit to their husbands, equating married life with the religious life. Any reversal of Catholic teaching in the works of Francis would mean that the infallible Church has, after two millennia, become fallible.
Below this email is a list of news items on matters issuing from the Vatican over the last week. I believe that this indicates that this is not a trivial matter, and needs urgent clarification.
If Francis is indeed a heretic, then it is clear that he has left the Church, either since his election or some time before. If a non-Catholic can be head of the Catholic Church, then perhaps Luther can be reinstated.
I should be grateful for an explanation of the issues where the words of Francis are opposed to Catholic teaching. I believe that Catholics have a right to know the true situation in the Vatican.
If I have made errors in the above statements, please point them out.
News of Francis and the blessing of homosexual couples. The last seven days
Please see the links below, many of which examine the outcomes of the Vatican document Fiducia Supplicans.
It seems to me that there is sufficient room in the statement to permit the blessing of two people living in the state of mortal sin. I cannot find in the document any exhortation to repent or confess.
It would also appear possible for a paedophile to ask blessing on himself and a pre-pubescent girl.
Many dioceses have rejected this concept.
Given the legal status of homosexual unions in this country, would it be discrimination under the law to reject such a blessing for two 'married' homosexuals, following this ecclesiastical 'approval'?
I should be grateful for your advice as to whether the blessing of a pair of active sodomites would be acceptable in this archdiocese.
The essay seems to assume that men are the villains, and women are the victims. Under the heading of Drivers and Enablers of Violence and Abuse there is the following:
“Domestic violence is learned behaviour. Men who abuse learn to abuse through observation, experience and reinforcement. They believe that they have a right to use violence and are also rewarded; that is, their behaviour gives them power and control over their partner.”12
There is much information available about men who suffer domestic violence, and the overwhelming majority goes unreported.
In Christian marriage there are fairly clear roles for husband and wife. A husband will have some responsibilities and duties, and his wife will have others. It is not impossible that ignorance of these roles may have played a part in creating this problem.
However, in the Social Justice statement, it seems that you have dismissed these duties as having been inspired by 'Hellenistic moral philosophies'.
Here is two paragraphs under the heading Submission and Leadership
Some Christian men appeal to the household codes in Colossians 3-4, Ephesians 5-6 and 1 Peter 2-3 to justify their sense of entitlement to be ‘head’ of the household and to control women and children. These codes of behaviour, “inspired by Hellenistic moral philosophies and by the ancient literature on household management” reflect “mentalities common in ancient Greco-Roman societies regarding the hierarchic order of the household and the submission of women and slaves.”33 These codes demand that those who were considered socially inferior – women, children, and slaves – submit to the authority of husbands, fathers, and masters. These codes do not reflect a context in which the equal dignity of every human being created in the image and likeness of God is acknowledged, or in which marriage is based on a relationship of love, mutuality, and partnership.
Today the Church does not ask women to be subservient to their husbands any more than it endorses slavery. Rather, the relationship between spouses should reflect their equality in Christ (Galatians 3:28). Furthermore, the respect due to each member of a family, household or community should reflect the respect and care shown for others by Christ.
Here we have a problem. This passage seems to dismiss the Church's formal teaching from Scripture and the Magisterium.
And it echoes Amoris Laetitia, which claims that wives do not need to submit to their husbands.
Amoris Laetitia 156. Every form of sexual submission must be clearly rejected. This includes all improper interpretations of the passage in the Letter to the Ephesians where Paul tells women to “be subject to your husbands” (Eph 5:22). This passage mirrors the cultural categories of the time, but our concern is not with its cultural matrix but with the revealed message that it conveys. As Saint John Paul II wisely observed: “Love excludes every kind of subjection whereby the wife might become a servant or a slave of the husband… The community or unity which they should establish through marriage is constituted by a reciprocal donation of self, which is also a mutual subjection”.162
Now I have always believed that we offend God if we deny the truth of the Bible. Here is what Scripture and the Popes teach:
Eph. 5:24: “As the Church is subject to Christ, so also let wives be to their husbands in all things.”
1 Cor. 11:3; But I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man,[a] and the head of Christ is God.
Col. 3:18; Wives, submit to your husbands, as is fitting in the Lord.
Tit. 2:3-5; Likewise, teach the older women to be reverent in the way they live, not to be slanderers or addicted to much wine, but to teach what is good.Then they can urge the younger women to love their husbands and children,to be self-controlled and pure, to be busy at home, to be kind, and to be subject to their husbands, so that no one will malign the word of God.
1 Pet. 3:1-5; Wives, in the same way submit yourselves to your own husbands so that, if any of them do not believe the word, they may be won over without words by the behavior of their wives,when they see the purity and reverence of your lives.
Pius V, Catechism of the Council of Trent, commentary on the sacrament of matrimony;
Leo XIII, Arcanum, ASS 12 (1879): 389;
Pius XI, Casti connubii, AAS 22 (1930): 549 (DH 3708-09);
John XXIII, Ad Petri cathedram, AAS 51 (1959): 509-10.
So now, what do we believe? The Church says that wives must submit to their husbands, or offend God.
Your statement takes the position that wives do not need to worry about submitting to their husbands. I have quoted those verses which take a view which is directly opposed to yours.
I should like to ask two questions:
1 Can you give me any formal Church document which abrogates those verses which state quite clearly the duties of husband and wife? And also the statements of the Popes listed above?
2 Given that husbands may not use violence to gain submission, what measures are available to a man to convince his wife to obey?
The article below claims that Francis is a heretic. It needs to be refuted, since many Catholics are now aware of these issues.
If this evidence is allowed to go unchallenged, there is the danger that a significant number of Catholics will come to the conclusion that since heretics are automatically excommunicated, Francis will be seen as a non-Catholic, and thus unable to be Pope. That is, Francis would be an antipope.
But if, based on evidence, it turns out that Francis is not Pope, should Australian Catholics not be told?
The Church tells us that outside Catholicism there is no salvation. That is, those who die outside the Church are damned. See the quotes and links below.
It follows that there are no Muslims in Heaven. Those who die as unrepentant practising Muslims are destined to suffer an endless horror of untold misery in Hell.
Is it possible that some of these souls could be saved? Is there not an obligation on the Church to try to bring these souls some better outcome?
What could the Church do in the way of reaching out to Muslims, to give them some chance of a happier destiny? Would it not please God to add to the numbers of men and women who surround Him after this world has been wound up?
No Salvation Outside the Church.The Catholic Church has solemnly defined three times by infallible declarations that outside the Catholic Church there is no salvation. The most explicit and forceful of the three came from Pope Eugene IV, in the Bull Cantate Domino, 1441, who proclaimed ex cathedra: "The Most Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that none of those existing outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans, also Jews, heretics, and schismatics can ever be partakers of eternal life, but that they are to go into the eternal fire 'which was prepared for the devil and his angels' (Mt. 25:41) unless before death they are joined with Her... No one, let his almsgiving be as great as it may, no one, even if he pour out his blood for the Name of Christ can be saved unless they abide within the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church." The other two infallible declarations are as follows: There is one universal Church of the faithful, outside of which no one at all can be saved. Pope Innocent III, ex cathedra, (Fourth Lateran Council, 1215). We declare, say , define, and pronounce that it is absolutely necessary for the salvation of every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff. Pope Boniface VIII, (Unam Sanctam, 1302). This means, and has always meant, that salvation and unity exist only within the Catholic Church, and that members of heretical groups cannot be considered as "part" of the Church of Christ. This doctrine has been the consistent teaching of the Popes throughout the centuries. Further, it is dogmatically set forth that no authority in the Church, no matter how highly placed, may lawfully attempt to change the clear meaning of this (or any) infallible dogma. Vatican I taught: "The meaning of Sacred Dogmas, which must always be preserved, is that which our Holy Mother the Church has determined. Never is it permissible to depart from this in the name of a deeper understanding." This same Vatican I defined solemnly that not even a Pope may teach a new doctrine. Naturally, the truth that there is no salvation outside of the Catholic Church has been supported by all the saints from every age. Following are several examples: St. Irenaeus (130-202), Bishop and Martyr: "The Church is the entrance to life; all others are thieves and robbers. On this account we are bound to avoid them . . . . We hear it declared of the unbelieving and the blinded of this world that they shall not inherit the world of life which is to come . . . . Resist them in defense of the only true and life giving faith, which the Church has received from the Apostles and imparted to her sons."St. Augustine (354-430), Bishop and Doctor of the Church: "No man can find salvation except in the Catholic Church. Outside the Catholic Church one can have everything except salvation. One can have honor, one can have sacraments, one can sing alleluia, one can answer amen, one can have faith in the Name of the Father and the Son and of the Holy Ghost, and preach it too, but never can one find salvation except in the Catholic Church." St. Fulgentius (468-533), Bishop: "Most firmly hold and never doubt that not only pagans, but also Jews, all heretics, and all schismatics who finish this life outside of the Catholic Church, will go into eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels." Pope St. Gregory the Great (590-604): "The holy universal Church teaches that it is not possible to worship God truly except in Her and asserts that all who are outside of Her will not be saved." St. Francis of Assisi (1182-1226): "All who have not believed that Jesus Christ was really the Son of God are doomed. Also, all who see the Sacrament of the Body of Christ and do not believe it is really the most holy Body and Blood of the Lord . . . these also are doomed!" St. Thomas Aquinas (1226-1274), the Angelic Doctor: There is no entering into salvation outside the Catholic Church, just as in the time of the Flood there was not salvation outside the Ark, which denotes the Church." St. Louis Marie de Montfort (1673-1716): "There is no salvation outside the Catholic Church. Anyone who resists this truth perishes." St. Robert Bellarmine (1542-1621), Bishop and Doctor of the Church: "Outside the Church there is no salvation...therefore in the symbol (Apostles Creed) we join together the Church with the remission of sins: 'I believe in the Holy Catholic Church, the communion of saints, the forgiveness of sins"...For this reason the Church is compared to the Ark of Noah, because just as during the deluge, everyone perished who was not in the ark, so now those perish who are not in the Church." St. Alphonsus Maria de Liguori (1696-1787), Bishop and Doctor of the Church: "All the misfortunes of unbelievers spring from too great an attachment to the things of life. This sickness of heart weakens and darkens the understanding, and leads to eternal ruin. If they would try to heal their hearts by purging them of their vices, they would soon receive light, which would show them the necessity of joining the Catholic Church, where alone is salvation. We should constantly thank the Lord for having granted us the gift of the true Faith, by associating us with the children of the Holy Catholic Church ... How many are the infidels, heretics, and schismatics who do not enjoy the happiness of the true Faith! Earth is full of them and they are all lost!" Pope Pius XII (1939-1958): Some say they are not bound by the doctrine which teaches that the Mystical Body of Christ and the Roman Catholic Church are one and the same thing. Some reduce to a meaningless formula the necessity of belonging to the true Church in order to gain eternal salvation. Others finally belittle the reasonable character of the credibility of Christian Faith. These and like ERRORS, it is clear, have crept in among certain of our sons who are deceived by imprudent zeal for souls or by false science."
