“A time is coming when men will go mad, and when they see someone who is not mad, they will attack him, saying, 'You are mad; you are not like us.” ― St. Antony the Great
"1961. Meeting of the United Grand Lodges of Germany with foreign Grand Lodges. «The Pope, who we will elect shall possess the highest degree in the skill of ambivalence (work as a double agent). For example, disapproving of the Modernists with words, but with “actions” will support them (abolishing, first of all, the anti-modernist oath).” (From: Guidelines given to the Masons in 1961. See “Bulletin d’Information Indépendant Catholique” N ° 112-1974 - Brussels)"
"Paul VI, in ceremony of enormous symbolic importance deposes the Tiara, in the presence of 2000 Bishops. Let us remember the words of the Pontiff of Universal Freemasonry, Albert Pike: «The inspiration, philosophers and historical leaders of the French Revolution had sworn to overthrow the Crown and the Tiara on the tomb of Jacques de Molay ... When Louis XVI was executed, half the work was done, and since then, the Army of the Temple was to direct all its efforts against the Pope.»"
"The Grand Commander of the Supreme Council of Mexican Masonry, Carlos Vasquez Rangel, revealed that «Angelo Roncalli was initiated into Freemasonry in Paris.» In fact, «It was in Paris when not only Angelo Roncalli but Giovanni Montini were initiated, the same day, into the august mysteries of the Brotherhood."
"The Menorah, the seven-branched candelabrum is also a symbol of the High Jewish Freemasonry of B’nai B’rith. In a secret meeting, held in Paris in 1936, the members of the Jewish Secret Lodge of B’nai B’rith, among other things, said: «Let any one of our children become cardinals and bishops, so that they destroy the Catholic Church.»"
"«Our ultimate aim is that of Voltaire and the French Revolution. That is: The complete annihilation of Catholicism and even of the Christian idea! With the passport of hypocrisy, we can conspire with complete ease and come, little by little, to our purpose.» (Secret Instrctions of Alta Vendita - 1820)."
"But the weapon for the destruction of the Church is corruption and deception. In the documents of the Alta Vendita, in fact, it reads: «The corruption of the people by the clergy and the Clergy by us, “and also “Let the clergy walk under your (Masonic) flag, believing they are walking under the banner of the Apostolic Keys!»"
"It goes to show that Paul VI devoted all his pontificate for the realization of the “Religion of Man” and the “Universal Church of Man”, namely the transformation of the Catholic Church into an institution that abandoned the supernatural to devote Herself exclusively to human affairs and humanities, by serving the political world, a sworn enemy of Christ and His Church. But this is the task of the Top of Freemasonry! It is the task of the Patriarch of Freemasonry, which, in “Masonic theology” is also called the Patriarch of the World. But the Patriarch of Freemasonry is the supreme Head of the Satanic Order of the Illuminati of Bavaria, and the Patriarch of the World is the third person, after Lucifer and the Emperor of the World, of the blasphemous and satanic Masonic “Most Holy and Indivisible Trinity” better identified by Saint John the Evangelist as the union of three beasts: the Dragon (Lucifer), the first Beast rising from the sea (Emperor of the World), the second Beast rising from the earth that has two horns like those of a lamb (Patriarch of the World)."
"... the symbolism of the Templar cross surmounted by a torch, which appears on the pallium of Paul VI [and JPII, Benedict, Bergoglio] would identify him as the “Supreme Leader” of the Illuminati, and ... as the “second” Beast rising from the earth, of Revelation."
"Since 1964, Paul VI was photographed with the Ephod, the breastplate of the High Priest that Aaron and his successors brought by the Lord’s command to Moses. It was a square necklace with twelve precious stones arranged in four rows, the symbol of the 12 tribes of Israel. This emblem was worn by the High Priest Caiaphas when he condemned Jesus Christ to death for declaring himself “Son of God”! From that judgment, the Ephod represented the symbol of the denial of the divinity of Jesus Christ. Paul VI seemed to renounce the role as Vicar of Christ when, in the Basilica of St. Peter, in the presence of two thousand Bishops, he renounced the “Tiara” with the three crowns on the eve of exempting the Jews from their blame of “deicide”!"
