Tag Archives: apostasy

Did the crisis in the Church begin at Vatican II?



The upheaval and turmoil of heresy and apostasy did not begin with Vatican II. Spoken in 1846 by Pope Pius IX:

“…As a result of this filthy medley of errors which creeps in from every side, and as the result of the unbridled license to think, speak and write, We see the following: morals deteriorated, Christ’s most holy religion despises, the majesty of divine worship rejected, the power of this Apostolic See plundered, the authority of the Church attacked and reduced to base slavery, the rights of bishops trampled on, the sanctity of marriage infringed, the rule of every government violently shaken and many other losses for both the Christian and the civil commonwealth. Venerable brothers, We are compelled to weep and share in your lament that this is the case.”  ~Pope Pius IX, “Qui Pluribus”, 1846 A.D.

And again by Pope Pius VIII:

“In the first place, the Roman See is assailed and the bonds of unity are, every day, being severed. The authority of the Church is weakened and the protectors of things sacred are snatched away and held in contempt. The holy precepts are despised, the celebration of divine offices is ridiculed, and the worship of God is cursed by the sinner. All things which concern religion are relegated to the fables of old women and the superstitions of priests. Truly lions have roared in Israel. With tears We say: ‘Truly they have conspired against the Lord and against His Christ.’ Truly the impious have said: ‘Raze it, raze it down to its foundations.'”  ~Pope Pius VIII, “Traditi Humilitati”, 1829 A.D

The Second Vatican Council was just a tumor, a viral tumor, that infected the entire Body.  That tumor developed since Satan rebelled against God, ultimately; however, the Church and world has never been the same since the dreadful atrocities of the French Revolution – the overthrow of God and the glorification of man.  The Catholic Church has never had worldly peace or perfection from its every member. As a matter of fact, persecution is a sign of heavenly favor, for God is always showing his providential care by preserving the Apostolic Faith, at all times and in all places and for all people.

The errors of the French Revolution have led to a deification of man, where man is given pride of place in the Church.  What are these errors. Liberty, Equality, Fraternity. Sound familiar? Religious Liberty, Collegiality, Ecumenism. The current Faith being propagated as Catholic, is nothing more than the worship of man; the cult of man was even literally spoke of by one of the post-Counciliar Popes, Paul VI.

Cardinal Suenes famously stated that Vatican II is the French Revolution in the Church. Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre in “Open Letter to Confused Catholics” quotes one of the liberal prelates at Vatican II as saying, “We had struggled for a century and a half to bring our opinions to prevail within the Church and had not succeeded. Finally, there came Vatican Il and we triumphed. From then on the propositions and principles of liberal Catholicism have been definitively and officially accepted by Holy Church.”  In my opinion, the Modernists are the successors of the French Revolutionaries, in a spiritual way, for they murder the Faith and her glory and beauty.

Yet, in the end, God will triumph over the revolutionaries, once and for all:

“Verily no one of sound mind can doubt the issue of this contest between man and the Most High. Man, abusing his liberty, can violate the right and the majesty of the Creator of the Universe; but the victory will ever be with God – nay, defeat is at hand at the moment when man, under the delusion of his triumph, rises up with most audacity. Of this we are assured in the holy books by God Himself. Unmindful, as it were, of His strength and greatness, He ‘overlooks the sins of men’ (Wisd. xi., 24), but swiftly, after these apparent retreats, ‘awaked like a mighty man that hath been surfeited with wine’ (Ps. 1xxvii., 65), ‘He shall break the heads of his enemies’ (Ps. 1xxvii., 22), that all may know ‘that God is the king of all the earth’ (Ib. 1xvi, 8), ‘that the Gentiles may know themselves to be men’ (Ib. ix., 20).” ~Pope St. Pius X, “E Supremi”, 1903 A.D

May we always love our great and glorious Catholic Faith, protecting and preserving it with our lives, lest the Modernist Revolutionaries destroy our life and our hope, that is the Church.

~Damsel of the Faith






Sacrilege at the Altar of God

Featured Image

“A person sins by sacrilege when he mistreats sacred persons, places, or things.” ~Baltimore Catechism

“A sacrilege is the profanation of a place, of a person, or of a thing consecrated to God and set apart for his worship.”  ~Catechism of Pope St. Pius X

BRISBANE, Australia, December 15, 2016 (LifeSiteNews) — The Catholic archdiocese of Brisbane, which is led by Archbishop Mark Coleridge, has defended the staging of a sexually charged, explicitly anti-Christian ballet and fashion show in a Catholic church.

Held in St. Patrick’s Church in Fortitude Valley in October 2016, the event included an erotically suggestive ballet performed in front of the high altar in the sanctuary, during which an almost nude man and woman, wearing flesh-toned undergarments, re-enacted the fall of Adam and Eve, according to images published on the Stumbling Block blog, and others posted by the event organizers themselves.

