General Discussion (4)

General Discussion (4)

General Discussion (3)

If there’s something of interest in the news that’s not covered in one of the topic threads, or you have a question to ask, a comment you’d like to make about anything under the sun, more or less, this is the thread for you. However, please check first, to ensure that you haven’t missed a topic thread.  Readers have occasionally gone straight to the General Discussion thread to post news that is already the topic of a thread or to ask a question that is already being discussed elsewhere. So, do your Sherlock Holmes before posting here, please and thank you!

Feel free, also, to share your favourite spiritual reading books, prayers and devotions. Whatever.


To read General Discussion Thread (1) click here (2) click here (3) click here

Comments (540)

  • editor

    The following comment from Miles Immaculatae which was posted just as I closed page 3 of the General Discussion, bears repeating here. It’s the nail in the Church Militant TV coffin as far as I’m concerned:

    Update on Church Militant TV:

    Another SSPX supporter has emailed CMTV and has received a response from Simon Rafe of CMTV. Rafe’s responses are in bold:

    Dear REMOVED,

    Pope Benedict XVI does not agree with your assessment of the SSPX.

    Our assessment of the status of the SSPX is that they are invited to discover the path to full communion and that their ministers have no canonical standing and cannot legitimately exercise any ministry. These are the exact words of Pope Benedict XVI.

    Thirdly, I am troubled by the close relationship Churchmilitant has with Father Paul Nicholson.

    ChurchMilitant.TV has no formal, public association with Fr Nicholson – he is a personal friend of many of our staff, and previously appeared in a show on our site. Fr Nicholson is an excellent and holy priest, and his statements on the SSPX are superb and entirely accurate. Having personally participated in some of the discussions on his Facebook page about this, I find nothing in error with his statements and – speaking personally – much evidence for a general lack of charity from SSPX supporters.

    All of your other points are ones addressed in the statement you have read and disagreed with. There is nothing more to be said.

    God bless,

    Simon END

    And I do mean “the end” of our promotion of Church Militant TV.

    One other thing. For those fence-sitters who try to appear “OK” with the SSPX (while not supporting them openly) this will be a major clue. If they continue to support Church Militant TV then the game is over. Truth will out. Church Militant TV (a misnomer, clearly, now) had to take a step, either in the direction of the complete traditional Faith or back to the Planet Neo-Catholic. Sadly, they chose the latter. I cannot say how disappointed I am at this turn of events. All of that technology, expertise etc which could have been used to wonderful effect is now peddling the popular lie that there’s no big deal really going on – a few problems in the Church but no big deal. That’s a lie, and there can be no grace in peddling any lie.

    February 26, 2014 at 9:46 am
    • Leo


      I agree completely with every word.

      My reaction, on reading the original statement from CMTV was, “whatever”. Let them off.

      In my opinion, that statement was a rather bizarre exhibition of ignorance and defamation (“soft sedevacantism”, come on).

      Thank you, Miles Immaculatae for all the excellent posts. I have being thinking the same way for a while, and have to say I wasn’t exactly speechless with shock when I first read this story.

      February 26, 2014 at 10:34 am
      • Miles Immaculatae

        It doesn’t just stop with the accusation of sedevacantism. CMTV hurl a collection of religious insults at us, which seems to be all the rage at the moment (think ‘self-absorbed Promethean neo-Pelagian’):

        “Soft sedevacantist!”

        “Ecclesiastical pornographer!”

        “You who walk in the footsteps of Cham!”

        “Uncoverer of Thy father’s nakedness!”

        “Angry dissident!”

        “Relentless attacker!”

        February 26, 2014 at 1:15 pm
    • greatpretender51

      Thank you Editor, I have long smelled a self-serving, sycophantic rat amongst these people, and a promotion of personality as well. They are no better than those EWTN hosts with their rock music intros and their Tonight Show-style patter (e.g. “Have we got a great show for you!”). Not to mention their large salaries.

      Just further proof that Hollywood and the Church don’t mix.

      February 26, 2014 at 2:51 pm
    • Frankier

      I notice that CMTV was set up to address the erosion of the Catholic faith in the past 50 years.

      I wouldn’t fancy putting them in charge of the maintenance of the cables on the Forth Road Bridge.

      February 26, 2014 at 4:16 pm
  • Miles Immaculatae

    Some interesting information regarding Mr Simon Rafe, webmaster at CMTV and author of the above (defamatory) CMTV endorsed email communication:

    “staff apologist and program host Simon Rafe – who is the webmaster at St. Michael’s Media, and co-authored its ‘Saint Michael’s Basic Training’ apologetics course – had also written the ‘adult’ role-playing game ‘Castle Dracula’, and fan-fiction depicting homosexuality in the Star Wars universe […] the work contains a paragraph vividly describing a sexual encounter with ‘a beautiful Elven woman’ revealed to be ‘Asrel, the goddess of love, life, health, healing, beauty and sex’. Rafe gives the player a series of options in the scenario: ‘If you would like strength and vitality, turn to 70. If you would like health and life, turn to 383. If you would like true love, turn to 467. If you would like sex appeal, turn to 203. If you would like sexual potency, turn to 366. If you would like make love to the goddess (even if you are female – Asrel is an equal-opportunity lover!), turn to 11’.”

    Read the whole article here:

    Now, please understand that I am not interested one bit in what Rafe has written. I find it more embarrassingly pathetic than scandalous; it’s the kind of thing geeks are into. The reason I bring it up, is simply to highlight a contradiction at CMTV…

    They seem to think this kind of ‘pornography’ is acceptable?