"Faced with this dramatic situation of the Church, the amazement of the faithful is mainly due to the fact that they have ignored the existence of 586 ecclesial “documents” condemning the “satanic cult” of Masonry, issued over 260 years, from 1738 to the present. Moreover, they have ignored the “Masonic plan” which was denounced by Pope Leo XIII in his encyclical “Humanum Genus”, namely that «the ultimate goal of Freemasons is this: the utter overthrow of that whole religious and political order of the world which the Christian teaching has produced, and the substitution of a new state of things in accordance with their ideas, of which the foundations and laws shall be drawn from mere naturalism.»" (Fr. Luigi Villa.)
If Paul VI was a Freemason, why did he write Humanae Vitae? It would have been extremely easy for him to go with the flow. Say what you like, but I don't buy that he, John XXIII, JPII or B16 were masons.
Dear Barnum, Yes, it is incredible, but there is plenty of evidence to confirm the judeo-masonic invasion of the Church, including numerous Papal warnings. Father Pio had a vision of Our Lord, who asked him to summon a young Fr. Villa and send him to Pope Pius XII, who commissioned Fr. Villa to ferret out masons in the Vatican, under the direction of Cardinal Ottaviani. There are photos of Montini wearing the ephod. Why on Earth would a Pope wear the insignia of the High Priest of the Jews?See the masonic symbolism that he himself designed for his mother's grave. I suggest you read Fr. Villa's work yourself. Watch Bella Dodd's testimony to the U.S. Congress on utube; read the Pecorrelli List of 125 masonic prelates in the Vatican. Yip, it's shocking, but it's true and they are becoming more blatant by the day. Please read: http://padrepioandchiesaviva.com/uploads/Chiesa_viva_441_S_en_New_Corrected.pdf
But why didn't Pius oust Montini and the others? Didn't Pius and predecessors, sniff the Modernism? 125 Masonic prelates just don't happen all of a sudden.
Dear Barnum, Those prelates sure didn't happen all of a sudden! If you read my comment on Vox's post on masonry, of yesterday, 1 May, you will note that Pope Clement XII wrote "In Emeninti Apostolatus" against judeo-masonry in 1738! That's how long the Popes have been fighting these miscreants. Saintly Pope Pius X even made all his clerics swear the oath against Modernism. It's long, but I think many would be interested in reading it:
THE OATH AGAINST MODERNISM Given by His Holiness St. Pius X September 1, 1910: To be sworn to by all clergy, pastors, confessors, preachers, religious superiors, and professors in philosophical-theological seminaries.
"I . . . . firmly embrace and accept each and every definition that has been set forth and declared by the unerring teaching authority of the Church, especially those principal truths which are directly opposed to the errors of this day. And first of all, I profess that God, the origin and end of all things, can be known with certainty by the natural light of reason from the created world (see Rom. 1:19), that is, from the visible works of creation, as a cause from its effects, and that, therefore, his existence can also be demonstrated: Secondly, I accept and acknowledge the external proofs of revelation, that is, divine acts and especially miracles and prophecies as the surest signs of the divine origin of the Christian religion and I hold that these same proofs are well adapted to the understanding of all eras and all men, even of this time. Thirdly, I believe with equally firm faith that the Church, the guardian and teacher of the revealed word, was personally instituted by the real and historical Christ when he lived among us, and that the Church was built upon Peter, the prince of the apostolic hierarchy, and his successors for the duration of time. Fourthly, I sincerely hold that the doctrine of faith was handed down to us from the apostles through the orthodox Fathers in exactly the same meaning and always in the same purport. Therefore, I entirely reject the heretical' misrepresentation that dogmas evolve and change from one meaning to another different from the one which the Church held previously. I also condemn every error according to which, in place of the divine deposit which has been given to the spouse of Christ to be carefully guarded by her, there is put a philosophical figment or product of a human conscience that has gradually been developed by human effort and will continue to develop indefinitely. Fifthly, I hold with certainty and sincerely confess that faith is not a blind sentiment of religion welling up from the depths of the subconscious under the impulse of the heart and the motion of a will trained to morality; but faith is a genuine assent of the intellect to truth received by hearing from an external source. By this assent, because of the authority of the supremely truthful God, we believe to be true that which has been revealed and attested to by a personal God, our creator and lord.