The aisle of St. Patrick’s, a consecrated church in which Mass is held weekly, became the “catwalk” for a fashion show in which models strutted up to the sanctuary to pose before the high altar and tabernacle.

St. Patrick’s, built in the 19th century, is administered by St. Stephen’s Cathedral, which is under Coleridge’s pastoral care.

In a statement issued on Coleridge’s behalf, archdiocesan spokesperson Aidan Turner asserted “proper precautions” were taken.

“The altar and the Blessed Sacrament were moved before the event and returned after it ended,” Taylor told LifeSiteNews in an email. “The Archdiocese has received one complaint about this matter, three months after the event…” Read more: https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/catholic-archdiocese-allows-sacrilegious-sexually-charged-fashion-show-in-a

For me, blasphemies of this nature are their own abominations of desolation.

Only one soul speaks up about this pollution of the Sanctuary of God? That is disgraceful. Where are Catholics to defend the sanctity of the altar?

The Modernists never cease their hellbent quest to destroy the Catholic Church.  What they allow to happen in the House of God says quite enough about their faith (or lack thereof).  It condones the obvious fact that they do not believe the Catholic Faith or adhere to the Catholic Faith nor do they believe the Sacrifice of Jesus Christ was worth the many souls He redeemed, for the Great Commission is simply ignored and rejected; God is abandoned and trampled upon in his own sanctuary (both literally and figuratively), while his Representatives drag him through the mud and mire.  Please pray for their conversion, for they will have sacrilege upon sacrilege to account for, soul after soul lost that will have to be answered for.

Let the churches be restored, for the honor and glory of God and the salvation of souls:

“All should come to our churches and there be taught the truth of the Catholic faith, sing the praises of God, be enriched with benediction of the Blessed Sacrament given by the priest and be strengthened with help from heaven against the adversities of this life. Let all try to learn those prayers which are recited at vespers and fill their souls with their meaning. When deeply penetrated by these prayers, they will experience what St. Augustine said about himself: ‘How much did I weep during hymns and verses, greatly moved at the sweet singing of thy Church. Their sound would penetrate my ears and their truth melt my heart, sentiments of piety would well up, tears would flow and that was good for me.'”   ~Pope Pius XII, “Mediator Dei”, 1947

“Our churches are holy because they belong to God, and on account of the celebration of the holy Sacrifice therein, and the prayer and praise offered to the divine Guest who dwells there. More truly than the figurative tabernacle or the ancient temple, they are separated solemnly and for ever by their dedication from all the dwellings of men, and exalted far above all earthly palaces. Still notwithstanding the magnificent rites performed within them on the day they were consecrated to God, notwithstanding the holy oil with which their walls remain for ever impregnated, they themselves are devoid of feeling and life. What else, then, can be meant, but that the solemn function of the dedication, and the annual feast that commemorates it, do not point merely to the material building, but rise to living and more sublime realities? The principal glory of the noble edifice will be to symbolize those great realities. Under the shelter of its roof the human race will be initiated into ineffable secrets, the mystery whereof will be consummated in another world in the noonday light of heaven.”   ~Liturgical Year

“And they said every man to his neighbour: Let us raise up the low condition of our people, and let us fight for our people, and our sanctuary.”  ~1 Maccabbes 3:42

Let us defend the sanctuary!

~Damsel of the Faith

“Who can accept Marriage?”


The Pope blasphemes Catholic Marriage.

“They prefer to cohabitate, and this is a challenge, a task. Not to ask ‘why don’t you marry?’ No, to accompany, to wait, and to help them to mature, help fidelity to mature.”

Accompany them to what?  When the Church was in a healthy state and Popes taught the Catholic Faith, this would have meant to “accompany” them back to the state of Sanctifying grace, without which there is no life in the soul.  How do you “wait” on cohabitators to achieve a supposedly Catholic Marriage without admonishing them and warning them that they are living contrary to the laws of God and are bringing damnation to their souls, telling them that to amend this they must leave their sinful situation? To Pope Francis, cohabitation is the new marriage which ultimately means Marriage is meaningless and basically non-existent.  Is cohabitation to be raised to the permanence and holiness of Marriage? Are the pleasures of sin to be raised to the dignity of a Sacrament and upheld as a means to the end of fidelity and holiness?  Is Marriage too hard to live by now, with its duties, obligations and responsibilities?  What happened to picking up our crosses and following Christ?  Why do we have to pander to the pleasures of the people? The Pope, like those disciples of Christ who walked away from Him after He said that we must eat His Body, is ultimately saying concerning marriage, “this saying is hard. Who can accept it?” (John 6: 60).  Instead of accepting Christ and His teachings, it seems we have to be accepting of the modern culture that is entrenched in sin, all in the name of a false mercy and pastoral charity.