Dear Archbishop Coleridge Please see the links below.
It appears from these and other reports that Francis is moving toward legitimising sodomy.
Should that happen, is it possible that this will place priests in the position of being unable to refuse absolution to unrepentant sodomites?
Would it not also remove the Church's claim to infallibility, since the Church has not the power to overturn a teaching which it has upheld for two millennia?
I should be grateful for your advice on what priests and laity must do should Francis make such a reversal.
He argues that Francis has opposed the Council of Trent, with serious consequences for the Church.
Surely there must be some answer to his claims.
I should be grateful for your advice.
October 2023
Dear Australian Bishops
Please see the links below.
I cannot see how anyone could now believe that we are dealing with a tiny minority of extremists.
It is certainly possible to find a peaceful Muslim. From among those who have not read the Qur'an.
The following quote comes from an Australian bishop. It is quite false, and purports to present Islam as a religion of peace. It has never been corrected.
THE word “Islam” means peace and the “barbarity of extremists” has nothing to do with real Islam or God, Brisbane Archbishop Mark Coleridge has said.
“Historically Mohammed brought peace to the warring tribes of Arabia by summoning them to worship of the one God,” he said.
I cannot recall any statement from the pulpit or publications by Australian bishops condemning the rape or murder of innocent children by this 'tiny minority'. Instead we get social justice, climate change and so-called 'asylum seekers'.
It is certain that multitudes of souls are being taken unprepared to their judgement. And now this 'tiny minority' is trying to take over the streets in countries which used to be Christian.
Is it not time for our bishops to let Catholics know the true nature of Islam?
These links cover the last 7 days; if needed I can provide many more:
The links below cover headlines relating to the Vatican over the last week (since 1 October).
Among the laity it is no longer possible to claim that Francis is Pope simply because of acceptance by the faithful. As the links below tell, that acceptance does not exist.
It is possible now to recognise a significant groundswell of belief that Francis is (and perhaps always has been) an antipope.
The argument among many is that Francis has been teaching at least uncertainty on, among other things, whether the unrepentant divorced and remarried can receive the sacraments, and the possibility of blessing sodomy.
I find it hard to believe that a pope can do either of these things. The obstinate belief that he can do so would seem to the laity to be heresy. And would lead to automatic excommunication. So we are faced with the strange concept of a non-Catholic vicar of Christ.
I believe that it is a good time for bishops to tell Australians clearly where the truth lies. That is, to provide an explanation of the answers to the two sets of Dubia.
Earlier this year, and on other occasions, I have provided information which casts doubt on the legitimacy of the papacy of Francis. One such letter I have reproduced below.
On the status of the Church under Francis rests the safety of countless souls, so I place before you additional information hoping to clarify the situation we find ourselves in.
There are three reasons why a growing number of informed Catholics believe that Francis is an antipope (any one, if valid, is sufficient to deny him the papacy). These are listed in my earlier correspondence. The documentation available is very large, and much is quite familiar to the laity, so it is not unreasonable to expect that the clergy should be equally well-informed.
1 The argument of heresy.
In Amoris Laetitia there are several instances where Francis casts doubt on formal Church teaching.
It is now 7 years since Francis has been asked for clarification of what appear to be examples of heresy in Amoris Laetitia. I am not aware of any response from Francis. I have noted that some cardinals have made statements claiming that Amoris Laetitia is actually compatible with Church teaching. However, this would appear to come largely from cardinals aligned with the St Gallen Mafia.
If indeed Francis has taught heresy, and remained obstinate in his disagreement with formal Church teaching, this seems to place him outside the Church. I cannot find any way to reconcile the concept of a non-Catholic as head of Christ's Church.
2 The doubts over the resignation of Pope Benedict.
Whether Pope Benedict resigned under duress, or whether he actually resigned all functions of the papacy, the genuineness of his resignation has been called into question by a number of Catholic writers. I have not heard of any clarification by an Australian bishop.
3 The claims of illegitimate campaigning by the St Gallen Mafia, voiding the conclave
In 1996 Pope John Paul 2 issued Universi Dominici Gregis, which stipulated that in relation to conclaves, campaigning is forbidden. It renders the outcome void, and excommunicates those involved.
The information above is a small fraction of what is openly available, written by orthodox Catholic laymen, some priests and a few bishops.
Now Francis is either a Pope or an Antipope. The information above indicates the latter. If I am incorrect in my data and conclusions, I'd be grateful if you would explain where I have gone wrong.
But if I am right, is it not the duty of bishops throughout the world to remove the impostor?
On Thursday, 23 March 2023 at 07:34:32 GMT+10 wrote:
Dear Archbishop Coleridge
I have sent you on several occasions a considerable amount of material which indicates that Francis has produced Catholic teaching which is not Catholic.
There are examples in the Dubia, which have yet to be addressed by the Vatican.
In the documents provided, there is evidence which leads to the conclusion that Francis is an antipope.
There is the allegation of heresy, which has not been refuted. Among other things, Francis openly denies the teaching on Hell and the status of husbands as head of the family. He also raises the possibility of receiving the Blessed Sacrament in the state of mortal sin.
And there is the apparent illegitimacy of the conclave which elected Francis. Cardinals openly boasting of campaigning in a manner forbidden by Universi Dominici Gregis.
If Andrew Bolt is correct, it seems that our bishops are on the path to discriminating against innocent Australians on the basis of skin colour.
I think the Church would prefer if we discriminated on the basis of need. Helping the poor, regardless of colour.
Discrimination has been tried in the past. We have in our language such terms as 'apartheid', 'segregation' and 'Ku Klux Klan' (this last a gift from the Democrats in the US)..
There are many tasks waiting for bishops to address. Abortion, contraception, sodomy, slavery in Islamic countries, the commandments, the sacraments, the four last things. Separating people on the basis of skin colour does not seem so urgent when we have such issues awaiting attention.
Is it possible our bishops believe that this division can be justified because even in 2023 Aborigines, who already receive something like $39 billion in aid each year, are still being mistreated on the basis of their skin colour?
August 2023
Dear Bishops
Please see the video below.
So Australians still, in 2023, mistreat Aborigines? Can you provide any evidence of this?
There are far worse injustices around the world, never addressed by our bishops. North Korea, Armenia, Saudi Arabia, Mali and Mauritania for example.
Catholic clergy are free to vote for this 'Voice'. The laity are free not to.
June 2023
It seems to me quite logical that those who use money belonging to others to fund a hoax amounts to theft. I refer here to the use of the money of taxpayers to fund the replacement of coal-fired power stations while at the same time sending that coal to other countries which open new coal power stations every week.
In the case of the global warming hoax, this is a theft of huge proportions, making the poor poorer.
Large increases in the cost of electricity, proposals to ban the use of gas, and the suggestion that firewood is next on the list. So the poor cannot heat their homes, or even cook meals. What on earth is being achieved by this?
If ever there was an attack on the poor, this has to be it.
I should have thought that our priests and bishops might be the first to address the use of the tax money to promote global warming. But so far I have heard only from Cardinal Pell.
Of course, it is possible that those in the Church responsible for addressing this issue are convinced otherwise.
May 2023 Most Rev Robert McGuckin Bishop of Toowoomba
Dear Bishop McGuckin
Please find below this email a copy of text on the front page of the current parish bulletin at St Joseph's Stanthorpe. I have coloured it red. The bulletin itself is attached as a file.
I have not brought this to the attention of the relieving parish priest, as he is from Goa, and cannot be expected to know Australian history. So it seems that this subject originates outside the parish.
Much of it is defamatory to people of a particular skin colour in terms we used to call racism.
I believe that the information is so disinformed to the point of offending the eighth commandment, and thus a religious matter. I'll try to deal with the claims one by one.
1 Australia is built on stolen land.
At least four different groups have settled here. Some claim that more than seven have come to this continent, one after another. When the British arrived, Torres Strait Islanders were coming from Daru via Boigu, Saibai and Thursday Islands. As they invaded Cape York peninsula, they killed off any aboriginal tribes living there. They were still coming well after the first fleet, so many of them are less aboriginal than the British. Did they not also steal the land? Or does that apply only to people of another colour?
Had the British not arrived in 1788, the Torres Strait Islanders, being more organised, would certainly have completed their task of taking the whole continent. That would be a real case of genocide.
Aborigines settled, Tasmanians settled, Torres Strait Islanders settled, and British people settled. But only the British stole land. How is that not racist?
2 Massacres.
Yes, there have been massacres. Whites killed blacks, blacks killed whites.
Whites killed blacks when blacks stole their sheep. I can understand that the aborigines had no concept of fencing land, but they were well aware that people owned animals, since they used to keep dogs.
Blacks killed whites. The difference is that when whites killed blacks, the murderers were tried in court and hanged. When blacks killed whites, what happened to the murderers?
In my lifetime I have never seen a case where Australians abused an aborigine. But I have personally experienced attacks by aborigines simply on racial grounds. On one occasion I had to call the police, who tried desperately to avoid criminal procedures, simply because aborigines were in a sense off limits. That is, the police would happily proceed against whites, but would avoid charging aborigines, a blatant case of the kind of discrimination we live with.
4 Stolen children.
What stolen children? The best cases for stolen children were tested in court, before a sympathetic judge, who was unable to find for the applicants.
Aborigines are imprisoned when found guilty of a crime. Is this an argument that only whites should go behind bars? If so it is blatantly racist. People commit crimes, they go to prison. Nothing to do with skin colour.
6 Deaths in custody.
Again, is this an argument that aborigines should not be taken into custody? If so, it is another case of racism.