    February 26, 2014 at 12:56 pm
  • Miles Immaculatae

    From CMTV:

    We make these recommendations for the same reasons that we discourage people from visiting sedevacantist and pornography web sites: they are potential occasions of sin.

    I am not sure if the folk at CMTV have visited any pornography websites recently, but as far as I’m concerned, they constitute more than a “potential occasions of sin”, and they require more than ‘discouragement’.

    This is bizarre. CMTV.

    For the record, Voris is senior executive producer at CMTV. He is very much running the joint. We should not defend him according to the suspicion he is a ‘powerless subordinate’.

    February 26, 2014 at 1:24 pm
  • leprechaun

    Madame Editor,

    In addition to the background on Simon Rafe supplied by Miles Immaculatae revealing him to be the webmaster of St. Michael’s Media, did you know that Michael Voris no less is the founder and President of St. Michael’s Media which in 2012 was renamed Churchmilitant.TV and is now the Senior Executive Producer of this renamed entity?

    Given the respect shown to Michael Voris for his numerous defences of Tradition, does it not seem a little incongruent that the Simon Rafe portrayed in Miles Immaculatae’s vignette remains in post?

    The biography of Michael Voris given on the following link should be read in conjunction with the link provided by Miles Immaculatae, as it provides clarification on the various bodies involved:

    Surely, there must be some mistake somewhere?

    February 26, 2014 at 1:43 pm
    • Miles Immaculatae

      Saint Michael’s media wasn’t renamed, It still exists. Voris owns it. Saint Michael’s media was contracted by Real Catholic TV (later CMTV) with Voris as senior executive producer. RCTV/CMTV is owned by an Opus Dei member, Marc Brammer.

      I was annoyed when I learned this, because I thought CMTV was a subsidiary of Saint Michael Media which he owned outright. It transpires he does not have financial independence.

      February 26, 2014 at 3:47 pm
      • gabriel syme

        I thought CMTV was a subsidiary of Saint Michael Media which he owned outright.

        I had thought that too – that is certainly the impression given by his bio, which says:

        “2012: Ended partnership with Launched ChurchMilitant.TV”

        The wording of that suggests RCTV and CMTV are distinct bodies; is this just inventive presentation?

        I had also thought the change from RC to CM was down to Voris being told by a Bishop that he couldn’t associate the word “Catholic” with his work – is this correct?

        February 27, 2014 at 1:57 pm
      • Miles Immaculatae

        RE: Name change. Yes you’re correct, that’s the real reason. But they didn’t say that, their reason is it better suits their mission.

        If Voris does own it outright, then that is far worse, because he is more responsible.

        February 27, 2014 at 4:37 pm
  • editor

    Thanks everyone for your very interesting comments. I note that none of you appear to have been taken in, as I admit to having been taken in, by Michael Voris’s apparent move closer to Catholic Tradition. Ironically, I had drawn that conclusion after reading about his growing friendship with Michael Matt and Christopher Ferrara! I’m still feeling disappointed that it’s all ended in tears – mine 😯

    I’ve been thinking a good bit about it and recalling the dishonesty during his visit when the organiser had phoned to ask me if I would be willing to be interviewed by Michael during his visit here. I said I would but before I could make an appointment with the nearest beautician, I had a text saying Michael wouldn’t be able to meet with me after all, as they didn’t have their internet connection or whatever it was which allowed him to make videos. I knew right off that it was more likely to be my attendance at SSPX Masses (surely not my outspokenness, given that Michael Voris has that reputation as well) so it was something of a surprise later to see all the videos he made here during his visit. See if I care 😥

    Anyway, after a long day away from my computer, I’ve just this minute unsubscribed from Church Militant TV which means I will not receive their daily emails/videos any more. Out of sight, out of mind 😀

    February 26, 2014 at 6:02 pm
  • Frankier

    I am not trying to be wise after the event but I was never too enamoured by the introductory actions of this man in his videos. Too much like Billy Graham.

    February 26, 2014 at 10:01 pm
    • Margaret Mary


      I always found the introduction a bit annoying as well. I also always thought that there was a lot of money involved in Church Militant TV and that’s always a danger. I’m not really surprised because of the money aspect. If Michael became too traditional, he’d find the money draining away.

      February 26, 2014 at 10:12 pm
      • Frankier



        February 27, 2014 at 8:41 pm
  • gabriel syme

    @ Miles Immaculatae / Editor

    Thank you for the additional info you posted regarding Michael Voris, after my initial scepticism; I am quite dismayed, especially by the description of the SSPX as “soft sedevacantists” – outrageous and ridiculous. Ironically the article later goes on to accuse SSPX adherents of a “lack of charity”. The other thread reached its limit before I could reply to you there.

    @ Editor

    In happier news, I have managed to log-in from my home pc, after the log-in problem I told you about. I didn’t cure the issue, just avoided it (!) – I am using IE8 web browser, instead of my preferred Firefox. Clearly the issue is related to my version of the Firefox browser then, perhaps it needs updating?! But at least there is an answer meantime.

    February 27, 2014 at 1:16 am
    • Miles Immaculatae

      I find Google Chrome works best with WordPress and Disqus

      February 27, 2014 at 3:20 am
      • gabriel syme

        Thanks for the tip, I have not tried Chrome before but will give it a whirl!

