Are We Witnessing a Chastisement of the Church & the World Due to the Second Vatican Council?editor
The Council and the Eclipse of God by Don Pietro Leone – CHAPTER 11 (part 4) : The Effects of Council Teaching in terms of Chastisement
B. The Effects of Council Teaching in terms of Chastisement
In this section we consider the effect of antirealist subjectivism in its theological form of self-deifying atheism. Clearly the most notable effect of this sacrilege consists in chastisement. We consequently here investigate:
- The Motive for the Chastisement of the Church and the World;
- The Nature of Chastisement Consequent on Man’s Repudiation of God in General;
- The Nature of Chastisement Consequent on the Council’s Repudiation of God.
- The Motive for the Chastisement of the Church and the World
The motive for the chastisement that the Church and the World are now undergoing, stated more fully, is undoubtedly the Council’s failure to fulfil its duty both to God and to man. It failed in its duty to God in disobeying His mandate to exercise the munera; it failed in its duty to man in not exercising them for man’s good. We may describe this double failure of the Council as the negative motive for the chastisement; the positive motive being the self-deifying atheism in which this failure consists.
In order to understand the Council’s failure in its duty towards man, we must first place this duty in the context of the Economy of Salvation. God, according to the principle of order with which He operates in all things, desires to save man by the agency of man, and through the structure of the Church. Click here to read more…
A Council of the Church failing to fulfil its duty both to God and man… Is this possible?
Your thoughts on this, and on the chapter’s coverage of the nature of chastisement, welcome. Does any of it match what we are experiencing today? If so, is there anything we, as ordinary lay people, can do about it?
Well, that was a bit of heavy reading to begin with and I got stuck at “munera” until I read on, LOL! Then I got it. Here’s the bit that explains “munera”:
He has given the Church the entire Faith and all the sacraments ; He has entrusted Her with the three munera: with the task of teaching the Faith, of administering the sacraments, and of guiding man with pastoral care so that he might lead a life formed by the same Faith and sacraments, and thereby attain the Heavenly Kingdom. These munera are exercised by the ministers of the Church for the benefit, that is to say for the sanctification and salvation, of all men: not only of the members of the Church, but also of the whole World.
So, the “munera” means the Church’s task of (1) teaching the faith (2) giving us the sacraments and (3) guiding us to lead a holy life, through this faith and sacraments, so to get to Heaven.
It’s obvious that the Church is ongoing failing to do this, so it’s very clear why God would have to chastise us. I’m having to read that article in bits and pieces but it is enlightening, once you get used to the “heaviness” of it.
I am having trouble finding the rest of this book, but it is beyond brilliant. Here is a quote that seems to verify generally the specific claim of Malachi Martin in Windswept House about the satanic enthronement ceremony that took place among members of the hierarchy, somewhere in the Vatican, and by phone with a another group of hierarchy in Charleston, South Carolina on June 29, 1963:
“C. The Effects of Council Teaching in terms of Demonology
We have argued above to the devil’s agency in the Council. The result of this agency we can only describe as a form of demonic possession of the Mystical Body of the Church in its visible dimension . Demonic possession of an individual may result from malediction, from occultism, or from other sins of the utmost gravity, and if we compare the individual with the Church, we cannot but picture the abuse of the Church’s munera on the part of the Pope and of the entire Episcopacy as a sin of equal magnitude, leading to a sort of demonic possession, foreshadowed by the famous vision of Pope Leo XIII of the devils to whom power was being given over the Church .”
So far I have found these parts of this book:
Chapter 11, Pt. 1: https://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2023/01/the-council-and-eclipse-of-god-by-don.html
Ch. 11 Pt. 3: https://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2023/02/the-council-and-eclipse-of-god-by-don.html
Pt. 4 is linked in the introduction to this topic.
