Latin Mass for the Sacred Heart of Jesus

Latin Mass for the Sacred Heart of Jesus
It's worth the drive to Port Perry

Latin Mass in Toronto for St. John the Baptist

Latin Mass in Toronto for St. John the Baptist

Friday, 7 October 2016

Congratulations to you Pope Francis, you are leading souls to Hell!

Buenos Aires? Done.

Alberta and Northwest Territories of Canada? No!

Rome? Done.

Now, it will be all of Germany.

This is what we warned about. The devolution of the Holy Catholic Church. The turning of it into a congregationalist reality. Kasper said it at the first synod. Bergoglio echoed it last year. It is an attack on the Holy Eucharist, the Sacrament of Penance and the Sacrament of Holy Matrimony, all at once. It is heresy. It is from the pit of Hell and it was brought to you by Jorge Bergoglio. Imagine that, eh?

Stephan Burger, the Archbishop of Freiburg, expects a document of the German Bishops concerning marriage and the family and concerning the Church’s dealing with the remarried divorcees. The Bishops’ Conference has seen it as its task to pick up on Pope Francis’ recent explanations and to make them more concrete, said Burger to the Diocesan newspaper Konradsblatt in Karlsruhe. More importantly, Burger says that Pope Francis himself wants to allow Communion for the “remarried,” as Katholisch.de also reports:
An essential point of the papal document concerning marriage and the family (Amoris Laetitia) is, in the eyes of Burger, that Francis himself wants to make free the path for the remarried to receive Holy Communion. This is, in individual cases, possible after an ‘in-depth examination and formation of conscience and after a pastoral accompaniment.’
The Archbishop stressed that ‘life is too complicated in order to have at hand a clear and unequivocal solution for everybody and everything.’

Image result


This Bishop of Rome friends, in promulgating Amoris Laetitia, has sanctioned eucharistic sacrilege which will lead souls to Hell. He is fomenting error and heresy, he will cause a schism. But that schism must not come from you and I, faithful Catholic. No, we do not leave our Church. We do not abandon Our Lord at Calvary. We stay with him until we beat these malefactors out with whips.

We will not leave the Holy Catholic Church, the true Faith. We will denounce any Pope, any Bishop, any priest, we will do it publically, we will denounce them, we will renounce them. 

We will not renounce Christ and His Truth. 

Will my old commenter, "Mark Thomas" come back to spin this? Come on Mark, defend this Bergoglio! Come, defend him and his false, "god of surprises." 

Bishops and Cardinals, how much longer can you deny what is so blatantly obvious?


25 comments:

DJR said...

Many people don't seem to grasp what is being stated here, at least implicitly.

The people involved in these situations are always going to be in invalid marriages on the second go-round, even if the first marriage were invalid, because the second marriage is contracted outside the Church and lacks validity due to lack of form.

They would not have to get married civilly a second time if the first marriage is annulled; they could just marry in the Church.

But the fact that they truly believe the first marriage to be invalid does not somehow validate the second one, which was contracted outside the Church. Rather, the second marriage would be invalid also.

And if a person in an invalid second marriage can receive Holy Communion despite that fact, why could a person who is in a first invalid marriage not do so?

In other words, what has happened is that the proponents of this are implying that a valid sacrament of matrimony is not necessary for a Catholic in order to engage in a conjugal relationship, and he can, in good conscience, receive Holy Communion while doing so, regardless of whether that marriage is a first invalid marriage or a second invalid marriage.

This is a very grave departure from the teachings of the Church.

Dorota Mosiewicz-Patalas said...

Remember "bishop" Tony Palmer, friend and ambassador of Bergoglio, remember Copeland's event, where in front of thousands of protestant preachers Palmer played that video of the pope, and where all agreed that the protest had been over for years now?

This project, the fake unity, and not the Catholic faith or the Catholic family, are Bergoglio's true love. I am certain that all these religious leaders Bergoglio is always busy... encountering (sometimes he states: Our meeting is the message), were promised things. For example, how can there be unity with Anglicans, without communion for the divorced? Or unity with Lutherans, if Luther were to be considered a heretic rather than a hero? There is this woman here in Canada, Greta Vosper, a minister of the United Church, who is an atheist. How can there be unity with Greta, if rejecting Jesus Christ were to land her in hell or out of a job as Christ's minister? How can there be unity with Islam, if we were unwilling to tuck the cross under our innocent white garb, or let it proclaim Allah's victory in the Vatican?

The synods, homilies, plane interviews, are all serving one purpose - a fake unity, a denial of Christ. Bergoglio does not serve Jesus Christ. He is a duplicitous snake.

Fred said...