        February 27, 2014 at 1:49 pm
      • Miles Immaculatae

        It’s amazing. I use the bookmarks feature all the time. Because I’m a language student, the dictionary extension gives me instant definitions at a click. Chrome is considered the best browser.

        February 27, 2014 at 4:39 pm
    • editor

      Gabriel Syme,

      Delighted you’ve sorted out your log in problem.

      Crofterlady had a comment disappear the other day, as I did myself a couple of weeks ago. Since then, I’ve made a point of copying each post in case the problem returns. That way, at least I have the comment to try again or keep to post when the problem is resolved. I did contact the support people at WordPress about it but, although they spent time trying to work out what was wrong, they couldn’t come up with anything, so better safe than sorry, I suggest everyone get into the habit of copying comments, just in case. I found that, although the comment would disappear first time, eventually it would go up, so it’s worth copying (and save in Word on your computer) to paste later.

      The wonders – and mystery – of modern technology…

      Catholic Truth at your service 😉

      February 27, 2014 at 10:07 am
      • gabriel syme

        Thanks Ed,

        It was a strange one, Firefox worked OK for a long time and then…..kaput!

        I will try to update to the latest version and let you know what effect (if any) this has.

        February 27, 2014 at 1:50 pm
    • Eileenanne

      I have watched quite a few Church Militant TV programmes and have yet to hear anything that was not in complete harmony with Catholic teaching. I’ll keep watching and listening.

      February 28, 2014 at 9:06 pm
      • Josephine


        In making a statement that Church Militant TV will never criticise Pope Francis, they are going against Catholic teaching because Pope Francis has been saying things that are “not in complete harmony with Catholic teaching”. They want to turn a blind eye to that and that is dishonest.

        As is often pointed out on this blog, we sin by omission as much as by action. If Church Militant TV wants to be preaching about what is wrong in the Church but say that the Pope is above criticism, they are stopping way short of the full truth about the crisis in the Church.

        March 1, 2014 at 10:35 am
  • wendy walker

    Hello Everybody
    I would like to inform you of some appalling programmes recently
    On Sunday I was absolutely devastated to see while watching COUNTRYFILE ..a brilliant programme usually full of information…….Well it was about and praising MARIE STOPES and her evil work it took up a lot of the programme.
    This is the link to the programme above now I see when you scroll down to her name underneath the article is another link to Stopes and her work lauded by the BBC 1… PLEASE TRY TO WATCH THE PROGRAMME on your computer and if you feel able do write to the BBC with your objections was shown before the watershed ,she sunbathed naked ,she had a young lover at 70 odd years ,her “birth control book .and so called clinics .children would have been watching ..The BBC cannot be allowed to get away with this
    Tuesday night saw another programme first of a 3 part series of the lives of STRIPPERS IN SCOTLAND…STRIPPERS being its title this is on Channel 4…..
    It seems they can put any thing they like on T V now and get away with it all
    So COMPLAINTS please floods of them
    Thank you

    February 27, 2014 at 11:36 am
    • gabriel syme

      I saw that episode of Countryfile Wendy – I don’t watch the show a lot, but have seen some interesting episodes, when I have caught an episode by chance.

      I was also shocked to see the glowing (but conspicuously vague) praise heaped on Stopes.

      The show rather skirted over the fact she was a eugenicist and a racist who would have got on famously with Heinrich Himmler and the like.

      February 27, 2014 at 1:49 pm
  • greatpretender51

    A brief aside, I suppose: several weeks ago Catholic Family News had a sermon linked, from the Voice of Catholic Radio I believe, regarding the apparitions of Our Lady of Good Success in Quito. I noticed that Our Lady in these apparitions makes several references to Freemasonry. However, at the time these apparitions took place, Freemasonry was unknown, since it did not surface until about 1714 (if memory serves). So I emailed this question in to CFN: how did Mother Mariana de Jesus Torres know what this word meant? Did she inquire of Our Lady as to what this was? Never got a reply…

    February 27, 2014 at 4:35 pm
    • editor

      Great Pretender,

      That’s very worrying. Could it be a translation thing – that the reference was to “secret societies”? It would be worth finding out if there were any similar secret societies at that time. I’m not a historian of the Freemasons – if there’s an historian of the Freemasons in the house, please speak up. Otherwise, Great Pretender, it’s up to you to find out for us – like now 😉

      PS if you Google Our Lady of Good Success you’ll find a website which is the sort of “official” site. Maybe ask them?

      February 27, 2014 at 5:20 pm
      • greatpretender51

        Thanks Editor – is this the site you are referring to?

        February 27, 2014 at 5:53 pm
      • greatpretender51

        Editor – after perusing the above website and the narratives about the apparitions, it appears that the actual words of Our Lady do not mention Freemasonry; only the interpretive comments of others do. However, there are only isolated quotes from Our Lady in these narratives, so it is hard to tell. Looks like I would have to read one of the books footnoted here:

        February 27, 2014 at 6:05 pm
      • editor

        Great Pretender,

        Actually, after I posted my “worrying” comment I got to thinking that, since Quito – by its very nature – contained prophecies of the crisis in the Church and the world in the 20th century, e.g. the attacks on marriage and the family, perhaps any reference that might be interpreted as referring to Freemasonry, must in fact be understood in that prophetic context. No, that’s not a straw I’m grasping in my fair hand, it’s a reasonable (possible) interpretation don’t you think?