7 Ongoing disadvantage.
What laws in this country disadvantage aborigines? There is much in our system which benefits aborigines. Aboriginal legal aid. Aboriginal health services.
The aboriginal industry gets $39 billion dollars a year. That is more than $40 000 for each aboriginal man, woman and child. Where is the disadvantage? I have attached a file which explains the enormous benefits given to aborigines.
There are other claims of disadvantage to aborigines:
8 Genocide.
I don't know of any accurate figure for the numbers of people inhabiting the continent in 1788. Estimates range from 100 000 to about 300 000. But in 1929 they were counted, giving a figure of just over 78 000. In 2021 their numbers amounted to 948 000. Genocide? I don't think so.
It could be argued that this land was stolen from Australians as a whole, and given to aborigines, many of whom prefer the benefits provided by Australian society.
10 Violence among aborigines.
Studying Aboriginal history at a black university, I learned that domestic violence was normal among Aborigines at the time of white settlement. Aboriginal women would go to white towns for their own safety, and then get pregnant. Because Aboriginal men had the habit of murdering mixed-race babies, the mothers naturally went to the missions, asking them to take care of their children. Not so much stolen as delivered from certain death.
This problem of domestic violence exists today, and continues unaddressed. At my own workplace, about 10 years ago, we were required to stop work. The police arrived and surrounded a group of Aborigines. They told us that an Aborigine had murdered his wife.
I have seen the claim that Aboriginal women are hospitalised at 30 times the rate of the general population.
The British settlers were Christians. They brought with them the one true God. Who would suggest that the behaviour of Christians is somehow more sinful that that of pagans? If so, this amounts to the claim that paganism is superior to Christianity. A rather strange attitude for a Christian.
12 A Witness Explains.
More than a century ago Europeans settled in the far north of Australia. One built a plantation. He describes his interaction with the local people. It demonstrates that a lot of the information we read about our history is simply false. Here is a copy of his book.
Experience has taught us that you will not get an accurate history from left-wing academics.
13 There is a lot of work that priests and bishops can do, rather than promoting ideas which divide indigenes from whites. I go to daily Mass, and I have never heard any substantial information from the pulpit on contraception, sodomy, abortion, sin, Hell, demons, modesty, the Commandments or saving souls during the last 40 years or more.
Are these topics somehow no longer applicable to Catholics in this country?
I should be grateful if Catholics could be provided with a more balanced view of the problems in our society. There are many mixed-race families, and attacks like this one serve no purpose other than to divide them. And if we could be provided with teaching which will help Catholics to save their souls.
This is the text on the front page of today's parish bulletin:The Week of Prayer for Christian Unity in Australia 21st – 28th May will be observed this week between Ascension and Pentecost with the theme “Do good; seek justice.” (Isaiah 1:17). When we stop talking and listen, we hear that the church in Australia is built on stolen land, Indigenous land, and shares in a history of racism, massacre, abuse, stolen children, imprisonment and death in custody, and ongoing disadvantage. We hear that this legacy is really ours because we have explained, justified or remained silent in the face of this reality. When we stop talking and listen, we make space to realise anew that we have acted in ways that deny the worth of some of God’s people, equally made in God’s image.” (Rev. Radhika Sukumar-White’s sermon from Day of Mourning service, 19th January 2020, Leichhardt Uniting Church). While man came to this country in their ships. With their guns the black man has no answers. They were poisoned, shot, hung and put in chains as punishment. Then along came religion, Christianity, the Bible was read at campsites by white man and later black and white. Now we walk side by side burning bridges of the past. The chains of the past are broken free through and black and white walk on equal ground through this rugged wide land. Their spirit finally free through Christianity .
The statement below in red appears in this Sunday's parish bulletin at St Eugene's in Burpengary.
I am not aware of any laws in Australia which disadvantage Aborigines. Nor have I experienced any racism toward Aborigines. On the other hand, I have been the subject of attacks more than once by Aborigines simply on the ground of my skin colour. One of these required the attendance of police, who indicated a reluctance to prosecute an Aborigine.
The Aboriginal Industry is not short of money. Please see the attached video from Alan Jones, which tells us that we spend $39 billion a year on the Aboriginal Industry. That is more than $40 000 for each man, woman and child.
Much of this continent is forbidden to Australians whose skins are white, whilst there is no part of Australia denied to Aborigines.
Studying Aboriginal history at a black university, I learned that domestic violence was normal among Aborigines at the time of white settlement. Aboriginal women would go to white towns for their own safety, and then get pregnant. Because Aboriginal men had the habit of murdering mixed-race babies, the mothers naturally went to the missions, asking them to take care of their children. Not so much stolen as delivered from certain death.
This problem of domestic violence exists today, and continues unaddressed. At my own workplace, about 10 years ago, we were required to stop work. The police arrived and surrounded a group of Aborigines. They told us that an Aborigine had murdered his wife.
I have seen the claim that Aboriginal women are hospitalised at 30 times the rate of the general population.
The biggest claimed injustice perpetrated on Aborigines is that they were the subject of genocide. I have seen no reliable population figures until 1929 when the Aboriginal population was 78 420. However, in 2021 that population had grown to 948 000. This is not anything like the genocide of Hindus in Pakistan or the Jews in Arab countries.
Australia's history shows massacres of whites by blacks, and blacks by whites. The latter seems to have resulted from the Aboriginal stealing of sheep.
The difference is that when whites killed blacks, the murderers were hanged. When blacks killed whites, there are no records of punishment of any kind.
Australia's bishops have a record of espousing social justice and matters of this world.
But I have not seen a statement on contraception, abortion, sin, Heaven and Hell, the Commandments and saving souls. Nor have I heard anything like a serious attempt to teach the Catholic faith from a Queensland pulpit.
We have introduced Christianity to this continent. But many Aborigines have yet to receive the message.
Who will teach them?
FIRST NATIONS PEOPLES:
The injustice done to First Nations peoples in this country is running sore at the heart of the nation. It is contemporary Australia’s original sin…
We need a genuinely new engagement of the Church with the First Nations peoples, especially in an Archdiocese like this where the Indigenous presence is strong. A new engagement will mean, first of all listening to indigenous voices, and believing that we can learn if we really listen.
In the past, non-indigenous Australia has struggled to believe that we could learn anything from First Nations peoples. They could learn from us, but we from them. That has to change, both in the Church and in Australia more generally. Then the listening and learning need to lead to action.
Below is a list of terrorist attacks made by Muslims against innocent non-Muslims, simply because they are not Muslims. And this is just the attacks made since the start of this year. This behaviour has continued for 1 400 years.
It would be extremely difficult to compile a similar list of attacks by Baptists, Hindus, Jehovah's Witnesses, Methodists or Catholics.
Religion of peace? Or religion of submission?
April 2023
Dear Archbishop Coleridge
The Church teaches that there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church. There are no Protestants in Heaven. No Muslims. No Hindus. No Sikhs, Buddhists or pagans.
To save souls, it would seem that God requires us to do our best to attract non-Catholics to accept the Catholic Faith.
The links below indicate that the Church is at present controlled by sodomites. Many of the articles are authored by devout Catholics, aware that they must in conscience report the truth. And they declare that sodomy the norm in the Vatican, and that it is not unknown for priests who defend Church teaching on sodomy to suffer persecution. Here is one example.
I have never heard a Queensland priest teach from the pulpit the evil nature of sodomy. Is it not one of the four sins which cry out to Heaven for vengeance?
My question is this. How can the Church attract converts when bishops allow sodomites such power in the Church? It seems to me that the sight of the ordained openly pushing sodomy must turn the stomach of any good non-Catholic.
I should be grateful for any ideas you have which would help remove these unworthy men from positions of authority.
According to the information below, it seems that sodomy is the norm in the Vatican. And perhaps elsewhere also.
If this is true, and it is no longer easy to deny, then the Church is being run by sodomites.
The question that I think the laity would like to raise is this: Why are the good bishops not speaking out against this evil in the Church, which used to cry out to Heaven for vengeance? And from the housetops?
March 2023
Most Rev Robert McGuckin Bishop of Toowoomba
Dear Bishop McGuckin
Almost 20 years ago my wife and i planned to retire at Stanthorpe, and about 15 years ago we built a house next to the town.
When I finally retired 8 years ago, we found that we could not get daily Mass at Stanthorpe, and as we greatly desire daily Mass, we felt it necessary to put off moving into our house for about 6 years. Last November we could not delay any longer, so we moved to our home in Stanthorpe.
However, the number of days without Mass meant that we have to spend part of our time staying with our daughter in a northern suburb of Brisbane.
Here are some of the difficulties we face.
1 No Mass on Saturday. Given the Fatima promises associated with the First Saturday of each month, it would seem that Saturdays would be a high priority for the Church. We have to go to Warwick, a round trip of 120 km.
2 Sometimes Fr Duran is sick, and we find out that Mass is cancelled. I believe that there are 3 priests at Warwick. Would it not be possible for one of these priests to help Fr Duran when he is not well?
3 Another reason for cancellation is that the parish priest has to go to a meeting in Toowoomba. I asked Fr Duran if he could schedule a Mass before he goes, but he advised that he must leave very early in the morning. Would it be possible to schedule meetings to a time which would allow Fr Duran to say Mass?
4 Today the parish bulletin simply says NO MASS. That is, Mass is cancelled. This bulletin was printed late last week. Would it not be possible to arrange in advance a lay-led Communion service, so that parishioners can at least receive the Blessed Sacrament?
If you have plans in hand to make Mass more available, please accept my thanks. If there is little likelihood of improvement, I should be grateful for your advice so that we can decide where we need to live.
March 2023
I have sent you on several occasions a considerable amount of material which indicates that Francis has produced Catholic teaching which is not Catholic.
There are examples in the Dubia, which have yet to be addressed by the Vatican.
In the documents provided, there is evidence which leads to the conclusion that Francis is an antipope.
There is the allegation of heresy, which has not been refuted. Among other things, Francis openly denies the teaching on Hell and the status of husbands as head of the family. He also raises the possibility of receiving the Blessed Sacrament in the state of mortal sin.
And there is the apparent illegitimacy of the conclave which elected Francis. Cardinals openly boasting of campaigning in a manner forbidden by Universi Dominici Gregis.