Two points. 1) If one particular mortal sin doesn't keep me from receiving Holy Communion, then NO mortal sins can keep me away. And Catholic morality is dissolved.
2) Is there any talk about Holy Communion for those using artificial birth control? No, because in effect the Church has surrendered on that issue already.

Ana Milan said...

Another one of PF's invitees to the Synod of the LGBT Family. One remembers his twenty-two page letter prior to the opening of the Synod which provided a heads-up as to what was to come. Everything to date has been played out according to the Word of PF, NOT according to the Word of God, yet our esteemed Cardinals Burke, Sarah, Pell & Bishops Schneider, Gadecki, Lenga etc. have not collectively stood out against these prelates & accused them of taking Christ out of the word Christian in conformity with the wishes of Soros's NWO.

While Cardinal Burke did say to disregard AL there has been no follow-up. Did he personally write a letter to priests stating unequivocally that they must ignore this Papal Exhortation? Did any of them insist that Catholics must put Christ before PF & his cronies? Did any of them complain at being publicly ignored by a sitting Pontiff, pointing out the damage this causes, & did any of them intervene publicly on behalf of those academics who have been threatened for having the temerity of requesting clarification of the Papal Exhortation Amoris Laetitia? I haven't heard so, yet these signatories put their own livelihoods & welfare of their families on the line for Truth. Cardinals & Bishops don't have wives & families to support. Their only task in life is to uphold the Deposit of Faith, Magisterium of the CC & pass on the True Faith as the Apostles were instructed to do & which for nigh two thousand years Popes & Hierarchies of the CC have done. Jesus never promised a comfortable life to those who followed Him - He did promise life everlasting & that He would be with His Church until the end of time.

To all silent prelates: please get up off your padded armchairs & call PF for what he is - an Apostate Pope & then please find a way to rid us of him. You put him on the Seat of Peter, now you must get him off it.

Michael Dowd said...

Easy to understand the Pope's "thinking".
---All religions are valid and can get you to heaven.
---Nearly everyone goes to heaven.
---Catholic doctrinal moral goals are merely ideals.
---Mercy is extended to everyone regardless of the behavior or their lack or repentance. "Christ would want it that way if he were here in our modern age."
---Then it would seem to follow that the many Catholic pettifogging rules about marriage and sexual conduct in general are not only antiquated but totally lacking in Mercy.
---Accordingly, it seems both charitable and practical to abrogate all the so called doctrinal rules concerning marriage and sexual conduct in general.

Leah said...

I would like to make 2 comments on this remarriage business:
1. "Because of the hardness of your heart Moses permitted..." Isn't that where we are again today. Except today we can add ... because of the lack of any catechesis in church, in the home, at school. So divorce and remarriage is being permitted again as in Moses' time.

2. Had Pope John Paul I lived, who was an ultra liberal, a lot of these changes would have been inaugurated a long time ago. He was the smiling Pope who would have had a catechesis to go along with it.

Just a thought.

Anonymous said...

Leah has a point.

Divorce was permitted in Moses' time and Christ himself made an exception: "And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for adultery..."

The Catholic Church has spent an awful lot of time explaining that Christ's plain words in that passage don't mean what's there in plain black and white print.

And let's face it. The Catholic Church does permit divorce. They just call it annulment. You can't get an annulment unless you get a divorce first. And the grounds for annulment are pretty flimsy BS or psychobabble. Unless someone put a gun to your head and made you marry someone else or that someone else is your sister, annulment is a fraud to rationalize a divorce by saying there was no marriage to begin with. (On a side note, I'd love to see the figures for annulment of unions that haven't been consummated. I'll bet it's a big fat zero in North America. People might have psychic immaturities but they all have the presence of mind to engage in the horizontal hoochie).The disingenuousness of the annulment process parallels the underhandedness you are condemning in Amoris Laeticia.

If you've made vows to someone twice, three times, whatever, I'm sorry but you've been divorced and remarried and no nullity declaration changes that fact. The same types of people who make those annulment determinations are the same types of people who are behind Amoris Laeticia. If you don't like the tortured reasoning behind AL, you shouldn't like the tortured reasoning behind annulment.

If you ask me, the Catholic Church would be better served and call a spade a spade (i.e. A divorce a divorce instead of the "you really weren't married" annulment fantasy)and accept that people have flaws and have the hardness of heart that even Christ himself acknowledged.

Vox Cantoris said...

Except that the Church has the power to "bind and loose." Correct?

Decrees of Nullity to declare that which never was are completely legitimate. The issue is, how is it applied?

Are you suggesting that there are no valid annulments?

Would it scandalise you to know that this writer, Vox Cantoris, has a Decree of Nullity based on Defect in Canonical Form?