Fidelity does not exist in sin.  Cohabitation is unlawful and a blasphemy to the unity and indissolubility of lawful marriage based on fidelity to Christ and His Church.  If there is no fidelity to God by keeping His Commandments, there can be no fidelity to each other.  A lawful Marriage is a lifelong covenant and vow made before God by a man and woman. Anything else is a mortal sin and to see the Pope approving of mortal sin (of course this isn’t the first time) is a shameful disgrace.

Why don’t we take a refresher course?  The definition and meaning of the Sacrament of Holy Matrimony from The Baltimore Catechism #3:

Q. 1005. What is the Sacrament of Matrimony?

A. The Sacrament of Matrimony is the Sacrament which unites a Christian man and woman in lawful marriage.

Q. 1006. When are persons lawfully married?

A. Persons are lawfully married when they comply with all the laws of God and of the Church relating to marriage. To marry unlawfully is a mortal sin, and it deprives the souls of the grace of the Sacrament.

Q. 1007. When was marriage first instituted?

A. Marriage was first instituted in the Garden of Eden, when God created Adam and Eve and made them husband and wife, but it was not then a Sacrament, for their union did not confer any special grace.

Q. 1008. When was the contract of marriage raised to the dignity of a Sacrament?

A. The exact time at which the contract of marriages was raised to the dignity of a Sacrament is not known, but the fact that it was thus raised is certain from passages in the New Testament and from the constant teaching of the Church ever since the time of the apostles. Our Lord did not merely add grace to the contract, but He made the very contract a Sacrament, so that Christians cannot make this contract without receiving the Sacrament.

Q. 1009. What is the outward sign in the Sacrament of Matrimony, and in what does the whole essence of the marriage contract consist?

A. The outward sign in the Sacrament of matrimony is the mutual consent of the persons, expressed by words or signs in accordance with the laws of the Church. The whole essence of the marriage contract consists in the surrender by the persons of their bodies to each other and in declaring by word or sign that they make this surrender and take each other for husband and wife now and for life.

Q. 1010. What are the chief ends of the Sacrament of Matrimony?

A. The chief ends of the Sacrament of matrimony are:

  1. To enable the husband and wife to aid each other in securing the salvation of their souls;
  2. To propagate or keep up the existence of the human race by bringing children into the world to serve God;
  3. To prevent sins against the holy virtue of purity by faithfully obeying the laws of the marriage state.

Q. 1011. Can a Christian man and woman be united in lawful marriage in any other way than by the Sacrament of Matrimony?

A. A Christian man and woman cannot be united in lawful marriage in any other way than by the Sacrament of Matrimony, because Christ raised marriage to the dignity of a sacrament.

And the true nature of Marriage according to Pope Leo XIII:

“Marriage has God for its Author, and was from the very beginning a kind of foreshadowing of the Incarnation of His Son; and therefore there abides in it a something holy and religious; not extraneous, but innate; not derived from men, but implanted by nature… As, then, marriage is holy by its own power, in its own nature, and of itself, it ought not to be regulated and administered by the will of civil rulers, but by the divine authority of the Church, which alone in sacred matters professes the office of teaching.” ~Pope Leo XIII, “Arcanum”, 1880 A.D.

It’s blasphemy to put the profane on par with the holy.

~Damsel of the Faith


The Knight of Tradition is adding to the post by giving us some important information on the subject of situation ethics, or in other words as I like to call it, the fruit of Modernism:

As Rorate Caeli adequately covered in the linked article above, such a line of thinking has been already indicated in a few of this Pope’s documents, especially in the infamous Amoris Laetitia; the relevant parts of which are restated below:

(Part of 33.) “Yet if this freedom lacks noble goals or personal discipline, it degenerates into an inability to give oneself generously to others. Indeed, in many countries where the number of marriages is decreasing, more and more people are choosing to live alone or simply to spend time together without cohabiting.”

293. The Fathers also considered the specific situation of a merely civil marriage or, with due distinction, even simple cohabitation, noting that “when such unions attain a particular stability, legally recognized, are characterized by deep affection and responsibility for their offspring, and demonstrate an ability to overcome trials, they can provide occasions for pastoral care with a view to the eventual celebration of the sacrament of marriage”.

On the other hand, it is a source of concern that many young people today distrust marriage and live together, putting off indefinitely the commitment of marriage, while yet others break a commitment already made and immediately assume a new one. “As members of the Church, they too need pastoral care that is merciful and helpful”. For the Church’s pastors are not only responsible for promoting Christian marriage, but also the “pastoral discernment of the situations of a great many who no longer live this reality. Entering into pastoral dialogue with these persons is needed to distinguish elements in their lives that can lead to a greater openness to the Gospel of marriage in its fullness”. In this pastoral discernment, there is a need “to identify elements that can foster evangelization and human and spiritual growth”.