Any one of these would be sufficient to cast doubt on the status of Francis.
In times of doubt, it would seem to be the task of the Church to clear up contradictions and advise the faithful of exactly where the truth lies.
I should be grateful if these doubts could be addressed and cleared up.
October 2022
Dear Archbishop Porteous
In an article copied below, you are reported to have said the following: Archbishop Porteous said the statement about wives being subject to their husbands reflected the culture of the time it was written. "[St Paul] then presents a radical vision of marriage inspired by Christian belief in the equal dignity of men and women. Because he calls on husbands to sacrifice themselves for their wives as Christ sacrificed himself for the Church."
This gives the impression that submission of a wife to her husband was intended to apply only to the people of the time of St Paul. That is, it no longer has any effect.
I should be grateful if you, as appointed teacher of the Church, could give a clear answer to these questions:
Do wives need to submit to their husbands? If not, then can you point to any document issued by the Church formally renouncing this Biblical requirement, or declaring that the teaching no longer applies?
If the answer is no, then it follows that husbands no longer need to love their wives. Since the two requirements are paired, I believe that it will be necessary for both statements to be confirmed one way or the other.
Ephesians 521 Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ. 22 Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands as you do to the Lord.23 For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior.24 Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything. 25 Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her
Colossians 318 Wives, submit yourselves to your husbands, as is fitting in the Lord. 19 Husbands, love your wives and do not be harsh with them.
1 Peter 3
3 Wives, likewise, submit to your own husbands. Do this so that even if some of them refuse to believe the word, they may be won without a word by their wives’ way of life.
I believe that it is not unreasonable to divide Australian Catholics into three groups.
Group A: These suspect that something is amiss in the Vatican, but cannot put their finger on it. They are leaving this problem to the bishops in the hope that the situation will be sorted out.
Group B: These Catholics see the misdeeds of Francis and the Cardinals, but believe that everything will be all right because God would not allow the forces of darkness to take over the Vatican.
Group C: These believe that the election of Francis was not truly kosher, and that he may be some sort of heretic. This group is moving to the position that Francis is an anti-pope.
The documents below address some of the arguments that Francis is a fraud. That his election was invalid, that he appears to be a heretic, and that the 'resignation' of Benedict was not what people think it was. Any one of these three arguments could make Francis illegitimate.
The evidence for these claims is not given in great detail. Yet this evidence is massive and easily obtained on the internet.
I shall copy one of these documents in full below this email.
I should be grateful if you could either refute these arguments, demonstrating that Francis is a good and holy pope, or advise what can be done to save the souls in your care from the grave danger of following a false leader.
Most Rev Christopher Prowse Archbishop of Canberra and Goulburn
Dear Archbishop Prowse
The assignment below has been attributed to Year 9 at St Clare's College in Canberra.
It includes an exceptional number of sodomites and lesbians, far out of proportion to their numbers in actual society.
I cannot remember having heard over the last half century from the pulpit any teaching about this sin which cries out to Heaven for vengeance, and yet our politicians have just happily made it legitimate for these perverted people to 'marry' each other.
Would it not be possible for you to contact the school and point out the constant teaching of the Church? That those who commit this disgusting sin, even just once, and then die unrepentant, will suffer atrocious pain, unrelieved for all eternity.
As Catholics we are bound to believe in Hell, or cease being Catholic. Would it not be appropriate to ask the teacher or teachers responsible at St Clare's if they believe that Church teaching on sodomy has been somewhat revised, and why?
April 2022 Most Rev Christopher Prowse Archbishop of Canberra and Goulburn
Dear Archbishop Prowse
You will see from the links below that it seems that a Catholic institution has somehow invited a lesbian to address a function to be held on Catholic property, 'behind the chapel'.
How could a Catholic institution permit this? Do those who organise these events somehow think that those who live an unnatural lifestyle are suitable speakers for parents and grandparents of students?
The article below suggests that there are Australian bishops and priests who are Freemasons. I have heard this message independently from other sources over a lengthy period of time, and if this is true, then it appears that there are bishops and priests who have placed themselves outside the Church.
It is important to us as Catholics that we avoid attending Masses celebrated sacrilegiously by excommunicated priests and bishops, so I'd be grateful if you could advise how we can be sure of avoiding such Masses.
And for the good of the eternal destination of the souls of these misguided bishops and priests, is there some way they can be warned about the consequences of Freemasonry?
The document below has been available on the internet for more than 3 years, and I have not seen any attempt to refute it. It seems to suggest that bishops are unable to perform their tasks because someone, presumably in the Vatican, has information which they don't wish to be made public.
This places priests in a difficult position as regards their conscience, particularly those who believe that the vaccine is immoral, derived from the killing of unborn babies.
There is also the belief among orthodox Catholics, including priests, that the vaccines at present available have been found to seriously injure and kill healthy people, including children.
That is, since the fifth commandment requires us to take good care of our health and life, a priest might be justified in believing that taking the vaccine could place him in the state of mortal sin.
Given that those opposing the vaccine include many eminent scientists and physicians who are untainted by association with those who stand to benefit financially from selling the vaccine (such as TV channels running large numbers of lucrative government ads pushing the vaccine), it is not impossible that some priests might in good conscience be reluctant to take the vaccine.
Below I have copied some of the headlines from the last ten days. I have not included any from the mainstream media, since all those are readily available.
There are reports that cast doubt on the vaccines presently available, claiming that since the virus has not been isolated, there can be no true vaccine, unless someone has changed the definition of the word 'vaccine'.
I should be grateful if you could advise whether it is possible for a priest to reject the vaccine in good conscience.
There seems to be a general acceptance among Catholics that Islam is a religion of peace, and that any violence by Muslims against non-Muslims can be attributed to extremists and criminals rather than true believers.
Since Christians are being murdered around the world by Muslims who are simply following the dictates of Islam, it would seem just that the Church tell Catholics the truth about Islam.
Below this email I have given a list of today's headlines about Christianity and Islam. There is no equivalence to be seen. It is quite reasonable to form the view that the news about Christianity features corruption among Christians, whilst that of Islam focuses on violence. I have such daily lists going back several years and they have the same message day in and day out.
Islam does have messages of peace, but these are abrogated by the verses of violence. What matters is that Muslims who follow their faith strictly believe in that violence. Finding a true believing Muslim who rejects violence would be a real challenge.
Given that many Catholics appear to be in ignorance about the dangers of Islam, would it not be a good thing for our bishops and clergy to provide them with more accurate information?
Put another way, does the Church not teach that the teachings and practices of Islam lead to eternal damnation?
Over a frighteningly-short period of time, we have seen the legalisation of abortion, sodomite 'marriage', and euthanasia legalised. I heard very little from the pulpit about these satanic horrors and their effect on souls.
None of them could have been effected without the active compliance of MPs who claim to be Catholic. These seem to have attracted very little attention from religious leaders.
Fortunately we have a precedent where a bishop publicly confronted evil. St Ambrose of Milan kept an emperor outside the church until he did penance.
I am trying to think of a reason that an Australian bishop could not do the same with those Catholic politicians who actively oppose Catholic teaching.
It seems to me a tragedy that Muslim women openly celebrate the suicide jihad of their sons. They are proclaiming the new life of their offspring in Jannah with a large number of perpetual virgins (or raisins), which these sons have earned by violently murdering a number of innocents.
And yet, as Catholics, we know that there are no Muslims in Heaven. Not even one.
The activities of these men constitute grave sin, one which cries out to Heaven for vengeance. Those who die unrepentant of these sins spend eternity in Hell with demons for company.
Where is the warning from our bishops to Muslims who practise or support jihad?
Internet activity reveals that a substantial number of believing Catholics now doubt or openly deny the legitimacy of Francis as Pope.
I have seen no denial of the serious allegations of his claimed heresies or the alleged illegitimacy of his status. Nor have I seen any move by Francis to address the Dubia which comprehensively analyse purported doctrinal errors in Amoris Laetitia.
As time passes, more Catholics seem to be moving from doubting the legitimacy of Francis, rather toward regarding him openly as an Antipope, believing Benedict to be the true Pope. And if they are correct, this would appear to place bishops united with Francis in a difficult situation.
Given that the Dubia have gone unaddressed for more than 5 years, I believe that it is not unreasonable for Catholics to desire an explanation. It would appear that such an explanation should come from bishops.
I should be grateful if you would advise whether the questions asked in the Dubia are valid, and if so, what should be done to clarify the situation. If you can show that I have said anything uncharitable or untrue in the above I shall of course apologise.
You will see from the abbreviated list below this email that the Church appears to be overrun with sodomites. And from among sodomites we get child molesters.
The first link below lists Australian priests and religious who have molested children. Almost all of them molested boys, even though sodomites formed between one and two percent of the male population at the time the crimes were committed.
I have not heard a priest or bishop speak from the pulpit about sodomy, and I am at daily Mass. Yet no one can pretend that the problem does not exist.
My questions are three.
What on earth are sodomites doing in positions of authority in an organisation founded by God?
Where is the effort on the part of bishops to remove from positions of authority those priests and bishops who defend this poison?
Given that this sin, which directs men to eternal horror, is one which the Church classifies as a sin crying out to Heaven for vengeance, where is the outrage from those who are charged with defending the faith?
It seems that Catholics are faced with a serious problem.
Francis has issued a document which reportedly allows bishops to ban the traditional Latin Mass.
This Mass would appear protected by Quo Primum of St Pius V: “We grant in perpetuity that this Missal is hereafter freely and lawfully to be used, without any scruple of conscience or fear of incurring any penalty or censure…No one whosoever is permitted to alter this notice of Our permission, statute, ordinance, command, precept, grant, indult, declaration, will, decree, and prohibition. Should anyone dare to contravene it, let him know that he will incur the wrath of Almighty God and of the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul.”
Given that Christ told Peter that ‘Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven’ ( Matthew 16:19 ), it is difficult to avoid the argument that Francis is opposing Christ.
Below this email are two annexes. First, the reaction of Catholics to this latest document. And second, arguments which indicate serious impediments to the election of Francis.
I should be grateful for an explanation of what is the true situation, particularly in view of the great danger to souls of leaving such doubts unresolved. The question can be summarised: Is Francis Pope, or is he an Antipope?
If I have said anything inaccurate here please correct me.