And don't even think of suggesting that I am a hypocrite or an adulterer.

Some have gone there and have regretted it.


Maudie N Mandeville said...

The novus ordo leads souls to Hell.

Dan said...

With all this complexity making it so hard to decide what is good or evil, we'll all be "who am I to judge" before long....

Just doesn't leave much desire too abandon activities which no one is capable of judging..

Anonymous said...

You're not an adulterer. You're divorced and assumedly married again. To get your decree of nullity you had to first get a divorce decree, no? People who aren't married don't get divorced. Personally, I don't think it's a big deal even if you didn't have a decree of nullity. So no, I don't think you're a hypocrite, I just think you place too much value on nullity decrees.

If "that which never was" never was, you shouldn't need a divorce decree to start the process to say so. The Catholic Church can fix that too btw. Radical sanation. But people don't ask for that because they're at a point where they don't want to live together anymore. They want to divorce.

I bet you and your former spouse didn't say,"My goodness, honey. We have a defect in canonical form. Alas, we must part!"

There was a reason you divorced and it wasn't defect in canonical form.
Now if someone unknowingly married their sister and later found out, THAT would be the reason they would seek their annulment if and that would be valid. They don't even need a divorce decree because brothers and sisters CAN'T marry each other.

Defect in canonical form and whatever other goofy reasons churchy people come up with are afterthoughts. And that's my point. Annulments are just the Catholic Church's way of rationalizing a divorce.

Isn't it better to just be honest? Isn't it better for the Catholic Church to use it claimed power to "bind and loose" to reflect the reality of people's lives rather that come up with some convoluted process to proclaim something absurd such as "they were never married to begin with" so they can maintain the appearance of doctrinal conformity that is at odds with even the exception that Christ himself cited?

Life is messy and most people's situations don't fit in little boxes that are concocted to appease others who are a little too concerned about things that really have nothing to do with them. There's a day of reckoning and if these people have done something really wrong God almighty doesn't need you or any priest or pope to mete out his justice. If you really want to see these people punished, you can take comfort in that. (but just make sure you are as pure as the lily white snow btw)

Btw I have nothing but regard for you and the good work you do here. Nothing I've said should be construed as an attack on you personally because it isn't. I think I'm bringing up valid points that people ought to consider.

Vox Cantoris said...

Well, this was done right!


http://voxcantor.blogspot.ca/2013/06/missa-solemnis-sponso-et-sponsa-st.html

Anonymous said...

Most peoples circumstances DO FIT IN BOXES PREVIOUSLY DISCERNED AND KNOWN.

There is little that is new, save that the real scum folks want to be congratulated for their scandalous behavior rather than sinning in
private.

We all sin. Not all of us want a parade thrown in honor of our sins
AND TO FORCE OTHER TO COMPLY OR FACE PERSECUTION.

Sadly, based upon my personal experiences. Jorge Bergoglio is
just what the Catholic Church deserves.....decimation.

Karl

Anonymous said...

Vox,

It does hurt me when people get decrees of nullity based upon mere "lack of form". If it makes me angry enough that I sin, which sometimes has happened, then it has risen to scandalous.

I believe, that since you have said that you obtained a lack of form annulment, that there are questions?

Did you have children with this person, with whom the Catholic Church
has decided that you were never truly married due to a lack of form?

Have you remarried? Or, have you taken the wise(r) course, which is to remain celibate in the face of no marriage, BECAUSE, your marriage, that never was, was a PUBLIC ACT, that to people like me who have been through the wringer to defend out valid sacramental marriages actually view as a real marriage, UNLESS THERE WAS AN EXCLUSION OF CHILDREN, AN EXCLUSION OF PERMANENCE OR AN EXCLUSION OF CONTINENCE.

I do not agree with the Catholic Church related to mere lack of form.

I think it is causing massive damage to marriage and is, therefore, reprehensible, even if it is correct in a technical way.

I AM IN NO WAY TRYING TO HURT YOU. I AM TELLING YOU HOW SOMEONE LIKE ME SEES THINGS, AS I AM STILL IN A LIVING HELL, THANKS TO THE PERVERSE PRACTICES OF MEN LIKE JORGE AND EVEN BETTER MEN THAN HE.

I THINK, IF YOU HAVE NOT DONE SO THAT, WITHOUT NAMING NAMES, YOU SHOULD DISCLOSE ANSWERS TO THE COUPLE OF QUESTIONS THAT I ASKED ADN THE "GENERAL" CIRCUMSTANCES INVOLVED IN THE DISCERNED BY THE CATHOLIC CHURCH, INVALID MARRIAGE.

MY TWO CENTS.

