A ‘comrade’ (the term used by the communists as an alternative to the bourgeois ‘mister’ or the aristocratic ‘sir’) sat in a line in front of a grocery store. Eager to know what products they were waiting for, he asked the person in front. He didn’t know. He asked the next person. He didn’t know either. He went from person to person asking the same thing. To his astonishment, no one knew what they were waiting for. Finally, he asked the ‘comrade’ who was first in line:
“What are we waiting for? What is being sold?” The answer was as follows: “You know, last night I drank too much. Dizzy, I leaned against this wall and dozed off. When I woke up, the line had already formed behind me.” Indignant, our man reacted: “So, nothing is being sold? Then why are you all still here?” The ending is absolutely surreal: “Well, how can I leave, if I’m still the first?” Despite the awkwardness, we laughed at such jokes with the illusion that at least we were facing a difficult situation with humor.
This is the world created by communism! A massive lie, where we drank ‘nechezol’ and ate soy salami while propagandists incessantly repeated that soon we would reach the earthly paradise created by the one-party system.
To maintain the appearance of the proletariat’s triumphant ascending path to the “multilaterally developed socialist society,” the communists came up with a clever trick after the 1980s: ‘substitute’ foods. All of these were actually surrogate foods. I’ll give you just one example: coffee. It gradually disappeared from the stores in the ‘80s. Instead, a substitute coffee called, ironically, ‘nechezol’ emerged. This time, online popular encyclopedias made my life easy. Here’s how ‘nechezol’ is described:
“Nechezol contained only one-fifth coffee, the balance typically consisting of barley, oats, chickpeas and chestnuts. Its pejorative nickname is derived from the verb ‘a necheza’ (to neigh), alluding to the oats (usually fed to horses), with the chemical suffix -ol giving a pseudoscientific touch alluding to Elena Ceaușescu, ‘world-renowned scientist’ and wife of dictator Nicolae Ceaușescu.”
The above description correctly exposes not only the content of this fake coffee but also the deception through which the dictator’s wife, Elena Ceaușescu, tried to pass herself off as a genius scientist in Chemistry. That was despite the fact that, intellectually speaking, she wasn’t even at the level of an average high school student. This is the world created by communism! A massive lie, where we drank ‘nechezol’ and ate soy salami while propagandists incessantly repeated that soon we would reach the earthly paradise created by the one-party system.
The great forgery & the Second Vatican Council
The situation in the Church in recent decades is incredibly similar to that in Ceaușescu’s Romania. For decades, we have been continuously offered surrogates instead of everything that the Tradition of the Church of our Lord Jesus Christ has offered us over more than two millennia for our purification, sanctification, and salvation. The great forgery began long before the Second Vatican Council, as early as the 19th century when pseudo-theologians influenced by the ‘historical-critical’ method began to propose interpretations of the sacred texts of the Bible in clear contradiction to everything that the Saints and Doctors of old had taught us. In fact, these new ‘doctors,’ who resembled more Martin Luther than Saint John Chrysostom, told us that the sacred texts had been misunderstood under the influence of medieval intellectual currents dominated by a hierarchical, monarchical, and non-egalitarian vision, specific to the Roman Empire of the East and West Christianized by emperors like Constantine, Theodosius, Alfred, and Charlemagne. If the revolutions–Protestant, French, and Bolshevik–had replaced Christian royalty and hierarchy with democracy and egalitarianism, the reformers rewrote the entire history to proletarianize the Church and democratize its hierarchy.
The most profound reason why so-called ‘conservative’ Catholics have no issue with changes made by modernist popes who lead the struggling Church: Each of these popes has proposed, again and again, the same type of ‘argument:’ nothing has changed; only what is Traditional has been adapted according to the demands of today’s world.
After the destruction of the sacred exegesis of Holy Scripture, the next major blow delivered by these modernist forgers of Tradition was undoubtedly the replacement of the Roman Catholic Liturgy, of apostolic origin, with a counterfeit version. Cardinal Ratzinger, in a moment of inspiration, masterfully described the process of falsifying the traditional Liturgy:
“There had never been anything like that in the entire history of theology. The old building was demolished, and another was build. But setting it as a new construction over against what had grown historically, forbidding the results of this historical growth, thereby makes the liturgy appear to be no longer a living development but the product of scholarly work and juridical authority; this has caused us enormous harm. For then the impression had to emerge that liturgy is something ‘made,’ not something given in advance.”[i]
In the Romanian language, there is a word – “făcătură” – which expresses very well what Paul VI’s reformers led by Cardinal Annibale Bugnini did with the Holy Liturgy. This term could be translated into English, quite roughly, as “fake” or “hoax” – something that is not genuine, something that is counterfeited. This is what has been offered to us for decades through the Novus Ordo version of the Holy Liturgy. The trick was used in the past, it is used in the present as well. I came to understand this through a discussion with a “theologian” lady trained at a distinguished European Catholic University.