2 The Election of Francis was null and void. Pope John Paul 2 issued an instruction which made conclaves invalid where canvassing or manipulation took place, and the participant cardinals excommunicated.
297. It is a matter of reaching out to everyone, of needing to help each person find his or her proper way of participating in the ecclesial community and thus to experience being touched by an “unmerited, unconditional and gratuitous” mercy. No one can be condemned for ever, because that is not the logic of the Gospel! Here I am not speaking only of the divorced and remarried, but of everyone, in whatever situation they find themselves.
4 In addition to the three points above, there are indications that the behaviour of Francis and his entourage has not been in keeping with the office he claims to occupy.
In summary, the amount of information available on the points above is extensive. So far I am not aware of any denial of the claimed facts.
July 2021
Dear Archbishop Coleridge
The biblical sentence for sodomy was death (Lev 20:13). However, there seems to be a modern view that perhaps God did not really know what He was doing when He declared His judgement.
It could be argued that sentencing sodomites to death is not unreasonable.
It gives the guilty man time and opportunity to repent, thus permitting him to achieve eternal happiness.
It deters others who might be tempted to follow the guilty in depravity.
It saves the souls of children who might be snared by these evil men, since homosexuals corrupt children (go here and count the number of Australian priests who corrupted boys).
Until fairly recently sodomy was illegal. Somehow it has become respectable, and aggressively so. That is, our society thinks it knows better than God.
On the other hand, I believe that God's ideas are not necessarily outdated. Maybe He had it right all along.
If you agree with this, is there any reason why you would feel that our bishops would be unable to promote the restoration of God's expressed choice?
Revelation 21:8 But the cowardly, the unbelieving, the vile, the murderers, the sexually immoral, those who practice magic arts, the idolaters and all liars—they will be consigned to the fiery lake of burning sulfur. This is the second death.”
Please see below my email to Archbishop Coleridge.
I have since learned that there appear to be attempts elsewhere to introduce the normalisation of the disgusting practices of sodomy into Australian Catholic schools. If it is happening in Queensland Catholic schools, there is the danger that the cancer has spread elsewhere.
The instigators do not seem content with destroying their own souls, but want to take the souls of innocent children with them into eternal darkness. Have they not read Matt 18:6?
The pains of Hell are not to be dismissed, as appears to be happening here. There is only one thing in life that matters: the state of the soul at death.
This ugliness taking over Catholic schools seems to me to present a matter which requires immediate action. Is it possible that this could be done before souls are lost?
I believe that bishops have a duty to remove instantly from Catholic schools any staff promoting sodomy. Please tell me if I am wrong here.
On Monday, 24 May 2021, 05:32:42 GMT+10, wrote:
Dear Archbishop Coleridge
I believe that the information below requires immediate action.
It is not the purpose of a Catholic school to openly promote a lifestyle of sin.
Particularly a sin so ugly and offensive as sodomy.
Please see the material below, which comes from St Patrick's Shorncliffe.
I believe that this is a matter for which Churchill would call Action This Day.
I have compiled and attached the headlines for Islam and Christianity over a period of three days. I believe that this gives an insight into the differences between the two religions.
In the Christian (left) column the main theme appears to be corruption in the Catholic Church. In the Islam (right) column, the overwhelming nature of Islam comes across as generating outrageous violence.
I have about 5 years of similar data, which would appear to reinforce the document attached.
If these headlines (which include links) are typical of the two religions, then is it not appropriate that both issues, corruption and violence, need to be addressed, and with urgency, by our bishops?
May 2021
Dear Australian Bishops
Any priest or bishop who has read Fr Malachi Martin's Windswept House would be aware of two things.
1 The list of active homosexuals uncovered among the clergy and the list of satanists overlap so significantly as to indicate almost a single group. That is, many satanists among the clergy would seem to be sodomites, and vice versa. And their power is such that satanic rites have been celebrated in the Vatican.
2 Masonic lodges exercise considerable influence over much of the higher ranks of the Church.
The question now arises, are those in the Vatican working to save souls? Or to destroy them?
Given that Francis has made cast doubt on infallible Church teaching (see Amoris Laetitia and the Dubia, which remain unanswered after more than 4 years), it is necessary to ask whether Francis is mistaken, or is he actually promoting heresy? And this leads to a further concern: is Francis part of the problem?
If the links below arouse a suspicion that all is not well, then a second question arises: What should be done, and by whom? It is my belief that the fate of many souls could rest on the answer.
It must be more than 60 years since I heard anything about contraception from the pulpit. Now it may be that priests think there are more important issues to talk about, like global warming and asylum seekers. Yet the fact remains that churches are all but empty of young people.
So it is not unreasonable to assume that Catholics are refusing to have babies at the same rate as our Protestant friends.
And each deliberate refusal, no matter the method (pills, devices or abstinence) would appear to constitute a serious offence to God, Such an offence as would land a person in Hell if unrepented.
Because our clergy never mention it any more, Catholics have somehow assumed that it's not a serious problem - if it was a problem, they feel that the priests would then be shouting it from the housetops.
It seems to me that those people who are rejecting the babies God wishes to send them are going to have a severe reminder of their error when they appear before their Divine Judge. I cannot see how the same fate might not apply to those bishops and priests who have made a decision not to raise the subject.
There is also a human dimension to refusing, or even delaying, to have children. God intends motherhood for the young, and women who delay having children might find it not so easy. This can result in going through life childless, and having no family support in old age.
I believe it is God's will that married couples have all the babies God wills to send them. Should we not be warning young couples about the need to have babies now, while they still can? And the consequences, if they don't?
Around 80 years ago there was in Germany a socialist movement, in which large industrial organisations became part of a socialist government apparatus. It was called National Socialism, or Nazism, and its supremacist activities inevitably led to war. One of its features was overt racism.
Today we have in China a movement modelled on Nazism. All large Chinese industries have a party leader at the helm. The party is overtly socialist and racist, and promotes Chinese supremacy. International conventions are defied or ignored. It bullies its neighbours and threatens anyone who dares question its authority.
Back in the Nazi era, the Church rightly called out the evils of Nazism.
So far I have not seen anyone in authority in the Church condemn this re-run of Nazism in China, which would seem to have Satan as its author and champion. I have not seen any serious condemnation of the handing over to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) the innocent Catholics of China.
In fact, there are indications that the CCP is buying influence in the Vatican.
Would it be reasonable for Cathollcs to expect their bishops to issue some statement clarifying exactly what is going on? And perhaps preparing Australians for a possible coming war?
Given that the Church teaches infallibly that there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church, and that this teaching can never be overturned (else it would not be infallible), it would seem that those who die outside the Church are damned.
This means that, unless they achieved some form of repentance before death, Christian leaders such as Luther, Calvin, Knox, Cranmer, Henry VIII and other reformers, and also non-Christians such as Muhammad, now reside in Hell.
Would it not be an act of charity to tell the followers of these leaders that they are in great danger of sharing the same fate at death? Would such advice not give them an opportunity to make provision for their eternal future?
Pope Eugene IV, in the Bull Cantate Domino, 1441, proclaimed ex cathedra: "The Most Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that none of those existing outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans, also Jews, heretics, and schismatics can ever be partakers of eternal life, but that they are to go into the eternal fire 'which was prepared for the devil and his angels' (Mt. 25:41) unless before death they are joined with Her... No one, let his almsgiving be as great as it may, no one, even if he pour out his blood for the Name of Christ can be saved unless they abide within the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church."
There is one universal Church of the faithful, outside of which no one at all can be saved. Pope Innocent III, ex cathedra, (Fourth Lateran Council, 1215).
We declare, say , define, and pronounce that it is absolutely necessary for the salvation of every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff. Pope Boniface VIII, (Unam Sanctam, 1302).
St. Irenaeus (130-202), Bishop and Martyr: "The Church is the entrance to life; all others are thieves and robbers. On this account we are bound to avoid them . . . . We hear it declared of the unbelieving and the blinded of this world that they shall not inherit the world of life which is to come . . . . Resist them in defense of the only true and life giving faith, which the Church has received from the Apostles and imparted to her sons."St. Augustine (354-430), Bishop and Doctor of the Church: "No man can find salvation except in the Catholic Church. Outside the Catholic Church one can have everything except salvation. One can have honor, one can have sacraments, one can sing alleluia, one can answer amen, one can have faith in the Name of the Father and the Son and of the Holy Ghost, and preach it too, but never can one find salvation except in the Catholic Church." St. Fulgentius (468-533), Bishop: "Most firmly hold and never doubt that not only pagans, but also Jews, all heretics, and all schismatics who finish this life outside of the Catholic Church, will go into eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels." Pope St. Gregory the Great (590-604): "The holy universal Church teaches that it is not possible to worship God truly except in Her and asserts that all who are outside of Her will not be saved." St. Francis of Assisi (1182-1226): "All who have not believed that Jesus Christ was really the Son of God are doomed. Also, all who see the Sacrament of the Body of Christ and do not believe it is really the most holy Body and Blood of the Lord . . . these also are doomed!" St. Thomas Aquinas (1226-1274), the Angelic Doctor: There is no entering into salvation outside the Catholic Church, just as in the time of the Flood there was not salvation outside the Ark, which denotes the Church." St. Louis Marie de Montfort (1673-1716): "There is no salvation outside the Catholic Church. Anyone who resists this truth perishes." St. Robert Bellarmine (1542-1621), Bishop and Doctor of the Church: "Outside the Church there is no salvation...therefore in the symbol (Apostles Creed) we join together the Church with the remission of sins: 'I believe in the Holy Catholic Church, the communion of saints, the forgiveness of sins"...For this reason the Church is compared to the Ark of Noah, because just as during the deluge, everyone perished who was not in the ark, so now those perish who are not in the Church." St. Alphonsus Maria de Liguori (1696-1787), Bishop and Doctor of the Church: "All the misfortunes of unbelievers spring from too great an attachment to the things of life. This sickness of heart weakens and darkens the understanding, and leads to eternal ruin. If they would try to heal their hearts by purging them of their vices, they would soon receive light, which would show them the necessity of joining the Catholic Church, where alone is salvation. We should constantly thank the Lord for having granted us the gift of the true Faith, by associating us with the children of the Holy Catholic Church ... How many are the infidels, heretics, and schismatics who do not enjoy the happiness of the true Faith! Earth is full of them and they are all lost!" Pope Pius XII (1939-1958): Some say they are not bound by the doctrine which teaches that the Mystical Body of Christ and the Roman Catholic Church are one and the same thing. Some reduce to a meaningless formula the necessity of belonging to the true Church in order to gain eternal salvation. Others finally belittle the reasonable character of the credibility of Christian Faith. These and like ERRORS, it is clear, have crept in among certain of our sons who are deceived by imprudent zeal for souls or by false science."