        On reflection, I’d avoid ordering books from that website (I’d forgotten about them advertising Fr Villa’s book or I may not have posted the link) but you may find this one of interest.

        Also, you may like to take a look at the Apropos site (linked on our Links page, website) because I’m sure Hamish Fraser (Senior RIP) wrote something about Quito. Check out the archives.

        Tell me what you think of my “prophetic” interpretation re. Freemasonry. Is it a reasonable explanation or should I now opt for the quiet life and join the ladies who lunch?

        February 27, 2014 at 7:29 pm
      • editor

        Great Pretender,

        Scrub my last post at 7.29. I don’t need to join the ladies who lunch! Yippeee!

        Earlier, I emailed a friend down south who is something of an expert in private apparitions and told him that we had a troublemaker called Great Pretender asking about Freemasonry in OLGS apparitions 🙂 and added that I wondered if this was a prophecy etc. Here is what he replied, all but one minute ago… just in time to prevent me resigning en masse (yes, I really must sign up with Scottish Slimmers…)


        Yes! the warning of Freemasonry was definitely was a prophecy. Like all the others from Quito that have come true – including the wonderful presidency and martyrdom of Gabriel Garcia Moreno – who also didn’t exist when Our Lady gave the messages!

        He then recommended this website

        Am I exonerated or what? Phew! I must now rank as a Prophet of Prophecies, surely?

        Great Pretender, tell me you agreed with my theory even before you read this – please. Make my day 😀

        February 27, 2014 at 7:43 pm
      • greatpretender51

        Dear Editor,

        I have scanned that PDF your friend down south sent (it wasn’t a website), and my original question remains, even though the plot has now thickened. It has thickened because, if you read through this PDF, you will notice that the actual apparition narratives make no mention at all of the words “Masonry” or “Freemasonry.” The only use of those words comes in the large orange font inserts (e.g, the first of these is on page 8, then p. 14 with a picture of Satan with a face that closely resembles Karl Marx, then p. 15, then 17, then 22 twice, and finally, 24.)

        So now I have two questions: 1. Where did these orange font inserts come from? Are they words of Our Lady? If so, from what source? 2. Same as my original question: if Our Lady spoke of “Masonry” at this time, how did Mother Mariana, or anyone else for that matter, know what she was talking about? And if they didn’t know, as they couldn’t possibly have, why didn’t they ask?

        PS: If I allowed my suspicious nature to cloud my normally precise and objective mind, I would venture that someone involved in these apparitions has been doing a little dramatic editing. But, not having read a book presumably containing a full account, I shall suppress my suspicious nature for the time being…unless of course your friend down south tells us that this PDF contains the full account of the apparitions. In which case, there is clearly some mischief at work, ex post facto.

        PPS: Just to be clear, I am not attempting to cast doubt on these apparitions…having recently finished a Novena to OLOGC myself…

        February 28, 2014 at 1:11 pm
      • editor

        Great Pretender,

        I will send a copy of your post to my friend in England and let you know his reply.

        However, I wouldn’t worry about Mother Mariana not understanding the meaning of “Freemasonry” (and I doubt if Our Lady appeared to any of us that we would be in any state to question her about anything!)

        After all, the children at Fatima didn’t know what “Russia” meant. I read somewhere that they thought it was a woman (“Russia will spread her errors”)

        And St Bernadette hadn’t a clue about the Immaculate Conception and what it meant but it was what convinced her PP that she was telling the truth since the dogma had just been proclaimed in Rome (or was about to be – can’t recall precise dates.)

        Will get back to you O ye of little faith but sufficient Scottish canny-ness to offer a novena “just in case” 😀

        February 28, 2014 at 1:46 pm
      • editor

        Great Pretender

        My friend sent this article by Dr Horvat in the hope that it answers your questions.

        Answer in the affirmative puleeeeese ❗

        February 28, 2014 at 3:56 pm
      • greatpretender51

        Ed: affirmative, and then some! Thank you very much, and you may also assure your English friend that he/she need not provide any more information on the subject.

        February 28, 2014 at 5:21 pm
      • greatpretender51

        And I found this paragraph in Dr. Horvat’s article especially interesting:

        “The idea of replacing the Christian Civilization with another civilization based on Naturalism was born, we have affirmed, in the mid 14th century…”

        Yes, that is when the Knights Templar were suppressed in France (1307) and their Grand Master burned at the stake (1314). The Freemasons themselves boast of their origins in the Knights. BTW, legend has it that a large number of them escaped the suppression/arrest, sailed off with their considerable loot, and landed in…Bonnie Scotland…

        February 28, 2014 at 5:26 pm
      • editor

        Deo gratias!

        Will pass on the message. See, it helps to have friends south of the border. I hope he doesn’t disown me if the YES campaign wins in September – I couldn’t live without him!

        February 28, 2014 at 6:13 pm
      • Frankier


        Maybe you should join the Eastern Star ladies instead.

        February 27, 2014 at 8:55 pm
      • editor


        Any organisation with “star” in its title – count me in 😉

        February 28, 2014 at 3:56 pm
      • editor

        Yes, that’s the website I meant, but I never link to it because they advertise Fr Villa’s book on Paul VI and I have serious reservations about that book.

        February 27, 2014 at 7:14 pm
      • Frankier

        Most masons themselves don’t even know their history.