Furthermore, with due reverence, I submit and adhere with my whole heart to the condemnations, declarations, and all the prescripts contained in the encyclical Pascendi and in the decree Lamentabili, especially those concerning what is known as the history of dogmas. I also reject the error of those who say that the faith held by the Church can contradict history, and that Catholic dogmas, in the sense in which they are now understood, are irreconcilable with a more realistic view of the origins of the Christian religion. I also condemn and reject the opinion of those who say that a well-educated Christian assumes a dual personality-that of a believer and at the same time of a historian, as if it were permissible for a historian to hold things that contradict the faith of the believer, or to establish premises which, provided there be no direct denial of dogmas, would lead to the conclusion that dogmas are either false or doubtful. Likewise, I reject that method of judging and interpreting Sacred Scripture which, departing from the tradition of the Church, the analogy of faith, and the norms of the Apostolic See, embraces the misrepresentations of the rationalists and with no prudence or restraint adopts textual criticism as the one and supreme norm. Furthermore, I reject the opinion of those who hold that a professor lecturing or writing on a historico-theological subject should first put aside any preconceived opinion about the supernatural origin of Catholic tradition or about the divine promise of help to preserve all revealed truth forever; and that they should then interpret the writings of each of the Fathers solely by scientific principles, excluding all sacred authority, and with the same liberty of judgment that is common in the investigation of all ordinary historical documents.
Finally, I declare that I am completely opposed to the error of the modernists who hold that there is nothing divine in sacred tradition; or what is far worse, say that there is, but in a pantheistic sense, with the result that there would remain nothing but this plain simple fact-one to be put on a par with the ordinary facts of history-the fact, namely, that a group of men by their own labor, skill, and talent have continued through subsequent ages a school begun by Christ and his apostles. I firmly hold, then, and shall hold to my dying breath the belief of the Fathers in the charism of truth, which certainly is, was, and always will be in the succession of the episcopacy from the apostles. The purpose of this is, then, not that dogma may be tailored according to what seems better and more suited to the culture of each age; rather, that the absolute and immutable truth preached by the apostles from the beginning may never be believed to be different, may never be understood in any other way.
I promise that I shall keep all these articles faithfully, entirely, and sincerely, and guard them inviolate, in no way deviating from them in teaching or in any way in word or in writing. Thus I promise, this I swear, so help me God." (Abolished by Paul the Sick.)
HERE IS A STUNNING EXPLANATION OF THE BACKGROUND TO THIS OATH: https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=3142 This is really another "must read."
Just for interest: "– With the Motu Proprio, “Matrimonia Mixta”, Paul VI took out the solemn pledge of the non-Catholic spouse to baptize and educate their children in the Catholic Church. It was a Legislation that was passed, then, in the “Code of Canon Law” of 1983 (can. 1125). – With the Motu Proprio, “Ingravescentem Aetatem”, Paul VI forbade the Cardinals over eighty, to attend the conclave. It was an attempt to remove the traditionalist elements in the Curias and the Dioceses, because it was no longer suitable for his “New Conciliar Church” of Vatican II. – With the Instruction, “Memorial Domini”, Paul VI authorized the Episcopal Conferences to grant the distribution of Communion in the hand. It was another sacrilegious act! – With the Instruction “Fidei Custos”, Paul VI, in 1969, authorized the “laity” to distribute Holy Communion, counter to the mission that Jesus had reserved for the Apostles and the Clergy – He also abolished the “anti-Modernist Oath” of St. Pius X, who had also prescribed a “Profession of Faith” of the Council of Trent, already prescribed by Pius IV. – You should also know that on the coffin of Pope Paul VI there was no Christian symbol, not even the Cross." (Fr. Luigi Villa.)