There is also this, but I’m not sure where it fits: https://www.corrispondenzaromana.it/international-news/don-pietro-leone-the-enemy-within-a-critique-of-vatican-ii/
You’re way in front of me, LOL! It’s interesting, though, that you quote a section about the part the devil played in the Council. We kind of knew that the demonic was in there, but it is a bit scary to see it stated in black and white in that way.
After being bowled over by the segment linked for this topic, I was compelled to look for the rest of the segments immediately.
To respond to Editor’s lead question, the answer is obviously “yes,” but there is another important element involved which the author seems to bypass (unless it’s in one of those segments I can’t find, but this book seems to focus entirely on Vatican II): the failure of the “Pope of 1960” to obey Our Lady’s requests to release the Third Secret and to perform the Consecration.
Surely, that act of disobedience had as much to do with the “withdrawal of grace” as the disobedience of the hierarchy at Vatican II.
I totally agree – not just the Council but the Consecration of Russia not happening, explains the withdrawal of grace. That’s why, in my understanding, the Fatima message was so important, if it had been heeded by the popes of the Council, we would not be experiencing that withdrawal of grace.
An alternative perspective is that all great cultures comes to an end. Civilisations have a life-cycle, much like a living organism. The West is in the late stage of its life — an inevitable decline. This was Oswald Spengler’s thesis. Our society is plagued by chaos and degeneracy, just like during the last days of the Roman empire. Late capitalist society is becoming increasingly narcissistic. The economy is broken. Hard-working university-educated young adults cannot even afford a home. And to think, western politicians heap endless criticism upon Russia and China. The nerve of it! I am frightened that when I am an old man, this country will have become an authoritarian state. Some people believe that the Islamic world will become the next great civilisation.
I don’t actually believe in Spengler’s thesis. The west did not invent Christianity. It was the other way around: Christianity built the West. Secularists take human rights for granted. They don’t realise that Christianity is the basis for the West’s system of values. Freedom, democracy, rule of law, human rights, and the abolition of slavery all have their basis in Christian values.
I believe that God has a plan to save the Church and civilisation. I pray that God will save us from totalitarianism.
My immediate thought on reading your concluding sentence is that God can hardly save us from totalitarianism if we are stupid enough to obey the nonsensical totalitarian regulations introduced by Governments to prevent us catching what is nothing more serious than a bad flu virus. Idiots.
My second thought? The Consecration of Russia is God’s plan to save us from totalitarianism, as revealed in the Fatima apparitions. We need to work and pray for that happy conclusion.
Did Pope Francis not perform the consecration?
The chastisement is due not to VII but to the fact that Pope John XXIII and his successors did not reveal the true Third Secret of Fatima, i.e. the exact words of Our Lady which follow: “In Portugal, the dogma of the Faith will always be preserved… ” and which are held by “etc” in the Fourth Memoir of Sister Lucia.
Vatican II was in the early planning stages in 1960. Malachi Martin and others have said that Pope John XXIII did not reveal the Third Secret of Fatima because it would have interfered with the plans for VII and probably would have stopped it in it’s tracks.
No, Pope Francis did not carry out the Consecration of Russia. He performed a quasi-consecration of Ukraine and Russia. It was not what Our Lady asked for. The lack of peace, or a miracle, is certain proof of that.
Spot on, Petrus.
The book isn’t in print yet but it should be ready very soon. I read a draft of it a few months ago and he has been working on reviewers comments.
He published two other books which may be of interest: The Family Under Attack and The Destruction of the Roman Rite, both published by Loreto Publications (https://loretopubs.org/). Both are very good reads. The former is of a similar style to The Council and the Eclipse of God, so it’s not a light read. It contains a critique of the Theology of the Body which I found very helpful.
Thanks for that link – I paid a flying visit and it looks really interesting. I’ll be checking it out again later on. It’s really important to find trustworthy book sources.