April 2021
Dear Archbishop Coleridge
If the article below is to be believed, and I have seen many others from respected writers which contain the same message, then the higher echelons of the Church are saturated with active sodomites.
Given that this evil brought God to the point of raining fire down on Sodom and its neighbours, and that it is one of four sins that cry out to Heaven for vengeance, then it would seem inappropriate for a priest, bishop or cardinal to retain any office in the Church if he professes that sodomy is somehow acceptable in Christianity.
This is a request for you and your brother bishops first to publicly denounce the utter depravity of this most disgusting sin; secondly to demonstrate from your own records that priests who molest children overwhelmingly prey on boys; and thirdly to suggest to all Australian bishops that those with homosexual inclinations are unfit to hold any position in the Church in Australia.
Fourthly, where priests or bishops indicate compromise on sodomy, to remind them that the Church must be obeyed, else the Church will be laid open to the consequences of scandal. And fifthly, to formally request the Vatican authorities to remove any cardinal, bishop or priest in the Vatican who has been credibly accused of sodomitic activity, at least until any allegations have been properly investigated.
Now I might be wrong about all this. If so, please correct me. But if this information has real substance, given that souls are at stake, I should be grateful if action could be taken in time to save those souls.
Every church I have been to in this archdiocese seems to have a roster of extraordinary ministers, which rather transforms them into something more ordinary.
Yet the Church, in her wisdom, apparently prefers that unconsecrated hands never touch the sacred Host.
It is unlikely that the whole archdiocese is full of priests too aged or sick to distribute the Blessed Sacrament, and the congregations are dreadfully small.
So it appears to me that there is an epidemic of disobedience among the clergy.
Below I have copied paragraph 11 from Inaestimabile Donum. Redemptionis Sacramentum does not disagree. If lay 'ministers' are for emergencies, then those rosters are surely predicting a regular supply of these emergencies, which some might think is a contradiction.
If I am wrong on this, please correct me. But if right, does this not leave priestly souls in great danger?
The faithful, whether religious or lay, who are authorized as extraordinary ministers of the Eucharist can distribute Communion only when there is no priest, deacon or acolyte, when the priest is impeded by illness or advanced age, or when the number of the faithful going to Communion is so large as to make the celebration of Mass excessively long.[20] Accordingly, a reprehensible attitude is shown by those priests who, though present at the celebration, refrain from distributing Communion and leave this task to the laity.
Media coverage suggests that you have spoken in favour of blessing those engaged in sodomitic 'marriage'.
It could be argued that such an act amounts to asking God to give His blessing to a sin.
Given the seriousness with which the Church treats this sin against nature, would it be appropriate to let parishioners know that these reports have failed to provide a faithful presentation of your meaning?
Below is a selection of Catholic news links for the month of March this year. This news is overwhelmingly bad, and some Catholic writers have indicated that the Catholic Church has been allowed to descend into atrophy through neglect by those appointed to defend it.
Of course, this assessment may be wrong. I'd be grateful if you could demonstrate that this news is perhaps exaggerated or misleading, and that souls are not as endangered as the links would appear to indicate.
Below is a partial list of links on the activities of Muslims for the month of March this year. So far as I can see, most of all events are in conformity with accepted Islamic practice, and no Islamic authority has denied their validity.
Unless these links are in error, then Islam cannot with honesty be considered a religion of peace, particularly as Christians are often the target of these infamous actions.
Should Catholics be warned about the danger to their souls of Muslims who practise the teachings of their religion?
Yesterday at the 6pm Mass the priest used an extraordinary minister to distribute the Host to the rear half of the church.
The priest is well below the average age for priests in this archdiocese, and is seemingly in robust health.
The congregation totalled around 60 people.
It is possible that the laws of the Church have been changed to allow this, but if not would it be considered prudent to warn the priest of the danger to his soul? This might be compounded by the public nature of the offence, which could entail an additional sin of scandal.
If the laws restricting the distribution of the Host to consecrated hands have been removed, please accept my apology.
Inaestimabile Donum 10. The faithful, whether religious or lay, who are authorized as extraordinary ministers of the Eucharist can distribute Communion only when there is no priest, deacon or acolyte, when the priest is impeded by illness or advanced age, or when the number of the faithful going to Communion is so large as to make the celebration of Mass excessively long.(20) Accordingly, a reprehensible attitude is shown by those priests who, though present at the celebration, refrain from distributing Communion and leave the task to the laity.
February 2021
At Mass this morning (Ash Wednesday) we had two priests distributing the ashes.
At Holy Communion, one priest distributed the Blessed Sacrament, along with two lay extraordinary ministers. The congregation was quite small, perhaps 100 people.
I should be grateful if you would advise whether it was a serious matter (ie mortally sinful) for the second priest to leave distribution of the Blessed Sacrament to the laity.
Inaestimabile Donum
10. The faithful, whether religious or lay, who are authorized as extraordinary ministers of the Eucharist can distribute Communion only when there is no priest, deacon or acolyte, when the priest is impeded by illness or advanced age, or when the number of the faithful going to Communion is so large as to make the celebration of Mass excessively long.(20) Accordingly, a reprehensible attitude is shown by those priests who, though present at the celebration, refrain from distributing Communion and leave the task to the laity.
November 2020
Dear US Bishops
Below is a comment from Bishop Stika, calling a fellow-Catholic a 'nut'.
No justifying explanation of the behaviour of Dr Taylor appears evident.
Also below is a quotation from Matthew 5:22.
If indeed Bishop Stika made this unworthy comment, should he not be informed of the consequences?
Matthew 5:22. But I tell you that anyone who is angry with a brother or sister will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to a brother or sister, 'Raca,' is answerable to the court. And anyone who says, 'You fool!' will be in danger of the fire of hell.
The laity is quite baffled by what they see as a reluctance to face reality. Where is the condemnation of the position of 'Catholic' Joe Biden on Catholic teachings such as abortion?
Could I suggest a formal statement clarifying the matter for US Catholics? Please tell me if I have said anything incorrect in the statement below.
PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE JOE BIDEN DIFFERS FROM CATHOLIC TEACHING ON ABORTION. IF HE MAINTAINS THIS POSITION UNTIL DEATH HE FACES ETERNAL DAMNATION.
SINCE HE PLACES HIMSELF OPPOSED TO THE CHURCH ON THIS AND PERHAPS OTHER MATTERS, ANY PRIEST KNOWINGLY ADMINISTERING TO HIM THE BLESSED SACRAMENT COMMITS A GRAVE OFFENCE AGAINST THE EUCHARIST.
THE US BISHOPS HEREBY DECLARE THAT SINCE MR BIDEN'S OPPOSITION TO CATHOLIC TEACHING ON ABORTION HAS BEEN MAINTAINED OVER A PERIOD OF TIME, MR BIDEN HAS PLACED HIMSELF OUTSIDE THE CATHOLIC CHURCH, AND IS NOT ENTITLED TO CLAIM MEMBERSHIP OF THE CHURCH.
July 2020
Most Rev Mark Coleridge Archbishop of Brisbane
Dear Archbishop Coleridge
Among orthodox Catholics there is a debate as to whether Pope Francis is really Pope, and the consensus appears to be moving toward the negative.
Here are some of the reasons (I shall limit references to one or two, since they are easily found):
1 The Church says that any canvassing at a conclave renders the participants excommunicated and the election null and void.
2 It appears that Pope Benedict attempted to bifurcate the papacy, a situation never anticipated at the appointment of Peter, and apparently without support from Church teaching.
There are also arguments concerning alleged 'deliberate' errors in the 'resignation'.
3 Francis has been promoting heresy, such as his claim that an eternal Hell does not exist, and that the Church teaches that capital punishment is against the will of God. There is also confusion about whether those living in the state of mortal sin are able to receive the Blessed Sacrament without offending God.
2 It appears that Pope Benedict attempted to bifurcate the papacy, a situation never anticipated at the appointment of Peter, and apparently without support from Church teaching.
There are also arguments concerning alleged 'deliberate' errors in the 'resignation'.
3 Francis has been promoting heresy, such as his claim that an eternal Hell does not exist, and that the Church teaches that capital punishment is against the will of God. There is also confusion about whether those living in the state of mortal sin are able to receive the Blessed Sacrament without offending God.
5 The terms reportedly used by Francis to attack others are in my view unworthy of a Christian.
http://popefrancisbookofinsults.blogspot.com/
The above is a tiny sample of what is available. If desired I can provide references to many similar pages.
What I believe Catholics need is a firm statement. Is Francis Pope, or does that office remain with Benedict?
February 2020
Most Rev Mark Coleridge GPO Box 282, Brisbane, Queensland 4001
Dear Archbishop Coleridge
This letter seeks to defend morals at St Eugene College in Burpengary.
The principal has installed same-sex (unisex) toilets at the college.
This enables the mingling of boys and girls at the entrance to cubicles, which in my view facilitates sexual activity, particularly when supervision is directed elsewhere.
The excuse given is pathetic. Apparently a boy stabbed someone in a toilet 20 years ago. It seems that if that same boy turned up at today's unisex toilets, his reaction would be "Curses, foiled by same sex toilets." And he would go away disappointed. Silly, isn't it? But for this we have much expense and angry parents.
The principal claimed that they were for Year 3 and Year 4 only, but there is no barrier to entry by others.
There could come a time when a parent whose daughter became pregnant as a result of the lack of protection might take legal action against all those in authority who failed to prevent sinful activity there. It is not impossible that these toilets could eventually be used for transexual children.
Finally, since this situation enables or facilitates illicit sexual activity on the part of children, it cannot be from God. This means that those Catholic authorities who have thrown their support behind these facilities, may be working against the will of God.
If my assumptions are wrong, please tell me. If not, then what is to be done?
November 2019
Dear Archbishop Coleridge
It seems to me that the enormous problems inflicted on the Church during the time of Francis must now be accepted as beyond doubt.