        February 27, 2014 at 8:52 pm
  • Lionel (Paris)

    Dear Editor, I made this difficult translation for you:
    Archbishop Lefebvre’s conference at a retreat in Avrillé, on 18th September 1989

    ” We are in extraordinary circumstances. Both the Church authorities would have us submit ourselves to the truth they proclaim, as they despise themselves their own infallibility, that of the Pope and the Church.
    Because I could be wrong, but as far as we could follow the development of the conciliar Church since the Council so far, it seems that these Popes, as Pope Paul VI and Pope John Paul II, did not want to use their infallibility, neither in the Council nor in the acts that followed the Council.
    And I say that, somehow, they have a fear of thinking in the infallibility because they do not believe: they do not believe in their own infallibility.
    And it is very simple as reasoning, there is no need to think a lot, especially for John Paul II: John Paul II was formed in an evolutionary truth: for him, there is not fixed truth, the truth changes with time, with science, with the development of human sciences etc… The truth is always alive (vivante), this is what we are told, they condemn us because we are not for the living tradition, the living tradition is a tradition that evolves.
    So imagine, this is impossible, inconceivable to his mind, to establish a truth; impossible, he cannot conceive this: for him the truth, he sees it only as a life, a life that is growing, evolving, which develops, which is perfected etc…
    While the dogma is the truth exactly fixed, the truth always: it is finished, the Credo is finished – finished in the terms in which it is located, you cannot change the terms, it is like that, it is over. And all dogmas which have been made with the seal of the infallibility of Popes and councils, have been made in this direction. This is final, you cannot touch it.
    This is contrary to their very conception of truth. They cannot conceive it. So, apparently, concerning the Pope, this would loath him if he were told: but then, this truth there, what you did today… you canonized such a saint or such another: the canonization, in principle, it is infallible, it is defined.
    No! but not. Canonize, oh!… If ever in the future history we see that this person does not have all the qualities, Popes can possibly say it was a certificate of perfection, not holiness ultimately etc…
    They cannot conceive a final truth!
    That is why we see him make canonization: he goes into a country, he looks for a sister who has some perfection, one puts her on the altar and then that is it, that is it! it is nice to the presidency of the Republic, to all Christians in the country, it is nice, it is an opportunity…
    That cannot be accepted, it is not serious, not serious! I am convinced of that, for him, all that is not irrevocable… Infallibility is inconceivable for men who have this spirit, who have been trained in these false theories of the living truth, of the evolution of the truth.
    It is better, so be it! because at least you can put a question mark to everything that is said by the Pope unfortunately, yes, unfortunately… ”

    July 9, 2013 at 6:50 pm
    (1) Lionel (Paris) says:
    Canonization of John XXIII and of John Paul II this year:
    my concern has nothing to do with a lack of Charity.
    I do not deny that John XXIII and John Paul II may be Holy – only God knows – and I sincerely hope that they are; however, I think that it is a useless, controversial, absurd and damaging project, the introduction in the Church of an additional cause of division…
    Ultimately, it is the reform of Vatican II which is celebrated throughout this festival of precipitate beatifications and canonizations…
    They canonize their fatal reform. It is a way to lock it so that no one can question anymore.
    If their intentions were really good and without mental reservations, they would have beatified in priority personages as deserving and distinguished as Cardinals Mindszenty and Slipyj; yet it did not happen…
    Please, let me know what are the good fruits of Vatican II and of the Popes who were pushing for this devastating Council and promulgated its decrees, while sanctioning the faithful Catholics?
    Certainly, no one, but God, knows who is holy or is not.
    November 17, 2013 at 9:01 am
    For more than half a century, the Church Authorities have acted without regard for the sensibility of the faithful who were rightly scandalized and mostly deserted churches, whilst the others most assiduous were precipitated into schism… Now, such Authorities are undoubtedly responsible for this situation and will have to be accountable.
    It is sad to see, but after such conduct, the credibility of the Magisterium has been durably undermined and this could lead us to doubt the reliability and even the existence of papal infallibility… It would be very serious, possibly even worse than the antics and tribulations of the past!…
    How can we trust personages who have deceived us for so long?

    February 28, 2014 at 12:15 am
    • editor


      Many thanks for that quotation from Archbishop Lefebvre. A number of people have emailed it to me in recent days – people are obviously researching in the light of the forthcoming canonisation of Pope John Paul II!

      The following sentence sums up the situation perfectly: having detailed the fact that the modern popes have not invoked infallibility and questioning whether they actually believe in it (Pope Benedict actually said that he had no intention of invoking infallibility) the archbishop draws this obvious conclusion – no doubt ordained by Divine Providence (who says the Holy Spirit isn’t working within the Church!)

      “It is better, so be it! because at least you can put a question mark to everything that is said by the Pope unfortunately, yes, unfortunately… ”

      This fact, together with the breakdown in the ancient process for guaranteeing infallibility in canonisations, means that if it goes ahead, there can be no guarantee of infallibility in the canonisation of Pope John Paul II.

      More on that on or after April 27th!

      March 1, 2014 at 10:47 am
      • Lionel (Paris)

        Dear Editor,
        I guess that it must be Winfried Würmeling (RU) who provided you with Archbishop Lefebvre’s conference at a retreat at Avrillé/France, on 18th September 1989?
        This is nice!
        Best wishes LD

        March 1, 2014 at 11:59 pm
  • Lily

    I have not heard this suicide following abortion reported on the news here, so I wonder how many other women commit suicide due to abortion grief.