You asked re: chastisement: “If so, is there anything we, as ordinary lay people, can do about it? Pope John Paul II said this to a group of lay people in Fulda, Germany in 1980:
The October 1981 issue of the German magazine Stimme des Glaubens reported on a discussion that Pope John Paul II had with a select group of German Catholics, in November of 1980. The following is a verbatim report of the discussion:
Text of the Published Report
The Holy Father was asked, “What about the Third Secret of Fatima? Should it not have already been published by 1960?”
Pope John Paul II replied: “Given the seriousness of the contents, my predecessors in the Petrine office diplomatically preferred to postpone publication so as not to encourage the world power of Communism to make certain moves.
“On the other hand, it should be sufficient for all Christians to know this: if there is a message in which it is written that the oceans will flood whole areas of the earth, and that from one moment to the next millions of people will perish, truly the publication of such a message is no longer something to be so much desired.”
The Pope continued: “Many wish to know simply from curiosity and a taste for the sensational, but they forget that knowledge also implies responsibility. They only seek the satisfaction of their curiosity, and that is dangerous if at the same time they are not disposed to do something, and if they are convinced that it is impossible to do anything against evil.”
At this point the Pope grasped a Rosary and said: “Here is the remedy against this evil. Pray, pray, and ask for nothing more. Leave everything else to the Mother of God.”
The Holy Father was then asked: “What is going to happen to the Church?”
He answered: “We must prepare ourselves to suffer great trials before long, such as will demand of us a disposition to give up even life, and a total dedication to Christ and for Christ… With your and my prayer it is possible to mitigate this tribulation, but it is no longer possible to avert it, because only thus can the Church be effectively renewed. How many times has the renewal of the Church sprung from blood! This time, too, it will not be otherwise. We must be strong and prepared, and trust in Christ and His Mother, and be very, very assiduous in praying the Rosary.”
What it Means
When Pope John Paul II spoke at Fulda, he had not yet been the victim of the 1981 assassination attempt. Speaking of the Third Secret of Fatima, he did not allude to anything resembling a future assassination attempt (which in 2000 the Vatican announced to be the subject of the final part of the Secret that Our Lady revealed at Fatima in 1917), but rather to imminent chastisement and worldwide tribulation.
The Holy Father implied that evil is the force behind the elements contained in the Third Secret. The themes alluded to here by the Holy Father are consistent with those considered by leading Fatima experts to be the substance of the real Third Secret of Fatima, and are discussed in detail in the article “The Real Third Secret“. https://fatima.org/pope-john-paul-ii-in-fulda-germany-1980
I clicked that link and was overwhelmed to read this answer to a question about why the Third Secret has not been revealed, near the start of the article. It’s unbelievable that any pope would have the temerity to think that diplomacy meant the contents should be withheld, as if Our Lady lacked diplomacy! I’m stunned to read this.
“Pope John Paul II replied: “Given the seriousness of the contents, my predecessors in the Petrine office diplomatically preferred to postpone publication so as not to encourage the world power of Communism to make certain moves.
Was Pope John Paul II so stupid as not to realise that it was to protect us from Communist takeover that Our Lady wanted us to be prepared in advance by knowing the contents of that part of the Fatima message, now called the Third Secret because the Vatican/popes refuse to do what they were told to do and release it?!
To think some Catholics believe JPII is a canonised saint! He’ll be lucky if he made it into Purgatory, IMHO.
Don’t forget that he suffered a lot during the last few years of his pontificate and that he received the last Sacraments.
Yes, Pope JP II did suffer a great deal before his death and thankfully received the Last Sacraments but that doesn’t make him a canonisable saint. That makes him, hopefully, saved, but that can still mean Purgatory and, in charity, that is what we were always taught to assume, in order to pray for the release of that soul into Heaven. If Pope JP II, who did immense damage to the Church in the long years of his pontificate, is a canonisable saint, then I think we can all breathe easily about our own judgment. I’m not ever going to be that relaxed about mine, and so I count Pope JP II among the souls in Purgatory, praying for his release.
Touche. Very good points.