Here is a small sample of articles which describe some of the dangers to souls.
If there is substance in what these writers have said, then is it possible that souls have already been and are still being lost by the lack of action on the part of bishops? Who would wish this to continue?
Below is a document which claims to set out a course of action which can be taken by bishops who wish to prevent any further harm to the souls in their care.
I should be grateful if you could advise me whether my assessment is reasonable. And if so, what are our bishops going to do?
There is no doubt in the minds of significant numbers of believing Catholics that simple logic indicates that Cardinal Pell is innocent of the crimes for which he is imprisoned. In this they are supported by one of the three appeal judges.
It seems to many that we owe a debt of gratitude to our non-Catholic Christian brethren for their great efforts in his defence.
Why are our bishops luke-warm in, or absent from, his defence? Do they believe him guilty?
All this has happened since the 'survey' on same-sex 'marriage' was translated into law by a triumphant parliament under Malcolm Turnbull.
And without any substantial opposition from Australian bishops.
Yet there are Christians who hold the view that bishops might be expected to form the first line of defence against the forces of darkness.
Is it possible that this lack of real opposition to institutionalising sodomy has not only allowed the sodomites an easy victory, but prepared the ground for the next assault on Christian teaching?
It would seem that this battle has been lost. Does that excuse Christians from continuing the fight? Who knows, we might one day win. Certainly, those lay men and women who oppose abortion have not given up.
Is there a plan for bishops to finally enter the fray and reverse this travesty?
If I have said anything untrue or unfair, please tell me and I shall apologise.
Below please find information revealed by Sr Agnes Sasagawa of Akita, Japan, advising that the world is to be visited by a chastisement from Heaven.
Given the amount of evil in the world, particularly in Australia at present, such a punishment cannot be ruled out.
I do not believe that the coming events can be stopped. But perhaps mitigated through prayer.
Also on this web page is a list of saints who provided similar prophecies, and whose prophecies seem to concur with those of Sr Agnes. Below that is given a list of purported mystics whose prophecies do not have approval.
Given the agreement among these holy individuals, and the dreadful state of society, along with the disgusting activities in the Vatican, should we now be preparing ourselves for the coming events?
It is appropriate at this time to recall, and in prayer reflect on, the words of St. Francis of Assisi, provided in the book “Works of the Seraphic Father St. Francis of Assisi,” which on page 248 begins: “A short time before the holy Father’s death, he called together his Children and warned them of the coming troubles, saying: ‘Act bravely, my Brethren; take courage, and trust in the Lord. The time is fast approaching in which there will be great trials and afflictions; perplexities and dissensions, both spiritual and temporal, will abound; the charity of many will grow cold, and the malice of the wicked will increase. The devils will have unusual power, the immaculate purity of our Order, and of others, will be so much obscured that there will be very few Christians who will obey the true Sovereign Pontiff’ and the Roman Church with loyal hearts and perfect charity. At the time of this tribulation a man, not canonically elected, will be raised to the Pontificate, who, by his cunning, will endeavour 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, that, except those days were shortened, according to the words of the· Gospel, even the elect would be led into error, were they not specially guided, amid such great confusion, by the immense mercy of God. Then our Rule and manner of life will be violently opposed by some, and terrible trials will come upon us. Those who are found faithful will receive the crown of life; but woe to those who, trusting solely in their Order, shall fall into tepidity, for they will not be able to support the temptations permitted for the proving or the elect. Those who preserve their fervour 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 be the refuge of the afflicted, and will save all who trust in Him. And in order to be like their Head, these, the elect, will act with confidence, and by their death will purchase for themselves eternal life; choosing to obey God rather than man, they will fear nothing, and they will ·prefer to perish 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 Our Lord Jesus Christ will send them not a true Pastor, but a destroyer.” This book was published in 1882 with the Imprimatur issued by the Most Reverend William Bernard, Archbishop of Birmingham United Kingdom.
October 2019
Dear Archbishop Coleridge
Until now criticism of the behaviour of Pope Francis has been limited largely to Catholic laymen, although these have been knowledgeable Catholics of good reputation.
Now an active bishop, Bishop Athanasius Schneider, has identified idolatry among the issues associated with Francis.
Others have noted the attempt to introduce female clergy via deaconesses, impossible under formal Catholic teaching.
The danger here being that since the Church teaches infallibly that valid ordination is confined to males, any attempt to negate this teaching is false since it would seek to 'prove' that the Church is no longer infallible.
Proceeding to 'ordain' a female would result in excommunication of those involved. But what about those promoting the idea of women priests? Are they not also subject to excommunication?
How is it that so many Catholics, in the face of formal Catholic teaching, somehow think that females can be ordained? What is being taught in Catholic schools? And seminaries?
Why are Australian bishops silent on what is reported to be open idolatry and the pushing of what seem to be anti-Catholic concepts?
Do ordinary Australian Catholics have the right to know where the truth lies?
There is a strong impression here and overseas (see comments below) that this archdiocese sees no real difficulty with the sin of sodomy.
Substantial opposition to sodomy exists among Catholics, but apparently not so much among those involved in the synod. Yet sodomy is one of those sins crying out to Heaven for vengeance.
What will happen if the synod recommends 'blessing ceremonies' for those engaged in sodomitic relationships?
In the document below, Michael Voris is claiming that cardinals and bishops are stealing, embezzling and misusing millions of dollars donated by lay Catholics.
He makes the point that the authorities in Rome and their adherents are outraged at the 'theft' of idols from a Catholic church, but their outrage stops short of concern about the theft of billions of dollars in cash and kind. It seems that the police have not yet been notified.
So far I have seen no attempt to deny the criminal activity. Just silence.
If these allegations have any grounding in fact, then from a layman's point of view it would seem that any collection money sent to Rome may not achieve what the giver intends.
Can you advise what Australian bishops are doing about safeguarding the hard-earned money of the laity from theft?
The links below form a sample of headlines which indicate a dysfunctional Vatican, claimed to be run and staffed overwhelmingly by sodomites.
One group has claimed that about 60% of Vatican staff are sodomites. They are the moderates. Others claim that the percentage is closer to 90%.
Neither is acceptable.
These stories below, to which I have so far seen no denial, seem to suggest that the Church structure and authority have fallen into the hands of evildoers.
There are reports which suggest that Cardinal Pell was falsely charged so that Vatican funds could be safely looted, with up to a billion dollars unaccounted-for. Here is a small sample of the links on this subject.
Mr Bernard Gaynor has produced the letter below, detailing proposals for the discussion of the legitimisation of the following topics at the Plenary Council.
Female ordination
An end to priestly celibacy
Communion for all
Contraception
Divorce
Euthanasia
Homosexuality
I have so far heard nothing of outrage from Australian bishops at these ideas.
1 Female ordination is impossible, and anyone who attempts it is automatically excommunicated. Without a return to the Church, Hell becomes the destiny for those who follow this path. Why would our bishops want Catholics to go to Hell?
2 Priestly celibacy is not an issue. There are married priests in many countries. It's just that the bishops and popes of earlier centuries deemed it unwise. Are our bishops somehow able to see more clearly than their predecessors?
Sunday Mass at my parish brings about 4% of Catholics to Mass. Those predecessor bishops of the mid-twentieth century managed to attract more than 80%.
3 Communion for all means giving the Blessed Sacrament to those in the state of mortal sin. It would be a courageous bishop who allowed such an insult to the Divine Majesty. How can this not lead to Hell? And why would bishops want this to happen?
4 Contraception means removing the reproductive element from marriage. That is, marriage without children, and our present catastrophic birthrate. Once the marriage union is limited to recreation without procreation, you open the door to other evils, and sex becomes solely recreational: how can you then argue against bestiality, sodomy etc?
5 Divorce is not the problem. It's the attempt to remarry after divorce. Again, once the door of serial remarriage is opened, where is the defence against polygamy? And what happens to the children? How would this idea appeal to a God Who says that marriage is for life?
6 Euthanasia places man above God. Where God gives life, and takes it in His own time, those who promote euthanasia believe that they know better than God, or that somehow God occasionally gets things wrong.
In a Euthanasian society, those who find themselves on an operating table might well be concerned about whether their lives are considered by medical staff to be of less value than their kidneys.
7 The defence of marriage during the recent debate on 'gay marriage' was on the negative side of feeble. I heard no bishop make the point that sodomites who die unrepentant spend eternity in torment perhaps more intense that that of other sinners.
The evil of sodomy is that it always involves two people, whereas other sins are often restricted to just one. How could a bishop even countenance any discussion of a promotion of an evil that cries out to Heaven for vengeance?
My questions are simple.
1 Why are these sins up for discussion?
2 Why have they not been dismissed as forbidden topics, and the promoters required to learn the faith?
3 One might also ask the question of whether these ideas were generated or supported by professional Catholics. And if so, what is to be done.
4 What benefit would the legitimisation of these evils bring to the salvation of souls?
5 Bishops, like the rest of us, face judgement at the end of their lives. The difference is that the judgement of a bishop is considerably more exacting. Why would a bishop wish to jeopardise his eternal fate by failing to teach the truth about the list above?
6 The ideas listed above are an indication that the proposers somehow know better than God does. Does this not indicate a lack of humility?
7 No one talks about Hell any more. Even Pope Francis tells us that eternal punishment is not the logic of the gospel. A promotion of the list above suggests a disbelief in eternal consequences for sin. Has the concept of Hell now been abrogated?
8 For those who believe that teaching about Hell would cause unnecessary fear, the Church believes that in 1917 Our Blessed Mother showed Hell very graphically to a seven-year-old girl. Was she wrong in doing so?
If I have said anything unfair or incorrect, please advise me.
The information below conforms with that of many other Catholic writers, whose knowledge and honesty I have respected over a period of some years.
The author believes it is time for senior members of the Church to take action to remedy what appears to be a grave situation in the Church, where Satan would seem to be in almost complete control of the management of the Church throughout the world.
It is my belief that God demands and expects swift and determined action, from faithful cardinals and bishops.
Of course, the writer could be wrong. I should be grateful if you could explain his error.
In the article below, it is claimed that the Archdiocese is promoting the concept of 'blessings' for people committing to a life of sodomy. That is, it pushes the idea of a form of sodomitic 'marriage'.
That such a revolting idea can be put forward without a strong reaction from those present does not bode well for the faith in this archdiocese.
After all, the concept of blessing a sin crying out to Heaven for vengeance can come only from Satan.
If there had been a proposal to reintroduce slavery, what would have been the reaction? Yet is sodomy not every bit as evil as slavery?
This proposal needs to be publicly and vigorously opposed by the archdiocese. If not, it suggests in the minds of people that sodomy is being considered for approval, an idea repellent to Catholic teaching, and repellent also to God.
Has error somehow acquired rights.
Just ten years ago your predecessor removed a priest for doing exactly what is here proposed.
I should be grateful if this idea could be publicly removed from consideration.
Of course, if the news item below is incorrect, please accept my apology.
Brisbane Archdiocese Promotes Blessings for Gay Couples
JNow it is quite possible that this photo was taken before Bishop Mackinlay became a priest.
But if not, it would have been better had this photo not been given to the media, since public disobedience on the part of clerics amounts to what used to be called the sin of scandal: against the fifth commandment, since it was regarded until recently as the 'murder of souls'.
Can. 284 Clerics are to wear suitable ecclesiastical garb according to the norms issued by the conference of bishops and according to legitimate local customs.
Of course, if this rule has since been abrogated, please let me know.
This nun, who does not seem to approve the wearing of the habit, has for a number of years pushed ideas opposed to Catholic teaching, such as the heresy of women priests.
You will note that she is supported by Fr James Martin, who has somehow compared her to saints who at no time rejected the Church's teaching. The comments are quite revealing.
There cannot be many daily Massgoers who have not seen the Blessed Sacrament profaned as a result of Communion in the hand.
It makes it easy to take a Host away for satanic rituals, and Catholic children at school Masses who have no belief in the Real Presence might occasionally take a Host to play with back in their seats.
Teachers may not notice, or they may actually go on the offensive against a parishioner who tries to put a stop to this sacrilege.
This is almost unknown where Communion takes place on the tongue, the practice of the Church for many centuries.
In the time of Pope Paul VI, and perhaps earlier, priests in the Low Countries were reported to be experimenting with liturgical innovations. That is, it would seem that they were creating their own variations on the rubrics, in disobedience to the discipline of the Church.
Pope Paul tried to put a stop to this (see Memoriale Domini, which I have copied in entirety below, marking the relevant parts). Having failed, he permitted it on application to Rome. Shortly after, churches in the Western World (particularly in the Netherlands) began to empty. Coincidence?
These changes came about not through the Holy Spirit, but through disobedience. The author of disobedience is not the Holy Spirit (that would be blasphemy). The alternative is that the true author of this practice is Satan, who stands to gain souls wherever there is disobedience, irreverence and sacrilege.
I understand that at present, Communion on the tongue is the Ordinary method. In the hand, the extraordinary. But I have never seen any Queensland first communicants taught the Ordinary method. Priests invariably order them to put out their hands.
I have heard priests condemn Communion on the tongue, giving all sorts of fairy floss in place of logic. In each case, the priests exhibited inventiveness in other areas also.
Since it would appear that Communion in the hand is desired by Satan, then logically it is offensive to God.
Thus it follows that a decision to continue with this practice is, on the face of things, likely to offend God. Sir Humphrey Appleby might call such a decision 'courageous'.
Of course, I could be wrong. Can you advise of any benefit to the eternal destiny of souls stemming from Communion in the hand?
Almost three years has elapsed since four cardinals wrote to the Pope asking him to explain the reason Amoris Laetitia disagrees with Church teaching.
I am yet to hear of a reply. So Catholics are left wondering if the Church is no longer infallible.
I have listed four apparent heresies below. I do not believe that God wishes His people to be left in doubt about the meaning of the teachings of His Church.
I should be grateful for an explanation of how they may be reconciled with divine law and Catholic teaching.
1 Amoris Laetitia 83. Here I feel it urgent to state that, if the family is the sanctuary of life, the place where life is conceived and cared for, it is a horrendous contradiction when it becomes a place where life is rejected and destroyed. So great is the value of a human life, and so inalienable the right to life of an innocent child growing in the mother’s womb, that no alleged right to one’s own body can justify a decision to terminate that life, which is an end in itself and which can never be considered the “property” of another human being. The family protects human life in all its stages, including its last. Consequently, “those who work in healthcare facilities are reminded of the moral duty of conscientious objection. Similarly, the Church not only feels the urgency to assert the right to a natural death, without aggressive treatment and euthanasia”, but likewise “firmly rejects the death penalty”.93
The Church says: Gen. 9:63: “Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed; for God made man in his own image.” Lev 20:1 The Lord said to Moses, 2 “Say to the Israelites: ‘Any Israelite or any foreigner residing in Israel who sacrifices any of his children to Molek is to be put to death. The members of the community are to stone him. 20:9 “‘Anyone who curses their father or mother is to be put to death. 20:10 “‘If a man commits adultery with another man’s wife—with the wife of his neighbor—both the adulterer and the adulteress are to be put to death. 20:11 “‘If a man has sexual relations with his father’s wife, he has dishonored his father. Both the man and the woman are to be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads. 20:12 “‘If a man has sexual relations with his daughter-in-law, both of them are to be put to death. There are many passages like this in Leviticus. Who will accuse God of being somehow in error? The same for Deuteronomy 13:20-21. Matt 15:4 and Mark 7:10 sentence men to death for cursing parents, so it's not confined to the Old Testament. Rom 13:4 and Heb 10:28 say quite clearly that authorities have the power of the death sentence.
2 Amoris Laetitia 156. Every form of sexual submission must be clearly rejected. This includes all improper interpretations of the passage in the Letter to the Ephesians where Paul tells women to “be subject to your husbands” (Eph 5:22). This passage mirrors the cultural categories of the time, but our concern is not with its cultural matrix but with the revealed message that it conveys. As Saint John Paul II wisely observed: “Love excludes every kind of subjection whereby the wife might become a servant or a slave of the husband… The community or unity which they should establish through marriage is constituted by a reciprocal donation of self, which is also a mutual subjection”.162 Hence Paul goes on to say that “husbands should love their wives as their own bodies” (Eph 5:28). The biblical text is actually concerned with encouraging everyone to overcome a complacent individualism and to be constantly mindful of others: “Be subject to one another” (Eph 5:21). In marriage, this reciprocal “submission” takes on a special meaning, and is seen as a freely chosen mutual belonging marked by fidelity, respect and care. Sexuality is inseparably at the service of this conjugal friendship, for it is meant to aid the fulfilment of the other.
The Church says: Gen 3:16: To the woman he said, "I will make your pains in childbearing very severe; with painful labour you will give birth to children. Your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you." Eph. 5:24: “As the Church is subject to Christ, so also let wives be to their husbands in all things.” 1 Cor. 11:3 But I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man, and the head of Christ is God. Col. 3:18 Wives, submit yourselves to your husbands, as is fitting in the LORD. Tit 2:3-5 Likewise, teach the older women to be reverent in the way they live, not to be slanderers or addicted to much wine, but to teach what is good. 4Then they can urge the younger women to love their husbands and children, 5to be self-controlled and pure, to be busy at home, to be kind, and to be subject to their husbands, so that no one will malign the word of God. 1 Pet. 3:1-5 Wives, in the same way submit yourselves to your own husbands so that, if any of them do not believe the word, they may be won over without words by the behaviour of their wives, 2when they see the purity and reverence of your lives. 3Your beauty should not come from outward adornment, such as elaborate hairstyles and the wearing of gold jewellery or fine clothes. 4Rather, it should be that of your inner self, the unfading beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, which is of great worth in God's sight. 5For this is the way the holy women of the past who put their hope in God used to adorn themselves. They submitted themselves to their own husbands.
3 Amoris Laetitia 159. Virginity is a form of love. As a sign, it speaks to us of the coming of the Kingdom and the need for complete devotion to the cause of the Gospel (cf. 1 Cor 7:32). It is also a reflection of the fullness of heaven, where “they neither marry not are given in marriage” (Mt 22:30). Saint Paul recommended virginity because he expected Jesus’ imminent return and he wanted everyone to concentrate only on spreading the Gospel: “the appointed time has grown very short” (1 Cor 7:29). Nonetheless, he made it clear that this was his personal opinion and preference (cf. 1 Cor 7:6-9), not something demanded by Christ: “I have no command in the Lord” (1 Cor 7:25). All the same, he recognized the value of the different callings: “Each has his or her own special gift from God, one of one kind and one of another” (1 Cor 7:7). Reflecting on this, Saint John Paul II noted that the biblical texts “give no reason to assert the ‘inferiority’ of marriage, nor the ‘superiority’ of virginity or celibacy”166 based on sexual abstinence. Rather than speak absolutely of the superiority of virginity, it should be enough to point out that the different states of life complement one another, and consequently that some can be more perfect in one way and others in another. Alexander of Hales, for example, stated that in one sense marriage may be considered superior to the other sacraments, inasmuch as it symbolizes the great reality of “Christ’s union with the Church, or the union of his divine and human natures”.
The Church says: Council of Trent, 24:10: “If anyone says that the married state surpasses that of virginity or celibacy, and that it is not better and more blessed to remain in virginity or celibacy than to be united in matrimony, let him be anathema”. 1 Cor7:38 So then, he who marries the virgin does right, but he who does not marry her does better. Pius XII Sacra virginitas, (1954): 45. In the first place, it must be clearly stated that because virginity should be esteemed as something more perfect than marriage, it does not follow that it is necessary for Christian perfection. Optatam totius 10: Students ought rightly to acknowledge the duties and dignity of Christian matrimony, which is a sign of the love between Christ and the Church. Let them recognize, however, the surpassing excellence of virginity consecrated to Christ, so that with a maturely deliberate and generous choice they may consecrate themselves to the Lord by a complete gift of body and soul.
4 Amoris Laetitia 297. It is a matter of reaching out to everyone, of needing to help each person find his or her proper way of participating in the ecclesial community and thus to experience being touched by an “unmerited, unconditional and gratuitous” mercy. No one can be condemned for ever, because that is not the logic of the Gospel! Here I am not speaking only of the divorced and remarried, but of everyone, in whatever situation they find themselves. Naturally, if someone flaunts an objective sin as if it were part of the Christian ideal, or wants to impose something other than what the Church teaches, he or she can in no way presu