Remember these rats were flying under the radar; operating in secret; conniving, deceiving and scheming in the shadows; smiling and bearing two faces and speaking out of both sides of their mouths with lucifer's backing.
Here is the oath taken by Montini: "«I vow: – to change nothing of the received Tradition, and nothing thereof I have found before me guarded by my God-pleasing predecessors, to encroach upon, to alter, or to permit any innovation therein; to the contrary: with glowing affection as their truly faithful student and successor, to safeguard reverently the passedon good, with my whole strength and utmost effort; – to cleanse all that is in contradiction to the canonical order, should such appear; to guard the Holy Canons and Decrees of our Popes as if they were the Divine ordinances of Heaven, because I am conscious of Thee, whose place I take through the Grace of God, whose Vicarship I possess with Thy support, being subject to the severest accounting before Thy Divine Tribunal over all that I shall confess. If I should undertake to act in anything of contrary sense, or should permit that it will be executed, Thou willst not be merciful to me on the dreadful Day of Divine Justice (pp. 43 o 31). Accordingly, without exclusion, we subject to severest excommunication anyone - be it ourselves or be it another -who would dare to undertake anything new in contradiction to this constituted evangelic Tradition and the purity of the Orthodox Faith and the Christian Religion, or would seek to change anything by his opposing efforts, or would agree with those who undertake such a blasphemous venture.»" (Fr. Villa.)
I really think that if one reads the whole of Fr. Luigi's book, a lot of lights turn on which illuminate Vatican II, the conciliar popes of the past and Bergoglio today.
8 comments:
"1961. Meeting of the United Grand Lodges of Germany with foreign Grand Lodges. «The Pope, who we will elect shall possess the highest degree in the skill of ambivalence (work as a double agent). For example, disapproving of the Modernists with words, but with “actions” will support them (abolishing, first of all, the anti-modernist oath).” (From: Guidelines given to the Masons in 1961. See “Bulletin d’Information Indépendant Catholique” N ° 112-1974 - Brussels)"
"Paul VI, in ceremony of enormous symbolic importance deposes the Tiara, in the presence of 2000 Bishops. Let us remember the words of the Pontiff of Universal Freemasonry, Albert Pike: «The inspiration, philosophers and historical leaders of the French Revolution had sworn to overthrow the Crown and the Tiara on the tomb of Jacques de Molay ... When Louis XVI was executed, half the work was done, and since then, the Army of the Temple was to direct all its efforts against the Pope.»"
"The Grand Commander of the Supreme Council of Mexican Masonry, Carlos Vasquez Rangel, revealed that «Angelo Roncalli was initiated into Freemasonry in Paris.» In fact, «It was in Paris when not only Angelo Roncalli but Giovanni Montini were initiated, the same day, into the august mysteries of the Brotherhood."
"The Menorah, the seven-branched candelabrum is also a symbol of the High Jewish Freemasonry of B’nai B’rith. In a secret meeting, held in Paris in 1936, the members of the Jewish Secret Lodge of B’nai B’rith, among other things, said: «Let any one of our children become cardinals and bishops, so that they destroy the Catholic Church.»"
"«Our ultimate aim is that of Voltaire and the French Revolution. That is: The complete annihilation of Catholicism and even of the Christian idea! With the passport of hypocrisy, we can conspire with complete ease and come, little by little, to our purpose.» (Secret Instrctions of Alta Vendita - 1820)."
