OPEN

BYPASS BIG TECH CENSORSHIP - SIGN UP FOR mICHAEL mATT'S REGULAR E-BLAST

Invalid Input

Invalid Input

OPEN
Search the Remnant Newspaper

Robert Morrison | Remnant Columnist

In his 1936 book studying the human character of Christ, In the Likeness of Christ, Fr. Edward Leen described the way in which the cave of Bethlehem shows us the “paradox of Christianity.” He began with a picture of the inhospitable cave in which the Divine Infant was born:

“The cave of Bethlehem is an exact presentation of the paradox of Christianity. It is austere and forbidding. Even in the daylight and under the bright sun the cavern would look miserable and uninviting. In the darkness it is positively repellant. The glimmer shed by Joseph’s lantern was not strong enough to shed a cheerful light; it served but to reveal and bring out into relief every harsh and rude feature. The sides dripped with moisture and showed bare and jagged. Through openings in them, here and there, the wind moaned dismally. The strong draughts increased the natural chilliness of the place. The floor was uneven and covered with straw that had been trampled to filth by the animals. What was in the rude manger, though clean, was coarse and prickly; it scarcely tempered the hardness of the few planks for the Infant limbs. The dripping of the water and the sounds of the animals as they stirred in their rest, falling on the ear, intensified the general feeling of comfortlessness.” (p. 51)

In his 2016 conference dealing with the relations between the Society of St. Pius X and Rome, Bishop Bernard Fellay used the analogy of a poisoned soup to explain the SSPX’s objections to Vatican II:

“But the problem is not the good things that you can find in it, which actually exist. The problem is the bad things! If you put a drop of cyanide in the soup, what difference does it make if you add good vegetables, good stock, the best water that you can find; the soup is inedible because of the poison. That is what happens at the Council. That is why we say that the Council is inedible. Not because of the good things that you can find in it, but because of the poison.”

“Now, for any one to say that they believe in God—I doubt very much whether there is any one who really does believe, or understand what it means—but for any one even to say so is the very worst crime conceivable: it is high treason. But there is going to be no violence; it will all be quite quiet and merciful. Why, you have always approved of Euthanasia, as we all do. Well, it is that that will be used . . .” (Mr. Brand, from Monsignor Robert Hugh Benson’s Lord of the World)

As reported by Vatican Journalist Marco Tosatti, a group of nine Italian theologians recently published their so-called “Sedemenefreghismo Thesis,” named for the Italian term they invented:

“‘Sedemenefreghismo’ is an invented Italian word based on the word ‘sedevacantism’ which means ‘holding that the (Holy) See (sede) is vacant’ and ‘me ne frega,’ meaning, ‘I don’t care’, so that this invented word could be translated as ‘I don’t care at all whether the (Holy) See (is vacant or not).’”

Most faithful Catholics can now name at least a few heretical ideas from Francis’s ten-year occupation of the papacy, including those related to Communion for Catholics who are not in the state of grace and blessings of intrinsically evil relationships. Among these multifarious heresies, though, one category of heretical ideas stands apart because one cannot accept it without simultaneously undermining the entire basis for the Catholic Faith.

With Vatican II and its aftermath, God has permitted an unprecedented crisis in the Church which, in various ways, appears to conflict with common understandings of the Church’s indefectibility. Some faithful Catholics consider that the gravity of scandals from the post-Vatican II popes challenges that indefectibility, leading them to conclude that the Chair of Peter has been vacant since Pope Pius XII. Others, sharing the same general concerns, have concluded that a prolonged period without a pope would itself throw into question the Church’s indefectibility. Traditional Catholics have debated these issues for several decades, often vehemently.

“In the Holy Place itself, where has been set up the See of the most blessed Peter and the Chair of Truth for the light of the world, they have raised the throne of their abominable impiety, with the iniquitous design that when the Pastor has been struck, the sheep may be scattered.” (Exorcism of Leo XIII against Satan and the Fallen Angels)

“[W]e have never wished to belong to this system which calls itself the Conciliar Church, and defines itself with the Novus Ordo Missæ, an ecumenism which leads to indifferentism and the laicization of all society. . . We ask for nothing better than to be declared out of communion with this adulterous spirit which has been blowing in the Church for the last 25 years . . . We believe in the One God, Our Lord Jesus Christ, with the Father and the Holy Ghost, and we will always remain faithful to His unique Spouse, the One Holy Catholic Apostolic and Roman Church.” (SSPX District Superiors, Open Letter to Cardinal Gantin, Prefect of the Congregation for Bishops, July 6, 1988)

In his Communism and the Conscience of the West, Bishop Fulton Sheen foretold the eventual rise of Satan’s ape church:

“In the midst of all his seeming love for humanity and his glib talk of freedom and equality, he will have one great secret which he will tell no one: he will not believe in God. Because his religion will be the brotherhood without the fatherhood of God, he will deceive even the elect. He will set up a counterchurch which will be the ape of the Church, because he, the Devil, is the ape of God. It will have all the notes and characteristics of the Church, but in reverse and emptied of its divine content. It will be a mystical body of the Antichrist that will in all externals resemble the mystical body of Christ.” (p. 24)

Dear Francis,

We write to you as fellow sinners, in great need of God’s mercy. In various ways — especially through your Synod on Synodality and persistent opposition to proselytism — you have asked Catholics to have respect for all baptized Christians and their particular religious beliefs. This openness to the religious beliefs of others encourages us to explain our religion to you.

We are Catholics who believe the same truths, and retain the same religious devotions, that all Catholics enjoyed prior to Vatican II. We often call ourselves Traditional Catholics, while others refer to us as rigid and backward.