I AM SORRY, TRULY, IF THIS HURTS YOU. BUT WE ARE IN GOD-AWFUL TIMES AND TRUTH MUST REIGN, WITH LOVE, JUSTICE, MERCY AND COMPASSION, ALL!


KARL

NO I AM NOT YELLING WITH THE CAPS. I AM EMPHASIZING AND MY COMPUTER DOES NOT DO CAPS AND NORMAL STUFF WITHOUT A SUSTAINED EFFORT THAT CAN BE EXHAUSTING TO AN OLD GEEZER LIKE ME, WHICH I HOPE AT LEAST MAKES YOU SMILE.

GOD BLESS.

Anonymous said...

Vox,

If you think it better, I can disappear from the scene. My own pain is tremendous and ever-present. All, of these issue hit me very hard, due to my long experiences. But, I am not on this earth to only criticize. My desire is to do good. It is just that these issues divide good people and less good people and good people and good people.

I would proffer that a thorough discussion of all of these issues, by people who are experts and people who are victims and somewhat familiar with their victimization and of good will, might do some real good with all the trash going around.


Karl

MilfordHaven said...

If it ever becomes an occasion of mortal sin to stay put in the church you believe to be the One True Ark of Salvation, then quite simply you’re in the wrong place. You are basically admitting that God’s Grace is no longer sufficient to keep the Ark of Salvation spotless so you choose to remain steadfast on a ship that has already sunk. The Novus Ordo church is an empty carcass that has long since abandoned Truth and the only “fruit” being born from it now is shadow fruit of no substance. There is nothing heroic about risking damnation in the hull of this sunken ship where Our Lord at Calvary is most definitely not present. The roaming Starfish and Sea Anemones have a greater grasp on Truth than Bergoglio does.

Vox Cantoris said...

Karl, No; I do not think you should disappear. I am not banning you. If you've followed some debate here for the last few weeks you would know that.

First, your opinion is your's and you are entitled to that but you are not entitled to the facts. No "marriage" can be annulled but decrees are made indicating that no marriage existed. You know this. You choose not to agree with it in nearly any and all circumstances short of marrying your sister or having a shotgun pointed at you.

One can debate whether decrees are properly granted or abused but not the Church's position that they can be granted.

Three issues are necessary for a Sacrament, you know this. Form, matter and intent. Who are you to declare that "lack of canonical form" is something which disqualifies. In my own case, there were probably three items of "intent" that could have been grounds but the Tribunals declare on the path of least resistance and that which can be upheld. It is not possible to argue otherwise if the Form is not adhered to, and in my case, it was not.

I am married to a wonderful Catholic woman, go look at the link above.

Thank you for reading this blog, but I will not be dragged in to this debate. You must grant me the assumption that I followed my properly formed conscience and so did the Auditors and Judges. You cannot go otherwise.

What you write does not hurt me, but there is no doubt that you are clearly hurting.

For that, I am sorry, but it is time for you to give it to Our Lord and find peace.

Anonymous said...

Vox,

Then, I will bid you adieu, with love and respect, but disagreement.

God be with you, my friend.


Karl

Vox Cantoris said...

MilfordHaven, Sorry, one does not abandon one's mother to the vipers in the family. One stays with her and beats them off.

MilfordHaven said...

With all due respect, the Bride of Christ is impervious to blemish so it doesn’t need you to defend It. If human intervention is required to help rid the church of error then you can be assured that it was never the True Church in the first place. The servant cannot be greater than the Master.

Vox Cantoris said...

MifordHaven, you should know that "with all due respect," is actually the complete lack of it.

You, are incorrect.

We are the work of His hands and we must do His will and that includes getting our hands dirty.

Now, I have to get to a "NewChurch" parish with original altars to prepare the Schola for a Missa Cantata for today's feast, you can see it advertised above.

Perhaps, just perhaps, if more people got of their keyboards and into the mess we might bring a few souls to realise what has happened.

Make sense?

Off line till 10PM EDT

Kathleen1031 said...

Oh my, our own fellow man, sometimes, they are too much. People mean well, but don't realize they inadvertently add to the burden of others. Well what's that saying about good intentions...
Thank you for all you do Vox. Thanks for putting up with us.

Anonymous said...

http://aleteia.org/2016/10/07/lightning-strikes-dome-of-peters-basilica-on-feast-of-our-lady-of-the-rosary/

Dan said...

Been there, done that.

Defect in canonical form seems like a valid reason for annulment to me. If we believe special graces are given to a couple with shared faith, and sacramental marriage.

Anonymous said...

Re:

Backround Related to Defect of Form Annulments:


https://canonlawblog.wordpress.com/2014/01/16/an-orientation-to-the-question-of-canonical-form-for-marriage/


Give it a read.