294. “The choice of a civil marriage or, in many cases, of simple cohabitation, is often not motivated by prejudice or resistance to a sacramental union, but by cultural or contingent situations”. In such cases, respect also can be shown for those signs of love which in some way reflect God’s own love. We know that there is “a continual increase in the number of those who, after having lived together for a long period, request the celebration of marriage in Church. Simply to live together is often a choice based on a general attitude opposed to anything institutional or definitive; it can also be done while awaiting more security in life (a steady job and steady income). In some countries, de facto unions are very numerous, not only because of a rejection of values concerning the family and matrimony, but primarily because celebrating a marriage is considered too expensive in the social circumstances. As a result, material poverty drives people into de facto unions”. Whatever the case, “all these situations require a constructive response seeking to transform them into opportunities that can lead to the full reality of marriage and family in conformity with the Gospel. These couples need to be welcomed and guided patiently and discreetly”.

What is happening here is the promotion of Situation Ethics.  Although Pope Francis might have insisted to some, e.g., the SSPX, that he does not intend to change doctrine, it would seem that the doctrine could be “flexible” in “pastoral” application.

John Vennari on the definition of Situation Ethics:


“What is situation ethics?

Situation Ethics is the rejection of the universal, binding, immutable norms of morality. There is no such thing as a moral act that is intrinsically evil, there is no rule that admits no exceptions. According to this false approach, the morality of an act ultimately depends not on objective truth, but on the individual’s given situation.

The early advocates of situation ethics (as well as contemporary advocates) rebelled against what they call “legalism,” “rigidity” and certain “fixed rules of morality that can never be violated.” Such an approach, as the 1960s advocates of situation ethics complained, “puts rules over people.”

Dr. Joseph Fletcher (1905-1991), the Anglican clergyman and principal proponent of modern situation ethics (who published the landmark 1966 book Situation Ethics and ended his days as an atheist), insisted that in a given situation, we need not always act according to objective morality, but rather, we “do the loving thing” based on the our given circumstances. The new pastoral approach coming from Francis’ Vatican delivers a new twist to the same error, claiming what is most important is to do the “merciful” thing, in light of the various “concrete circumstances” of the individual.”

Bp. Bernard Fellay on the application of Situation Ethics after the Synod on the Family:  http://www.sspx.org/en/declaration-concerning-synod-family     

“…In keeping with the natural law, man has a right to exercise his sexuality only within lawful marriage, while respecting the limits set by morality. This is why homosexuality contradicts natural and divine law. Unions entered into apart from marriage (cohabitation, adulterous, or even homosexual unions) are a disorder contrary to the requirements of the natural divine law and are therefore a sin; it is impossible to acknowledge therein any moral good whatsoever, even diminished.

Given current errors and civil legislation against the sanctity of marriage and the purity of morals, the natural law allows no exceptions, because God in His infinite wisdom, when He gave His law, foresaw all cases and all circumstances, unlike human legislators. Therefore so-called situation ethics, whereby some propose to adapt the rules of conduct dictated by the natural law to the variable circumstances of different cultures, is inadmissible. The solution to problems of a moral order must not be decided solely by the consciences of the spouses of or their pastors, and the natural law is imposed on conscience as a rule of action.”

As the Catholic liturgy and doctrine were significantly ignored or even rejected to a point by Fathers of the “pastoral” Second Vatican Council, Pope Francis, as a Son of the Council, is taking the next step in putting even basic morality under this “pastoral” treatment.  Let us pray to the Sacred and Immaculate Hearts for the eventual triumph that is promised by Our Blessed Mother at Fatima!

~Steven C, “Knight of Tradition”

How much has changed in 200 years!

To hear these words spoken again by a holy Pope, with much more zeal and concern for the salvation of souls in this 21st century, a century full of heresy, apostasy and Modernism that has overrun the Catholic Church, is the hope of every Catholic that truly loves the Church.

“If ever those in charge of the Lord’s vineyard should be concerned about the salvation of souls, they must be so in this age especially. For many ideas aimed at weakening religion arise almost daily. When men are enticed by novelty and led on by an eagerness for alien knowledge, they come together more eagerly for this very purpose and more willingly embrace it. Wherefore, We lament that the destruction of souls is propagated more widely each day.

Accordingly you must work all the harder and exercise diligence and authority to repel this audacity and insanity which stalks even divine and most holy matters. Be confident that you will accomplish this by simplicity of sound doctrine and by the word of God which penetrates more than any two-edged sword. You will easily be able to contain the attack of enemies and blunt their weapons when in all your sermons you preach and present Jesus Christ crucified. By His own laws and institutions He founded and reenforced this holy city which is His Church. To it he entrusted, as it were, the deposit of faith in Him to be preserved piously and without contamination. He wished it to be the bulwark of His teaching and truth against which the gates of hell would never prevail.

We, therefore, the overseers and guardians of this holy city, must preserve the magnificent heritage of Our laws and faith which has been passed down intact to Us; We must transmit it pure and sound to our successors. If We direct all our actions to this norm found in sacred scripture and moreover cling to the footsteps of our ancestors, We will be best equipped to avoid whatever could weaken and destroy the faith of the Christian people and loosen in any way the unity of the Church.”