"But the weapon for the destruction of the Church is corruption and deception. In the documents of the Alta Vendita, in fact, it reads: «The corruption of the people by the clergy and the Clergy by us, “and also “Let the clergy walk under your (Masonic) flag, believing they are walking under the banner of the Apostolic Keys!»"
"It goes to show that Paul VI devoted all his pontificate for the realization of the “Religion of Man” and the “Universal Church of Man”, namely the transformation of the Catholic Church into an institution that abandoned the supernatural to devote Herself exclusively to human affairs and humanities, by serving the political world, a sworn enemy of Christ and His Church. But this is the task of the Top of Freemasonry! It is the task of the Patriarch of Freemasonry, which, in “Masonic theology” is also called the Patriarch of the World. But the Patriarch of Freemasonry is the supreme Head of the Satanic Order of the Illuminati of Bavaria, and the Patriarch of the World is the third person, after Lucifer and the Emperor of the World, of the blasphemous and satanic Masonic “Most Holy and Indivisible Trinity” better identified by Saint John the Evangelist as the union of three beasts: the Dragon (Lucifer), the first Beast rising from the sea (Emperor of the World), the second Beast rising from the earth that has two horns like those of a lamb (Patriarch of the World)."
"... the symbolism of the Templar cross surmounted by a torch, which appears on the pallium of Paul VI [and JPII, Benedict, Bergoglio] would identify him as the “Supreme Leader” of the Illuminati, and ... as the “second” Beast rising from the earth, of Revelation."
"Since 1964, Paul VI was photographed with the Ephod, the breastplate of the High Priest that Aaron and his successors brought by the Lord’s command to Moses. It was a square necklace with twelve precious stones arranged in four rows, the symbol of the 12 tribes of Israel. This emblem was worn by the High Priest Caiaphas when he condemned Jesus Christ to death for declaring himself “Son of God”! From that judgment, the Ephod represented the symbol of the denial of the divinity of Jesus Christ. Paul VI seemed to renounce the role as Vicar of Christ when, in the Basilica of St. Peter, in the presence of two thousand Bishops, he renounced the “Tiara” with the three crowns on the eve of exempting the Jews from their blame of “deicide”!"
"Faced with this dramatic situation of the Church, the amazement of the faithful is mainly due to the fact that they have ignored the existence of 586 ecclesial “documents” condemning the “satanic cult” of Masonry, issued over 260 years, from 1738 to the present. Moreover, they have ignored the “Masonic plan” which was denounced by Pope Leo XIII in his encyclical “Humanum Genus”, namely that «the ultimate goal of Freemasons is this: the utter overthrow of that whole religious and political order of the world which the Christian teaching has produced, and the substitution of a new state of things in accordance with their ideas, of which the foundations and laws shall be drawn from mere naturalism.»"
(Fr. Luigi Villa.)
If Paul VI was a Freemason, why did he write Humanae Vitae? It would have been extremely easy for him to go with the flow. Say what you like, but I don't buy that he, John XXIII, JPII or B16 were masons.
Dear Barnum, Yes, it is incredible, but there is plenty of evidence to confirm the judeo-masonic invasion of the Church, including numerous Papal warnings.
Father Pio had a vision of Our Lord, who asked him to summon a young Fr. Villa and send him to Pope Pius XII, who commissioned Fr. Villa to ferret out masons in the Vatican, under the direction of Cardinal Ottaviani. There are photos of Montini wearing the ephod. Why on Earth would a Pope wear the insignia of the High Priest of the Jews?See the masonic symbolism that he himself designed for his mother's grave. I suggest you read Fr. Villa's work yourself. Watch Bella Dodd's testimony to the U.S. Congress on utube; read the Pecorrelli List of 125 masonic prelates in the Vatican. Yip, it's shocking, but it's true and they are becoming more blatant by the day.
Please read:
http://padrepioandchiesaviva.com/uploads/Chiesa_viva_441_S_en_New_Corrected.pdf
Thanks, Peter. I'll read up.
But why didn't Pius oust Montini and the others? Didn't Pius and predecessors, sniff the Modernism? 125 Masonic prelates just don't happen all of a sudden.
Dear Barnum, Those prelates sure didn't happen all of a sudden! If you read my comment on Vox's post on masonry, of yesterday, 1 May, you will note that Pope Clement XII wrote "In Emeninti Apostolatus" against judeo-masonry in 1738! That's how long the Popes have been fighting these miscreants. Saintly Pope Pius X even made all his clerics swear the oath against Modernism. It's long, but I think many would be interested in reading it:
THE OATH AGAINST MODERNISM Given by His Holiness St. Pius X September 1, 1910:
To be sworn to by all clergy, pastors, confessors, preachers, religious superiors, and professors in philosophical-theological seminaries.
"I . . . . firmly embrace and accept each and every definition that has been set forth and declared by the unerring teaching authority of the Church, especially those principal truths which are directly opposed to the errors of this day. And first of all, I profess that God, the origin and end of all things, can be known with certainty by the natural light of reason from the created world (see Rom. 1:19), that is, from the visible works of creation, as a cause from its effects, and that, therefore, his existence can also be demonstrated: Secondly, I accept and acknowledge the external proofs of revelation, that is, divine acts and especially miracles and prophecies as the surest signs of the divine origin of the Christian religion and I hold that these same proofs are well adapted to the understanding of all eras and all men, even of this time. Thirdly, I believe with equally firm faith that the Church, the guardian and teacher of the revealed word, was personally instituted by the real and historical Christ when he lived among us, and that the Church was built upon Peter, the prince of the apostolic hierarchy, and his successors for the duration of time. Fourthly, I sincerely hold that the doctrine of faith was handed down to us from the apostles through the orthodox Fathers in exactly the same meaning and always in the same purport. Therefore, I entirely reject the heretical' misrepresentation that dogmas evolve and change from one meaning to another different from the one which the Church held previously. I also condemn every error according to which, in place of the divine deposit which has been given to the spouse of Christ to be carefully guarded by her, there is put a philosophical figment or product of a human conscience that has gradually been developed by human effort and will continue to develop indefinitely. Fifthly, I hold with certainty and sincerely confess that faith is not a blind sentiment of religion welling up from the depths of the subconscious under the impulse of the heart and the motion of a will trained to morality; but faith is a genuine assent of the intellect to truth received by hearing from an external source. By this assent, because of the authority of the supremely truthful God, we believe to be true that which has been revealed and attested to by a personal God, our creator and lord.
Furthermore, with due reverence, I submit and adhere with my whole heart to the condemnations, declarations, and all the prescripts contained in the encyclical Pascendi and in the decree Lamentabili, especially those concerning what is known as the history of dogmas. I also reject the error of those who say that the faith held by the Church can contradict history, and that Catholic dogmas, in the sense in which they are now understood, are irreconcilable with a more realistic view of the origins of the Christian religion. I also condemn and reject the opinion of those who say that a well-educated Christian assumes a dual personality-that of a believer and at the same time of a historian, as if it were permissible for a historian to hold things that contradict the faith of the believer, or to establish premises which, provided there be no direct denial of dogmas, would lead to the conclusion that dogmas are either false or doubtful. Likewise, I reject that method of judging and interpreting Sacred Scripture which, departing from the tradition of the Church, the analogy of faith, and the norms of the Apostolic See, embraces the misrepresentations of the rationalists and with no prudence or restraint adopts textual criticism as the one and supreme norm. Furthermore, I reject the opinion of those who hold that a professor lecturing or writing on a historico-theological subject should first put aside any preconceived opinion about the supernatural origin of Catholic tradition or about the divine promise of help to preserve all revealed truth forever; and that they should then interpret the writings of each of the Fathers solely by scientific principles, excluding all sacred authority, and with the same liberty of judgment that is common in the investigation of all ordinary historical documents.
Finally, I declare that I am completely opposed to the error of the modernists who hold that there is nothing divine in sacred tradition; or what is far worse, say that there is, but in a pantheistic sense, with the result that there would remain nothing but this plain simple fact-one to be put on a par with the ordinary facts of history-the fact, namely, that a group of men by their own labor, skill, and talent have continued through subsequent ages a school begun by Christ and his apostles. I firmly hold, then, and shall hold to my dying breath the belief of the Fathers in the charism of truth, which certainly is, was, and always will be in the succession of the episcopacy from the apostles. The purpose of this is, then, not that dogma may be tailored according to what seems better and more suited to the culture of each age; rather, that the absolute and immutable truth preached by the apostles from the beginning may never be believed to be different, may never be understood in any other way.
I promise that I shall keep all these articles faithfully, entirely, and sincerely, and guard them inviolate, in no way deviating from them in teaching or in any way in word or in writing. Thus I promise, this I swear, so help me God." (Abolished by Paul the Sick.)
HERE IS A STUNNING EXPLANATION OF THE BACKGROUND TO THIS OATH:
https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=3142
This is really another "must read."
Just for interest:
"– With the Motu Proprio, “Matrimonia Mixta”, Paul VI took out the solemn pledge of the non-Catholic spouse to baptize and educate their children in the Catholic Church. It was a Legislation that was passed, then, in the “Code of Canon Law” of 1983 (can. 1125). – With the Motu Proprio, “Ingravescentem Aetatem”, Paul VI forbade the Cardinals over eighty, to attend the conclave. It was an attempt to remove the traditionalist elements in the Curias and the Dioceses, because it was no longer suitable for his “New Conciliar Church” of Vatican II.
– With the Instruction, “Memorial Domini”, Paul VI authorized the Episcopal Conferences to grant the distribution of Communion in the hand. It was another sacrilegious act! – With the Instruction “Fidei Custos”, Paul VI, in 1969, authorized the “laity” to distribute Holy Communion, counter to the mission that Jesus had reserved for the Apostles and the Clergy
– He also abolished the “anti-Modernist Oath” of St. Pius X, who had also prescribed a “Profession of Faith” of the Council of Trent, already prescribed by Pius IV.
– You should also know that on the coffin of Pope Paul VI there was no Christian symbol, not even the Cross." (Fr. Luigi Villa.)
Remember these rats were flying under the radar; operating in secret; conniving, deceiving and scheming in the shadows; smiling and bearing two faces and speaking out of both sides of their mouths with lucifer's backing.
Here is the oath taken by Montini:
"«I vow: – to change nothing of the received Tradition, and nothing thereof I have found before me guarded by my God-pleasing predecessors, to encroach upon, to alter, or to permit any innovation therein; to the contrary: with glowing affection as their truly faithful student and successor, to safeguard reverently the passedon good, with my whole strength and utmost effort; – to cleanse all that is in contradiction to the canonical order, should such appear; to guard the Holy Canons and Decrees of our Popes as if they were the Divine ordinances of Heaven, because I am conscious of Thee, whose place I take through the Grace of God, whose Vicarship I possess with Thy support, being subject to the severest accounting before Thy Divine Tribunal over all that I shall confess. If I should undertake to act in anything of contrary sense, or should permit that it will be executed, Thou willst not be merciful to me on the dreadful Day of Divine Justice (pp. 43 o 31). Accordingly, without exclusion, we subject to severest excommunication anyone - be it ourselves or be it another -who would dare to undertake anything new in contradiction to this constituted evangelic Tradition and the purity of the Orthodox Faith and the Christian Religion, or would seek to change anything by his opposing efforts, or would agree with those who undertake such a blasphemous venture.»" (Fr. Villa.)
I really think that if one reads the whole of Fr. Luigi's book, a lot of lights turn on which illuminate Vatican II, the conciliar popes of the past and Bergoglio today.
Post a Comment