Visibly outraged by the criticisms I had expressed regarding the new liturgy, she countered my arguments with a single response, based more on the principle of identity than on any solid reasoning. “The Novus Ordo mass,” she told me, “is the same as the old one. There is no significant difference.” Indeed, in essence, she saw no discrepancy, no rupture, nothing discontinuous. In her opinion nothing had changed. But if that were the case, I asked, why was there a need for such a total replacement operation? And, more importantly, why was the old Liturgy, revered for thousands of years by saints, banned? But for her, my question made no sense. Because, in fact, nothing had been replaced; only modified, cosmetically altered, adapted to the mentality of the modern man. Otherwise, everything remained the same. This was her conviction – the conviction of all those who tell us that we must permanently and exclusively participate at the new liturgy.
Just as the communists gave us ‘nechezol’ instead of coffee, asking us to pretend that everything is fine, wonderful, and paradisiacal in a world of peace and proletarian harmony, today we are offered a different faith than that of the Gospel, a counterfeit, in the name of universal peace and harmony.
I have never doubted the good faith and intentions of my interlocutor. Unfortunately, however, we are all too familiar with that old saying that tells us that “the road to hell is paved with good intentions.” We fully realize today that this is the most profound reason why so-called ‘conservative’ Catholics have no issue with the changes made in recent decades by the modernist popes who lead the struggling Church. Each of these popes has proposed, again and again, the same type of ‘argument:’ nothing has changed; only what is Traditional has been adapted according to the demands of today’s world. The famous notion of aggiornamento (the Italian word for ‘update’) has been used wonderfully to undermine, probably unconsciously but certainly without encountering almost any resistance, everything that was truly Traditional in the Church.
Not only the Liturgy, but also the Sacraments, the Canonical Hours, Christian dogma (especially teachings about God as “the consummator” who punishes sins and rewards virtues), and above all, morality, have been completely altered and transformed into something new. All of this has been probably done in good faith, as we see in the case of pontiffs like John Paul II and Benedict XVI. I am (almost) certain that even Pope Francis himself is convinced that his works serve a noble, grand cause of “reforming” and “adapting” Christian faith to the chaotic context of a twilight world. As I said: the road to hell is paved with good intentions.
The strategy has always been the same. Followed with the conviction of being the only possible solution in the modern world, it consisted of affirming traditional teachings while simultaneously, in practice and sometimes in doctrine, negating and rejecting them. For example, while the possibility of women being ordained as priests was quite categorically rejected, the emancipation of women and the installation of altar girls under the pontificate of John Paul II were supported and promoted. Or, in the case of Benedict XVI, while the demands of Christian morality were clearly affirmed, at the same time, Peter’s successor argued, hallucinatingly, for the necessity of a unique, global government. Today, however, after countless ‘innovations’ by Pope Francis and, especially, after the publication of the Fiducia Supplicans declaration, things have reached a paroxysmal point.
No one, to my knowledge, died from the surrogate sold by the communists instead of coffee. However, faith mixed with the poison of heresies is something that certainly kills the souls of those who let themselves be deceived.
“Virtutes caelorum movebuntur” (Luke 21:26): Fiducia Supplicans
As always, Cardinal Fernández wants us to believe that the document from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith is a strong response directed against the German bishops and lay “reformers” – those about whom George Weigel has already rightly told us are not just heretics but rather apostates.[ii] In the recent statement from the Congregation he leads, Cardinal Fernández asserts once again that the traditional and unchangeable teaching of the Church regarding marriage has not changed.[iii] Only the intention of the scandalous German Synodal Way has been opposed. I can almost see conservative friends nodding in approval and telling me, “See, there’s no problem, the teaching is fine. Nothing has changed.” However, this time, some of them can no longer sleep soundly. On the contrary, they have begun to realize that what the current successor of the fisherman Peter supports and promotes is fishy. The reactions of some courageous bishops from various countries clearly show us this.
At the same time, however, for a vast majority of “conservatives,” the explanations provided by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith are satisfactory. Nothing must shake their conviction – based on the so-called ‘hyper-papalism’ brilliantly analyzed by Professor Peter Kwasniewski – that, being a kind of spiritual superman, the pope can never err. And, of course, he cannot be in any case a heretic or schismatic. Unfortunately for them, the principle of reality contradicts this.
The immense confusion generated and amplified in recent years is indicative of unprecedented actions by many heterodox (i.e., heretical) hierarchs. Essentially, everything we have heard in the last ten years leads us to lean towards believing that the current pontiff holds beliefs contrary even to the most basic teachings of faith, such as the eternal punishment of those who persist obstinately without repentance, violating the principles of Christian morality. True precursors of the Antichrist, like Judas and Luther, as well as leaders of “liberation theology,” have been presented as victims, not as guilty. And the “reforming” German bishops and other hierarchs like them are treated through “dialogue,” not through excommunications and a call to repentance. All of this clearly shows us the intimate and profound convictions of the Vatican hierarchy. In practice, the major liturgical change instituted by Paul VI was followed – little by little – by a major change in Christian faith. We are the ones who see and experience the consequences.
We, the laity, can talk a lot, but all our words do not amount to the decisive intervention of a bishop or a cardinal faithful to the Gospel of the Savior Christ.
Just as the communists gave us ‘nechezol’ instead of coffee, asking us to pretend that everything is fine, wonderful, and paradisiacal in a world of peace and proletarian harmony, today we are offered a different faith than that of the Gospel, a counterfeit, in the name of universal peace and harmony. However, the difference is enormous. No one, to my knowledge, died from the surrogate sold by the communists instead of coffee. However, faith mixed with the poison of heresies is something that certainly kills the souls of those who let themselves be deceived. As bishops and priests of the Society of Saint Pius X have repeatedly said, it is impossible to drink water from a well in which even a small amount of poison has been poured, under the pretext that there is no danger. In fact, the danger is enormous. The signs are absolutely relevant.
Did you know that Poland, predominantly Catholic, has one of the lowest birth rates in Europe? What could be the explanation? I will leave the details of such analyses for other articles. Here, I will only say this much: the death of souls is always accompanied by the spread of a culture of death that does everything it can to hinder, like a global Herod, procreation, life, but especially sanctity. As seen in the case of all communist countries, which mass-produced horrors like the Gulag Archipelago described by Alexander Solzhenitsyn or the Pitești Phenomenon described by writers like Virgil Ierunca, Cassian Maria Spiridon, and Romulus Rusan, this has always been the result of counterfeiting not only food but also society and its fundamental values centered around the monogamous family.
We, the laity, can talk a lot, but all our words do not amount to the decisive intervention of a bishop or a cardinal faithful to the Gospel of the Savior Christ. To all of them, I wish to remind here, with filial respect, a single word of Saint Cardinal Roberto Bellarmine. He, though inclined towards the pious hypothesis of the impossibility of the existence of a heretical pope, nevertheless, reflecting on such a possibility, wrote the following:
“(It) would be the most miserable condition of the Church, if she would be compelled to acknowledge a manifestly prowling wolf for a shepherd” (De Romano Pontifice, Book II, Chapter 30).
Latest from RTV — BISHOPS REFUSE TO OBEY: Globalist Pope Faces Massive Resistance Worldwide
[i] Peter Seewald, Benedict XVI. An Intimate Portrait, Ignatius Press, San Francisco, 2008, p. 204.
[ii] George Weigel, “The German Crisis, the World Church, and Pope Francis:” „German Catholicism is often said to be in a de facto schism. That is an inadequate description of the German crisis. The German Catholicism manifest in the documents of the Synodal Path is in apostasy. The German Synodal Path does not accept the ‘faith which was once for all delivered to the saints’ (Jude 1:3). Rather, one of its ‘foundational’ texts affirmed earlier this year that ‘in the Church, too, legitimate views and ways of life can compete with one another, even in terms of core beliefs’.” Link: https://www.firstthings.com/web-exclusives/2022/12/the-german-crisis-the-world-church-and-pope-francis [Accessed: 05 January 2024]
[iii] Link: https://www.vaticannews.va/en/vatican-city/news/2024-01/dicastery-for-the-doctrine-of-the-faith-on-fiducia-supplicans.html [Accessed: 05 January 2024]