    February 28, 2014 at 11:24 am
  • Frankier

    Eternal rest grant unto the poor soul and her baby and let perpetual light shine upon them.

    May they rest in peace, Amen.

    We’ll never hear about this on the news: it doesn’t tie in with their agenda.

    February 28, 2014 at 2:01 pm
    • editor

      Exactly, Frankier.

      February 28, 2014 at 6:15 pm
  • 3littleshepherds

    It sure looks like Fr. Kramer’s idea is spreading somewhat. Pope Emeritus Benedict wrote a letter denying he was forced to abdicate but I don’t see that it has been put on the Fatima Center’s site, yet, although they still have the Socci articles up.
    The world is so filled with conspiracy theories and so many people follow them that I think it has become second nature for a lot of people to disbelieve any news worthy event. Some people believe horrible things about US Presidents, historical figures, Jews, Catholics, royalty in various countries, etc. A lot of people are primed to believe in a conspiracy behind “two Popes”. I think we’re in only the beginnings of a terribly confused time.

    February 28, 2014 at 6:10 pm
    • editor


      I saw that letter from Pope Benedict, and hope it puts that particular conspiracy theory to rest.

      Yesterday’s post brought an envelope from the USA packed with material about “the Jews” being behind everything you can think of to destroy the social fabric and the Church. I’ve emailed to say not to waste another five dollars & ten cents in postage costs because this batch of nonsense and any future batches of nonsense will be going straight into the bin, where I do a lot of my filing 😉

      February 28, 2014 at 6:20 pm
  • 3littleshepherds

    Who’s the webmaster for the Fatima center? John Vennari is totally against this whole idea of Fr. Kramer and Mr. Socci.

    February 28, 2014 at 9:31 pm
  • editor


    The article on the Fatima site was published on The Remnant website last week. It’s based on an article by the Italian journalist Antonio Socci. The webmaster’s name is Andrew (I can’t recall his surname) but John Vennari has no authority over what is posted on the Fatima website and I doubt if Fr Gruner knows the half of it. If you wish to email and mark your message for the attention of webmaster (Andrew) I’m sure it will reach him.

    February 28, 2014 at 10:13 pm
  • gabriel syme

    Recently we had a good discussion about Michael Voris comments about other Catholic journalists. Here is Michael Matt’s response:

    He does not name Voris and says neither will he attack or criticise him in return. Though there is perhaps implied criticism when he talks about people opening up new front or new fights with people whom they should really be allies with.

    I was impressed by Michael Matt’s level headed and considered response.

    March 3, 2014 at 4:45 pm
    • Vianney

      “He does not name Voris”

      True, but he does wave his pencil like Voris does so it’s obvious who he’s talking about.

      March 3, 2014 at 11:00 pm
      • editor


        I remember Michael Matt taking the same stance as Voris when Pope Francis was first elected. Wouldn’t criticise – wanted to give him time etc. Took him quite a while to speak out.

        Since every informed person knows exactly to whom he is referring, I can’t see any great virtue in not naming Voris. Would perhaps have been better to name him since he is merely putting the record straight, responding to criticisms, which can be done without making any personal remarks about Voris rather than, perhaps, give the impression of a false charity. After all, we have a duty to warn unthinking Catholics against Voris now – he’s like many others in the “orthodox” camp, essentially lying to his audience by not giving them the whole message.

        Still, waving the pencil is, indeed, a clue 😀

        March 4, 2014 at 10:02 am
  • editor

    Gabriel Syme,

    Will watch the video later – thanks for posting it.

    I was pleased to see in the Catholic press this weekend that a new association of priests (confraternity) has been launched in Ireland. It was reported as a countering of the dissident ACP but turns out they are no such thing. The new confraternity is led by a priest who said that there is a “perception” that the ACP is not completely faithful to Catholic teaching, which must rank as the understatement of the century. I’d been told of an article on the ACP website, inspired by Pope Francis’s “Who am I to judge “gays”” (without the inverted commas of course.) So, I paid a quick visit and sure enough, the ACP is, if anything, worse than ever.

    Check it out here – and then check the aims of the ACP and see if you think the new confraternity, with its “diplomatic” refusal to call the ACP a bunch of dissenting er priests, will make a blind bit of difference over there in once-Catholic Ireland. Seems to me that the new confraternity is about as much use as a chocolate teapot. And I say that, despite the fact that I love chocolate 😀

    March 3, 2014 at 8:23 pm
    • Leo

      “Many pastors have destroyed my vineyard, they have trodden my portion under foot: they have changed my delightful portion into a desolate wilderness.” – Jeremias 12:10

      “Henceforth the enemy of the Church is no longer outside the Church; he is now within”. -Pope Saint Pius X, encyclical E supremi apostolatus, October 4, 1903


      The objectives of the ACP certainly need to be seen to be believed. Nothing original, of course. In fact, it looks rather like the ring leaders went to Pascendi Dominici Gregis for their material and decided on a few of the Modernist errors condemned by Pope Saint Pius X.

      Rather than encourage your readers to boost visitor numbers at ACP’s website, it might be helpful to do a bit a comparing:

      Pascendi warns that Modernists “disdain all authority and brook no restraint: and relying upon a false conscience, they attempt to ascribe to love of truth that which in reality is the result of pride and obstinacy.” (# 3)

      The ACP invokes the “primacy of the individual conscience.”