~Pope Clement XIV, Cum Summi (Proclaiming a Universal Jubilee, Encyclical, 1769


~Damsel of the Faith

Convert Muslims, but not Jews?

Why are you ordained, Eminence?



Judaism is to be defined as the “mother” of the Catholic Church? An absurdity.  The Catholic Church is our Mother, hence, the title Holy Mother Church.  The Old Covenant is no longer valid, therefore, the Jews live in darkness because they reject Jesus Christ, the Son of God, and in rejecting Him, they reject the Father.  Our Lord clearly states that no one comes to the Father except through Him.  This turns on its head the claim that we worship the same God, doesn’t it?

Christ declared the first covenant abolished to establish the second.  With the death of Christ, the new covenant began.  According to St. Thomas Aquinas, Christ fulfilled the Law, perfecting it through words and doctrine, granting grace for its fulfillment.  The New Law perfects the Old Law.  There is no salvation outside of the New Law and the Church that the Son of God established.

To continue under the Old Law is a sin:

“The first consideration is that the ceremonies of the Mosaic Law were abrogated by the coming of Christ and that they can no longer be observed without sin after the promulgation of the Gospel.”  ~Benedict XIV. Encyclical Ex Quo Primum, no. 61, March 1, 1756)

“Consummatum est” (It is finished).  ~John 19:30

What better proof is there from Sacred Scripture than these three words of Christ that the Old Law is finished and the New begins, bought with the Blood of the Son of God, established as the Catholic Church, the New Israel, whose Sacraments give life?

Jeremais even prophesies the revocation of the Old Covenant to be superseded by the new covenant of the Christians, the new Israel:

 “Behold the days shall come, saith the Lord, and I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Juda:

 Not according to the covenant which I made with their fathers, in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt: the covenant which they made void, and I had dominion over them, saith the Lord.

 But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel, after those days, saith the Lord: I will give my law in their bowels, and I will write it in their heart: and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.”  ~Jeremiah 31:31-33

I think the revocation of the Old Covenant is also a fulfillment. Jesus Christ and His coming is the fulfillment of the Law. Our Lord said,  “Do not think that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets. I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill.”  ~Matthew 5:17

When Our Lord establishes the Mass and gives us His Most Precious Blood he says, For This is My Blood of the new testament, which shall be shed for many unto remission of sins” ~Matthew 26:28

The only valid Sacrifice that remains is the Sacrifice of the New Law, the Holy Mass:

Finally, if you insist, oh Jews, on distorting the meaning of prophetic words according to your own view, thus resisting the Son of God against your salvation; […] if you wish to understand things in this way, what will you say and how will you interpret the other Prophet (Mal 1:10-11) that cuts through such words, crying out with perfect clarity: ‘I have no pleasure in you, says the Lord of hosts, and I will not accept an offering from you hand. For from the rising of the sun to its setting my name is great among the nations, and in every place incense is offered to my name, and a pure offering; for my name is great among the nations, says the Lord of hosts.’ With so much clear evidence with what right then, do you object? […] Certainly here you cannot deny that not only does He not accept a sacrifice from your hands, but also that you do not offer a sacrifice with your hands. For there exists only one place established by the law of the Lord, where he commanded that the sacrifices be offered by your hands, outside of which place he firmly prohibited it. Since such places were lost through by fault, you do not dare to offer in other places the sacrifices that were only licit to offer there. […] Then, do not think that just because you are not offering a sacrifice to Him, or due to the fact that he does not receive it from your hands, that sacrifices are no longer offered to God. […] Open your eyes at last and see that, from the rising of the sun to its setting, the sacrifice of the Christians is offered not only in one place, as you had established, but in all places; and not to any god, but to the One who had foresaid this, the God of Israel. For which he also said in another place to his Church: ‘And the Holy One of Israel is your Redeemer, the God of the whole earth he is called.’(Isa 54: 5)    ~Saint Augustine. Adversus Iudaeos, no.12-13

The great St. Paul desired the Jews’ salvation:

Brothers, my heart’s desire and prayer to God on their behalf is for salvation. I testify with regard to them that they have zeal for God, but it is not discerning. For, in their unawareness of the righteousness that comes from God and their attempt to establish their own (righteousness), they did not submit to the righteousness of God. For Christ is the end of the law for the justification of everyone who has faith.”   ~Rom 10:1-4

Pope Pius XII states that the Old Law has been buried and is a bearer of death:

And first of all, by the death of our Redeemer, the New Testament took the place of the Old Law which had been abolished; then the Law of Christ together with its mysteries, enactments, institutions, and sacred rites was ratified for the whole world in the blood of Jesus Christ. For, while our Divine Savior was preaching in a restricted area —He was not sent but to the sheep that were lost of the House of Israel— the Law and the Gospel were together in force; but on the gibbet of His death Jesus made void the Law with its decrees fastened the handwriting of the Old Testament to the Cross, establishing the New Testament in His blood shed for the whole human race. “To such an extent, then” says Saint Leo the Great, speaking of the Cross of our Lord, “was there effected a transfer from the Law to the Gospel, from the Synagogue to the Church, from the many sacrifices to one Victim, that, as Our Lord expired, that mystical veil which shut off the innermost part of the temple and its sacred secret was rent violently from top to bottom.” On the Cross then the Old Law died, soon to be buried and to be a bearer of death, in order to give way to the New Testament of which Christ had chosen the Apostles as qualified ministers.   ~Pius XII. Encyclical Mystici Corpori Christi, June 19, 1846

This begs the question, why do these Modernists desire death upon souls?  To be without Baptism is to not have life in the soul, after all. It’s little wonder why the prayer for the conversion of the “perfidious Jews” was removed from the Novus Ordo.  If these men of the Church truly love souls, then their primary objective should be to proclaim the Divinity and Authority of the Son of God and His Church, the true and only Law that will exist until the end of time. Where is the missionary spirit among these Prelates whose most solemn duty it is to convert souls, baptizing them in the name of the Faith, the Son and the Holy Ghost so as to live in sanctifying grace, without which one cannot enter Heaven?  Why would you bring Muslims, who are indeed in dangerous error, into the fold of the Church and leave the Jews outside, to continue to be left in error and approved in it, as if they can still achieve salvation in a law that has been fulfilled and revoked?  Does salvation really mean this little to the Modernists?   Apparently so.  The Modernists no longer believe because they no longer have supernatural Faith nor do they believe in the teachings of the Catholic Church and Sacred Scripture, which have been in force before the Second Vatican Council.

Pray for the clergy that they will come back to the truth and do the truly ecumenical thing, convert souls and bring them to Christ.

~Damsel of the Faith


The heretical Amoris Laetitia

I will quote some of the content of this massive, uncatholic heretical mess that has come out of Rome and give a few meager words on it.

“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.” -Pope Francis

Believe it or not, the Catholic Church teaches that those who die in a mortal sin go to hell forever. So, yes, people are condemned forever, Holy Father.

Baltimore Catechism:

33. What happens to those who die in mortal sin?

Those who die in mortal sin are punished forever in the fire of hell.

Mercy is extending to those who repent and are sorry for what they have done to offend Our Lord.

“301…The Church possesses a solid body of reflection concerning mitigating factors and situations. Hence it can no longer simply be said that all those in any “irregular” situation are living in a state of mortal sin and are deprived of sanctifying grace. More is involved here than mere ignorance of the rule. A subject may know full well the rule, yet have great difficulty in understanding “its inherent values”, or be in a concrete situation which does not allow him or her to act differently and decide otherwise without further sin.” – Pope Francis

Mortal sin is deadly and kills the life of grace in our souls.

Baltimore Catechism:

32. What does mortal sin do to us?

Mortal sin makes us enemies of God and robs of our souls of His grace.

Also, it’s no wonder people are ignorant, if what the Pope is saying is true. How often do you hear the sins of the day being condemned?  How often do you hear priests preach that adultery and cohabitation is a mortal sin?

“Chapter 8 – Accompanying, Discerning and Integrating Weakness   

Some forms of union radically contradict this ideal [of Christian marriage], while others realize it in at least a partial and analogous way.  The Synod Fathers stated that the Church does not disregard the constructive elements in those situations which do not yet or no longer correspond to her teaching on marriage …

The Fathers also considered the specific situation of a merely civil marriage or, with due distinction, even simple cohabitation, noting that … they can provide occasions for pastoral care with a view to the eventual celebration of the sacrament of marriage”.  (AL 292,293)

So, adultery is a union?  This is so ambiguous they don’t even specify what these forms of “union” are?  Is sodomy considered a “union,” as well?

Also, it seems we’re allowed to cohabitate since it might eventually lead to the Sacrament of Marriage? Mortal sin is not going to lead to a Sacrament.  Yet, according to this document these situations are not even mortal sin anymore, for it they called it that they would foil the whole purpose of this document, namely to excuse sin in the name of pride.

“The choice of a civil marriage or, in many cases, of simple cohabitation, is often not motivated by prejudice or resistance to a sacramental union, but by cultural or contingent situations.  In such cases, respect also can be shown for those signs of love which in some way reflect God’s own love.”

God’s love is reflected in mortal sin? I don’t think so.  This is bordering on blasphemy to suggest that God’s love can be found, in this context, outside of a valid Catholic Marriage. These supposed “situations” seem to take precedent over the salvation of souls, since the Pope fails horribly in this Document to state the absolute truth regarding these sins.  And for all the talk about all the good that is in the Document, a little poison poisons the whole cup.

“The divorced who have entered a new union, for example, can find themselves in a variety of situations, which should not be pigeonholed or fit into overly rigid classifications leaving no room for a suitable personal and pastoral discernment. (AL 298)”

Of course. Telling people that they are in adultery and need to get out of it is too “rigid.” What will the Pope do to ensure the salvation of souls? Very little of anything, it seems. Looks like we’ll be “discerning” our sins all the way to hell.  Then again, nobody is going there since, according to the Pope, no one can be condemned forever.

The indissolubility of Marriage is being totally undermined.

Hence it can no longer simply be said that all those in any “irregular” situation are living in a state of mortal sin and are deprived of sanctifying grace. (AL 301)

According to Divine Law and the Catholic Church, those living in adultery and fornicating are in a state of mortal sin, which does indeed deprive the soul of sanctifying grace, which is the life of God in the soul.  Truly, this Document goes against and mocks 2,000 years of the teaching and tradition of the Catholic Church, not to mention the words of Our Lord in Sacred Scripture.

In footnote 351 of this document, it is suggested that those in a state of mortal sin can receive the help of the Sacraments “in certain cases.” Well, certainly they can receive Confession to restore the life of grace in their souls, provided that they will repent and leave their life of sin. But, this obviously is allowing Holy Communion for those living in mortal sin, albeit by the back door, which, for the Counciliar Church, “certain cases” will turn into the norm within a matter of time.  This is what certain Roman prelates have been promoting all this time and they know they cannot state it outright but have to hide it behind pleasing words.  Doctrine may not change, but expounding heresy and pandering to man’s pride of wanting to be “accepted as they are” ultimately changes belief.  If Rome realized that we deal with the supernatural in the Sacraments, in the Mass, in the Holy Eucharist, the very heart of the Church, I don’t think they would not do what they do. If Rome realizes that the Holy Eucharist wasn’t a happy meal for everybody and the Church a social club, I don’t think we would be at this terrible point we are at now.

What is there to achieve by excusing sin and abandoning people to their sinful lives, not telling them the truth and ultimately the means to achieve salvation, which is the very mission of the Church?

Advocating sacrilege against the Blessed Eucharist is akin to calling for the death of Our Lord over and over and over again, every time Our Lord in the Holy Eucharist is received by the soul in a state of mortal sin.

If you’re a Catholic, you need to defend Our Lord in the Blessed Sacrament and what His Church teaches regarding sin. You must reject this departure from the moral doctrines of the Faith. This ultimately comes down to upholding the truth of the Ten Commandments as being just that, Ten Commandments, to be kept and upheld as a sign of our fidelity and love of Our Lord Jesus Christ, who told us to keep them.  Looks as if they are being turned into Ten Suggestions, if that.  The truth must be said and not excused or “interpreted in the light of tradition.”  What was written was written and is quite clear.  We have a war on our hands and this time, it’s a war for the moral edifice of the Church.

Enough is enough.

~Damsel of the Faith


The Pope was asked a direct question about Holy Communion for the divorced and remarried on his return trip to Greece:

“Some maintain that nothing has changed with respect to the discipline that governs the access to the Sacraments for the divorced and remarried, and that the law and the pastoral practice and obviously the doctrine remains the same; others maintain instead that much has changed and that there are many new openings and possibilities. The question is for one person, a Catholic, that wants to know: Are there new concrete possibilities, that did not exist before the publication of the Exhortation or not.”

He stated emphatically:

“I can say yes.”

For those still on the fence about the issue, even though it is plain as day what is going on, it is quite clear. Does the Pope know what sacrilege is?


This comment from ‘Athanasius’ was so excellent I had to include it here:


Your commentary on this is absolutely spot on. What the Pope is clearly attempting with this document is first to re-state the objective teaching of the Church, which is the divine teaching of Christ Our Lord, and then go on to undermine it with subjective specious argument.

All this talk of pastoral mercy depending on individual circumstances is just so much smoke and mirrors. The Church makes it clear that God writes His Commandments in every heart, which means that everyone knows the truth internally and cannot therefore claim to be ignorant of the divine law, or indeed the natural law. When a Catholic divorces a spouse and then goes on to marry someone else, they know exactly what they’re doing. The teaching of Our Lord in the Gospels about adultery is crystal clear to all who have an IQ above the average house plant. So this nonsense that the Pope espouses in his Apostolic Exhortation is precisely that – nonsense! The teaching of the Church cannot be altered either doctrinally or pastorally, so why this scandalous document, this back door to sacrilege?

Note how the Pope refers to “the ecclesial community” in his document. This follows from his oft-repeated error that “we are Church”. In other words, the Pope does not appear to recognise a divinely instituted hierarchic Church with unchangable doctrine and ordained priesthood to perpetuate the sacrifice of Our Lord and administer the grace of the Sacraments for the salvation of souls. His notion seems rather to be of a loose body of believers, kind of like a hippie commune in which all have a priestly dignity that is not to be distinguished from the ordained, celibate priesthood. From this notion stems the false idea, remarkably Lutheran in tone, that no matter what sins we commit, we are justified by faith in Christ and thereby saved. This idea does great violence to the true Catholic teaching that we must avoid sin, or at least repent of our sins, amend our lives and do good works. It is by the fruit, says Our Lord, that the tree is known, not faith. And again: “Not all those who say Lord, Lord shall enter into the Kingdom of heaven. But those who do the will of my Father in Heaven, they shall enter into the Kingdom of heaven.

And what is the will of God? Well, Our Lord specifically says: “If you love me, you will keep my Commandments”. The martyrs sacrificed their lives rather than deny or offend God, yet Pope Francis asks no sacrifice from those who want to be re-admitted to Holy Communion, not even the sacrifice of repentance for mortal sin and a remedying of a sinful union. On the contrary, he says there is good even in sinful unions. Woe to the man who says good is evil and evil is good, say the Sacred Scriptures. It seems to me that this is precisely what Pope Francis is saying when he denounces divine revelation as “rules” and speaks of God’s grace being at least benign to the mortally sinful state of some souls. This is neither true love nor mercy we’re hearing from Pope Francis, it’s falsehood.

And as regards this devolution of authority from Rome to each diocese and parish to discern individual cases of divorced/remarried and other sinful union scenarios, we all know where that will lead. Very soon, like the illicit abuses of Communion in the hand and extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion, access to Holy Communion for those not in a state of grace will become commonplace and accepted as the norm. Those who object on the basis of the infallible teaching of the Church will be called “judgmental” and dismissed as merciless. What we are seeing here is the logical next step in the apostasy disguised as pastoral sensitivity. Supernatural Faith, it seems, has given place in many senior Churchmen to empty and emotional philanthropy. There is no longer any love of immortal souls or desire for their salvation.

Our Lord said to sinners that He forgave “go and sin no more”. On one occasion He even admonished a penitent not to sin again “lest some worse evil befalls you”. But what is Pope Francis saying? He is saying “come, feel welcome, feel loved, feel God’s mercy, feel included. There’s no need for you to change sinful situations if you don’t recognise them as such, or if it’s going to hurt. If you can’t receive Holy Communion (indicating mortal sin), you can at least read the Scriptures from the lectern. Oh yes, and that’s going to gain their souls entrance to heaven? It’s much more likely to pile guilt upon guilt, say the saints. God is not mocked!

Pope Francis would do well to heed this wise and prophetic warning of his predecessor, Gregory XVI, who wrote in his 1832 Encyclical Mirari Vos: “To use the words of the Fathers of Trent, it is certain that the Church “was instructed by Jesus Christ and His Apostles and that all truth was daily taught it by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.” Therefore, it is obviously absurd and injurious to propose a certain “restoration and regeneration” for her as though necessary for her safety and growth, as if she could be considered subject to defect or obscuration or other misfortune. Indeed these authors of novelties consider that a “foundation may be laid of a new human institution,” and what Cyprian detested may come to pass, that what was a divine thing “may become a human Church…”

And what about the equally prophetic warning of Pius XII: “I am worried by the Blessed Virgin’s messages to Lucy of Fatima. This persistence of Mary about the dangers which menace the Church is a divine warning against the suicide of altering the Faith in her liturgy, her theology and her soul…I hear all around me innovators who wish to dismantle the Sacred Chapel, destroy the universal flame of the Church, reject her ornaments and make her feel remorse for her historical past. A day will come when the civilised world will deny its God, when the Church will doubt as Peter doubted. She will be tempted to believe that man has become God.” (Mgr. Roche, Pie XII Devant L’Histoire, p. 52-53).

I am sick to death of these Modernist Popes damaging our holy faith with their dangerous innovations. They are called to protect and hand on the faith unsullied, yet they seem to think that they have been especially gifted in our times to alter things according to their own confused state of mind and soul. Since Vatican II they have almost destroyed the Church with their Modernist falsehoods. As Archbishop Lefebvre once observed: The martyrs sacrificed their lives for the faith. Now they sacrifice the faith.” How absolutely true that observation was. The Catholic religion today is now barely distinguishable from Protestantism.”


Homosexual marriage contains love and holiness?


You just can’t make this stuff up.

I just can’t stand when these Bishops talk about “the spirit.” What spirit? The same demonic spirit that has a foothold in the Church, influencing these men to praise and commend homosexuals? I’m pretty sure the Holy Spirit would want the Church to affirm that homosexual marriage is a great evil and cannot be extolled and commended under any circumstances because it is unnatural and contains within it one of the four sins that cries to heaven for vengeance.

But, alas, who are we to judge? What are we even talking about anymore? That’s all that old judgmental stuff. The Church was wrong for 1,950 years.

Right, Excellency?