      Pascendi warns of Modernist belief that “ecclesiastical government requires to be reformed in all its branches, but especially in its disciplinary and dogmatic parts” (# 38) and that the “ecclesiastical magisterium must be subordinate” to “individual consciences” (# 25).

      The ACP calls for “all believers to be treated as equal”, as well as for a “redesigning of Ministry in the Church” and a “restructuring of the governing system of the Church”.

      Pascendi warns that Modernists “lay down the general principle that in a living religion everything is subject to change” (# 26) and for them “there is nothing immutable in the Church” (# 28).

      The ACP’s objectives include “a re-evaluation of Catholic sexual teaching.”

      Pascendi warns that Modernists “actually admit…that all religions are true” (# 14)

      The ACP claims that “full acceptance that the Spirit speaks through all people” is needed so that “the breadth of the Spirit will flow more freely.” I wonder what “Spirit” exactly that is.

      In 1894, in first pastoral letter to the clergy of Venice, Cardinal Sarto, the future sainted Pope, gave a very clear demonstration of his care for souls when declaring that liberal Catholics are “wolves in sheep’s clothing; it is more important than anything else that their murky designs should be exposed to the light and denounced.” Do those words not bear constant repetition today?

      They are nothing more than the restatement of those of another great Saint and pastor:

      “It is an act of charity to cry out against the wolf when he is amongst the sheep, wherever he is.”- Saint Francis de Sales, Introduction to the Devout Life, Part 3 chp. 29

      It isn’t possible to overstate the importance of combatting liberalism, the work and instrument of lucifer. Sin against the Faith is the worst of all breeches of the Divine Law. In rejecting even one Church dogma, liberals reject the very teaching authority instituted by Our Lord, and visible in this world in the form of His One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. Such rejection wilfully declares that the individual’s own private judgement is the supreme and final arbitrator in faith and morals. Once that line is crossed, the rejection of every element of Divine Law is on the agenda. Though many will of course strenuously deny it, dissenters who reject the Church’s constant and infallible Magisterium march straight from the City of God into the City of Satan; no doubt waving many ignorant and gullible souls onto the path to perdition.

      What Ireland, like everywhere else, needs right now are a couple of battalions of resolute medieval Dominicans. In happier times, any propagator of toxic poison such as those included in the ACP’s objectives would have faced a very uncomfortable appointment at the Holy Office, which might have resulted in adjusted attitudes, and left the souls of the faithful unmolested. Nowadays, by contrast, liberal dissenters enjoy the notoriety that comes with approval of the disciples of the father of lies.

      “When there is an imminent danger for the Faith, Prelates must be questioned, even publicly, by their subjects.” –Saint Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, Second Part of the Second Part, q.33, a.4

      The ACP have now been at large for over two and half years. It hardly needs repetition that this continuing threat to the salvation of souls is just one more example of catastrophic dereliction of episcopal duty. The inaction speaks very loudly indeed.

      No doubt, the shepherds who bear ultimate responsibility for the heresy and perversion which have infested the National Seminary at Maynooth haven’t demonstrated any noticeable determination to alleviate the grave concerns of those Catholics who exercise their right under Canon Law to question the continuing scandal of open dissent amongst the clergy. Perhaps the repetition of the following words might, by the Grace of God, have some effect:

      “And if the watchman see the sword coming, and sound not the trumpet: and the people look not to themselves and the sword come, and cut off a soul from among them: he indeed is taken away in his iniquity, but I will require his blood at the hand of the watchman.” – Ezechiel 33:6

      It really is time to wipe the dust off the Oath against Modernism.

      March 5, 2014 at 1:55 pm
      • Margaret Mary


        That a very good point about not pushing up the numbers of visitors on the ACP website. I like your comparison between what those priests preach and what the Church actually teaches.

        It’s also a first class point to “wipe the dust off the Oath against Modernism”. Unfortunately, I don’t see it happening any time soon.

        March 5, 2014 at 4:55 pm
      • Leo

        Margaret Mary

        Truth be told, as I see it, the enforcement of the Oath Against Modernism doesn’t reasonably appear to be any closer than the Consecration of Russia. One may well follow the other, though.

        As for the Oath, at this point in time, how many Cardinals, Bishops, Seminary professors, and priests could actually take it without being guilty of perjury? Certain names automatically spring to mind when it comes to that matter.Then again, all those who attended Vatican II, and many bishops since then, did actually swear the Oath. That’s a rather grave cause for thought.

        With the runaway train getting faster and faster, and considering the way Tradition is treated in the Church right now, it’s as if we are not far off priests being required to take an Oath OF Modernism.

        March 5, 2014 at 6:24 pm
  • catholicconvert1

    Do the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate have a house of formation in the UK?

    March 5, 2014 at 11:30 am
    • Miles Immaculatae

      St. Joseph’s, Burslem, Stoke-on-Trent.

      The FFI won’t be around for much longer.

      It is likely they will be forced to become mainstream capuchins.

      Pope Francis will have single handedly exterminated an entire religious order.

      March 5, 2014 at 4:25 pm
      • Margaret Mary

        Miles Immaculatae,

        I didn’t see your answer to Catholic Convert before I posted mine. That is terrible if the Pope has “single handedly exterminated” them. I wish he would exterminate the ACP.

        March 5, 2014 at 4:53 pm
      • Miles Immaculatae

        There is now evidence that Fr Manelli, the FFI founder, was libelled. This conspiracy against him and his order is totally criminal. To remain silent about the people involved (a la Voris), i.e. even if they are the Supreme Pontiff, IMHO is a sin against justice.

        The neo-Catholics defended Pope Francis’ actions against the FFI by highlighting Volpi’s allegations concerning Fr Manelli’s illegal financial conduct. These allegations have turned out to be utterly unfounded. And the neo-Catholics had the audacity to accuse Traditionalists of ‘rumour-mongering’.

        There is also evidence that the Church was informed about Maciel’s sodomitic violations of children in the 1970’s. Yet nothing was done about this. The Legionaries of Christ remain an intact order. No wonder people hate the Catholic Church. The Vatican is a thoroughly bent enterprise. I am profoundly scandalised.

        I assert, that based on the proofs I have seen, Pope John Paul II undermined a investigation into Maciel by the CDF that took place after nine formal allegations (including former priests) were lodged with the Holy See in 1998. These investigations were shelved. Consider that nothing was done about Maciel until after John Paul II literally died. I believe John Paul II was criminally responsible in this matter, a cover-up. Maciel’s own illegitimate son (who was sodomised by him) recalls how Maciel told his mother, “when John Paul II dies, I’ll be in trouble”. Sick.

        March 5, 2014 at 11:35 pm
      • Josephine

        Miles Immaculatae,

        I wholeheartedly agree with everything you say.

        The scandalous tolerance of Maciel and the cover up of his sexual promiscuity by Pope John Paul II is one of the many reasons why his canonisation should not be taking place and if it does cannot possibly be considered infallible. No way. Any serious examination of his life shows that he was no saint by any Catholic standards used in the past.

        One thing, nobody should hate the Catholic Church because of anything the members are guilty of. I know it seems right now that ALL the members, from the top down, are causing scandal but even so, the Church is holy because the Church is Christ.

        March 6, 2014 at 8:45 am
      • Lionel (Paris)

        Are you sure that Pope John Paul II actually knew at that time what Maciel really was?

        March 7, 2014 at 11:38 pm
      • editor


        Not sure exactly what Pope John Paul II knew about Maciel, but here is an extract with link to source:

        “Could John Paul not have known about the rumours and allegations swirling around Maciel? It may well be that as his infirmity increased, his aides limited access to information. And plenty of people can now attest to how they have been duped by apparent good, kind and charming people who have turned out to lead double lives. But certainly, there was more than an inkling about Maciel, well before ill-health struck John Paul. Evidence has emerged of Maciel’s abuse of seminarians as long ago as the 1940s. An American bishop sent detailed evidence from a former Legion priest to Rome through official channels on three occasions. Nothing happened. Meanwhile the cash flowed into the Vatican’s coffers from Maciel’s wealthy friends.

        By 2004, Jason Berry and the late Gerald Renner had exposed his double life in their book and documentary Vows of Silence. The following year, Maciel stood down from running the Legionaries, and just days before the death of John Paul, the then Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger was speaking of the “filth in the church”, widely interpreted as meaning child abusers in general and quite possibly Maciel in particular. It took Ratzinger just a year following his election as Pope Benedict XVI to discipline Maciel and invite him to a life of penitence and prayer.” Source

        March 8, 2014 at 12:02 am
      • Lionel (Paris)

        Thank you, Dear Editor, for this crucial information!
        Kind regards LD

        March 8, 2014 at 10:08 pm
      • editor


        Absolutely disgraceful. Maybe this will draw more commentary on the new thread, just posted, asking the question “what can we do”…?

        March 6, 2014 at 2:17 pm
    • Margaret Mary

      Catholic Convert

      I found this but it says they do not give the traditional Mass any prominence

      March 5, 2014 at 4:51 pm
  • Wendy walker

    Dear All
    I am writing to inform you that a wonderful event called 40 DAYS FOR LIFE Starts today Worldwide
    People go outside Abortion mills and Pray and offer help and carry placards to make passers by aware of what goes on inside ……..and give out factual leaflets on the harm abortion can do !
    Please can I ask you to pray for this? And/ or fast ?even if you cannot go outside any mill or Hospital that does abortions and if you want to send a donation
    Please go to
    It would be wonderful to see this happening in every Town or City and outside every Abortion mill….We must speak up about the horror of Abortion …sadly lots of people are genuinely very uneducated about abortion and all it encompasses when they do realise often they become very PRO LIFE they cannot believe this could happen around us
    Thank you and Bless you

    March 5, 2014 at 12:20 pm
  • gabriel syme

    In a strong statement, Pope Francis has hit out at criticism of the Church regarding sex abuse.

    Pope Francis has strongly defended the Roman Catholic Church’s record on tackling sexual abuse by priests.

    In a rare interview with an Italian newspaper, the Pope said “no-one else has done more” to root out paedophilia.

    He said the Church had acted with transparency and responsibility, yet it was the only institution to have been attacked.”

    That’s what I expect from the Pope, to defend the Church, not delight enemies by criticising or running it down.

    He has also said that other Popes may follow Benedict XVIs example of retiring and has attacked his own public “superhero” image. This is the right thing to do as his personality cult is reaching ridiculous levels. You can even buy a weekly “Pope Francis” magazine in Italy now.

    March 5, 2014 at 4:05 pm
    • Josephine

      “He has also said that other Popes may follow Benedict XVIs example of retiring”

      I hope he does that soon.

      March 5, 2014 at 4:22 pm

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: