Is the Latin Mass Back? By Rev. Fr. Dominic Radecki, CMRI What are we to think of Benedict XVI’s recent document bringing back the Latin Mass? Perhaps your friends or relatives have already said to you: “Well, are you happy now? You got your Latin Mass back. Isn’t that what you’ve been so upset about all these years?” Well, yes... and no. Of course, we have been upset about the New Mass or Novus Ordo — that’s why I offer the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass in this church and why many of you come a long distance to attend this Tridentine Latin Mass. (The term Tridentine Latin Mass is derived from the word Trent, and refers to the authentic Latin Mass offered from the Roman Missal of Pope St. Pius V.) Most of the traditional Catholic groups springing up all over the world in the 70’s rallied around the idea that the Novus Ordo was sacrilegious and invalid. In lieu of this, the Tridentine Latin Mass or true Mass was to be preserved at all costs. Soon seminaries were established to train priests so that the true Mass and sacraments would be preserved for future generations. For many years the Church was forced once again into the “catacombs” as the "outlawed” Tridentine Latin Mass was offered in rented halls, hotel conference rooms and the living rooms of private homes. As long as we could attend the true Mass and receive valid sacraments, it didn’t matter where or under what circumstances. Over the past four decades the traditional Catholic movement has become so large in certain areas of the world that the new religion has been totally rejected and only the Latin Mass is offered. They have even purchased or built churches for this purpose. And now, the New Postconciliar, Vatican II Church, after 40 years, is saying that the Latin Mass is back. Nevertheless, we have to say to our friends and relatives, “No, we’re not happy about it.” Why not? The document or motu proprio of Benedict XVI promulgated on July 7, 2007, makes it clear that the Novus Ordo, the New “Mass” of Paul VI, is the “ordinary expression of the law of prayer of the Catholic rite” — in other words, the Novus Ordo remains the primary “Mass” of the Postconciliar Church. Now along with this “Lord’s Supper” service, Benedict is allowing a Latin Mass. However, he did not accompany the word Latin with Tridentine so this leads us to ask the question, “Which Latin Mass is it?" Some of you may remember or are familiar with the fact that in 1962 John XXIII promulgated a new missal in which St. Joseph’s name was inserted into the Canon of the Mass. Perhaps at the time you thought that this was a good thing. Here it is helpful to note that in 1815 there was a movement inaugurated among the clergy and laity to add St. Joseph’s name to the Canon. Hundreds of thousands of petitions were sent to Rome, but the Sacred Congregation of Rites remained firm in denying the request. “So careful is the Church to prevent innovations from entering into this part of the Mass that she forbids anyone to meddle with it under pain of incurring her most severe censures” (Fr. John O’Brien, A History of THE Mass and the Ceremonies in the Eastern and Western Church, 1879, p. 296.) In fact, so sacred is the Canon that no changes have been made in it since the time of Pope St. Gregory the Great in the sixth century, until John XXIII changed it. The changes made by Pope St. Gregory the Great were only minor. However, John XXIII’s insertion of St. Joseph was intended to serve as a wedge to break open the Canon of the Mass and to authorize change to the very words of Consecration, the Modernists’ ultimate target. Along with this 1962 missal came a new calendar that demoted or removed a great number of saints and feasts, including those of St. Philomena, St. Christopher, the Finding of the Holy Cross, St. Peter’s Chains and Our Lady of Mount Carmel. In addition, they made more changes in the Mass. The Confiteor prayers before Holy Communion were eliminated, as well as the Last Gospel and Leonine prayers. In 1984 John Paul II allowed this so-called Indult Mass to be offered, but only under certain circumstances and with permission of the bishop. Benedict’s decree now allows this same Indult Mass to be offered by any priest, at any time without any special permission. But this is not the Tridentine Mass, the immemorial, unchanged Mass handed down to us from Our Lord Himself and codified by Pope St. Pius V over 500 years ago! Thus it is not the true Latin Mass that is back, but rather only John XXIII’s mutilated and deformed version (known as the Indult Mass.) The media press releases, and even the pseudo-traditionalists, have shown an incorrect picture. Benedict is allowing only the 1962 pre-Novus Ordo illicit Mass of John XXIII. Even though the New Church now has two Masses, Benedict insists that there is really only one rite used two ways, or as he says, “a twofold use of one and the same rite.” Benedict’s document, the motu proprio, also allows priests to pray the 1962 breviary and to use the old rite for the sacraments of Baptism, Matrimony, Penance and “Anointing of the Sick.” Sounds great, doesn’t it? However, one might ask how an invalidly ordained priest can validly confect the sacraments of Penance, Extreme Unction and the Holy Eucharist, regardless of the rite used. They would have us believe that Benedict XVI is Catholic again! The “Abomination of Desolation” is over! We don’t have to crowd into a traditional Catholic church anymore. We can just go across town to our local Novus Ordo meeting hall and hope for the best. Well, before you let out a sigh of relief, let’s take a close look at this decree, what it really means and the reasons behind it. With this Apostolic Letter to the Universal Church came a cover letter to the bishops allaying any fears they might have about the Latin Mass being restored. This letter is very insightful. Even a cursory or hasty reading of it betrays a master of deceit at work. That’s just what the Modernists are, masters of deceit, and Benedict XVI is a master among masters. What are Rome’s motives for allowing the Latin Mass to come back? In his letter to the bishops, Benedict tells them not to be afraid and confused by his decree because the Novus Ordo “Mass” of Paul VI is still and will remain the Mass of the New Church. The Latin Mass of John XXIII, he says, was never really abolished. (He is right, of course — it was the Tridentine Mass of Pope St. Pius V that was abolished in the postconciliar Church.) Benedict admits that the Modernists thought that after Vatican II people would forget all about the Tridentine Latin Mass as time went on. But they didn’t count on so many people stubbornly adhering to the true Mass. He writes, “It soon became apparent that a good number of people remained strongly attached to the Mass which had been familiar to them from childhood.” Surprisingly enough, even young people were attracted to the Tridentine Latin Mass, not just the old fogies! So many people, in fact, that the bishops are having to “constantly evaluate anew how they are to respond to various situations.” Clearly we’re a thorn in their side and the bishops can’t deal with it anymore. That’s why Benedict is going to give them a Latin Mass. But he goes on to say that the bishops have nothing to fear. In his own words Benedict says, “The use of the old missal presupposes a certain degree of liturgical formation and some knowledge of the Latin language, and neither of these is found very often... From these concrete presuppositions, it is dearly seen that... [the Novus Ordo] will certainly remain the ordinary form of the Roman rite, because of the actual situation in the communities of the faithful." Translated, this means that since the Novus Ordo priests no longer know or understand Latin, and very few have any training in the liturgical ceremonial or the rubrics, the Novus Ordo will end up being the only service offered anyway! How pacifying, how diabolically deceitful! Benedict is allowing the Latin Mass, realizing that almost no one knows how to say it anyway! So why is Benedict making this useless gesture, this show of tradition? Probably to placate the people, since so many have been leaving the false religion of the Postconciliar Church and it is suffering the consequences. Benedict further puts a contingency on the offer of his Latin Mass. He expects that as Rome has accepted the traditional Mass, so too traditional Catholics must accept the New “Mass” in order to experience “full communion.” Benedict says that, “The priests adhering to the former usage [that is, traditionalists] cannot, as a matter of principle, exclude celebrating according to the new books [the Novus Ordo]. To do so would be a failure to recognize the value and holiness of the New Mass." Let me ask you, my dearly beloved in Christ, what would and should you do IF it were announced — note that I’m saying IF it were announced — that next Sunday we were going to experience full communion with the new religion by celebrating the holiness of the Novus Ordo or New “Mass"? The pews would be empty and all of you would be looking for a Tridentine Latin Mass again. Why would you continue to reject the New “Mass"? Because you know that it is not a Mass at all; it is invalid. The Novus Ordo or “Lord’s Supper [by definition], the assembly or gathering together of the people of God, with a priest presiding, to celebrate the Memorial of the Lord,” is a typical Protestant service — a celebration of praise and thanksgiving. Benedict would have us believe that the New “Mass” is the same as the Tridentine Mass. However, this is untrue. The Novus Ordo is NOT a propitiatory sacrifice, a sacrifice to atone for sin, as is the unchanging Holy Sacrifice of the Mass in which Christ, through the ministry of the priest, offers Himself to God in an unbloody manner under the appearances of bread and wine. It is said that if a person tells a lie often enough, people will accept it as truth. This nevertheless does not change the fact that the truth remains regardless of how many follow the lie. The Tridentine Latin Mass is the true Mass and anything short of it is false. It is interesting to note that a recent press release headlined the story this way: “Pope Frees Up Use of Old Latin Mass. Stresses No Reversal on Vatican II.” And they had it right — nothing is changed. This is a cunning move on the part of the Modernists, intended to lure traditional Catholics back into the one world church of anti-Christ. The results of Vatican II are still in full force — new catechisms, new canon laws, new sacraments, new doctrines, new “Mass,” new everything — except the collection basket! Church officials told the press that Benedict is in no way refuting Vatican II. The document, Vatican spokesman Rev. Rederico Lombardi said, “doesn’t impose any return to the past, it does not mean any weakening of the authority of the Council.” After Vatican II, not only was the Mass changed, but also the rite of ordination of priests and the consecration of bishops were substantially changed. The 1968 rite for the ordination of bishops completely destroyed and replaced the very form of consecration as clearly determined by Pope Pius XII in 1947 in his Apostolic Constitution Sacramentum Ordinis. By following the same principle of sacramental theology taught by Pope Leo XIII in in which the pope declared Anglican orders invalid, the bishops consecrated in the 1968 rite are not valid bishops. Invalid bishops cannot validly ordain priests. Invalid priests who use the Latin Mass will offer invalid Masses. Thus, most of the sanctuaries of the postconciliar churches are staffed by invalidly ordained clerics. Regardless, then, of any seeming concessions, present or future, there will always remain in the postconciliar Church a lifeless ceremonial with no inner value, grace or effect. Satan has thus tried and will continue to try to deceive “even the elect” with his illusion of Catholicism, ever seeking the ruin of immortal souls. Commenting on the words of the Gospel for the 7th Sunday after Pentecost, St. Hilary says: “We should look not so much to what a man says, as to what he does; for there are many who hide the ravening of a wolf under sheep’s clothing. As, then, thorns do not bear grapes, nor do thistles produce figs, and evil trees do not bring forth good fruit, so the Lord teaches, neither do evil men bring forth good works. Therefore all men are to be known by their works” (Roman Breviary, 3rd Nocturn of Matins, 7th Sunday after Pentecost). “Therefore, by their fruits you will know them.”

Bishop Salvador Lazo D.D.

To His Holiness POPE JOHN PAUL II Bishop of Rome and Vicar of Jesus Christ, Successor of St. Peter, Prince of the Apostles, Supreme Pontiff of the Universal Church, Patriarch of the West, Primate of Italy, Archbishop and Metropolitan of the Roman Province, Sovereign of Vatican City. Ascension Thursday May 21, 1998 Most Holy Father, On the tenth anniversary of the consecration of the four Catholic bishops by His Grace Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre for the survival of the Catholic Faith, by the grace of God, I declare that I am Roman Catholic. My religion was founded by Jesus Christ when he said to Peter: Thou art Peter and upon this Rock, I will build my Church. (Mt. 16:18) Holy Father, my Credo is the Apostles’ Creed. The deposit of Faith came from Jesus Christ and was completed at the death of the last Apostle. It was entrusted to the Roman Catholic Church to serve as a guide for the salvation of souls to the end of time. St. Paul instructed Timothy: "O Timothy, keep the deposit." (I Tim. 6:20), the deposit of Faith! Holy Father, it seems that St. Paul is telling me: Keep the deposit… the deposit that is entrusted to you, not discovered by you. You received it: you did not draw it from your resources. It is not the fruit of any personal understanding but of teaching. It is not personal use, but it belongs to public tradition. It does not come from you, but it has come to you. With respect to it, you cannot act as an author, but only a simple keeper. You are not its initiator but its disciple. It is not for you to direct it, but your duty to follow it. (St. Vincent of Lerins, Commonitorium, No. 21). The Holy Council of Vatican I teaches that the doctrine of Faith that God has revealed, was not proposed to the minds of men as a philosophical discovery to be perfected, but as the divine deposit, entrusted to the Spouse of Christ that she might faithfully keep it and infallibly define it. Consequently, the meaning of the Sacred Dogmas which must always be preserved is that which our Holy Mother the Church has determined. Never is it permissible to depart from this in the name of a deeper understanding. (Dogmatic Constitution Dei Filius, Dz. 1800). The Holy Ghost was promised to the successors of Peter, not that they might make known new doctrine by His Revelation but rather that, with His assistance, they mighty religiously guard and faithfully explain the Revelation or deposit of Faith that was handed down through the Apostles. (Vatican I, Dogmatic Constitution Pastor Æternus Dz. 1836) Moreover, "the power of the pope is not unlimited; not only can he not change anything which is of divine institution (to suppress episcopal jurisdiction, for instance), but he is to build and not to destroy (cf. II Cor. 10, 8); he is enjoined, through natural law, not to sow confusion in the flock of Christ" (Dict. De Théol. Cath., II, col. 2039-2040). St. Paul too confirmed the Faith of his converts: "But though we or an angel from heaven preach a Gospel to you besides that which we have preached to you, let him be anathema." (Gal. 1:8) As a Catholic bishop, briefly, this is my stand on the post-Conciliar reforms of the Second Vatican Council. If the Conciliar reforms are according to the will of Jesus Christ, then, I will gladly cooperate in their implementation. But if the Conciliar reforms are planned for the destruction of the Catholic Religion founded by Jesus Christ, then, I refuse to give my cooperation. Holy Father, in 1969, a communication from Rome was received in San Fernando Diocese of La Union. It said the Tridentine Latin Mass was to be suppressed and the Novus Ordo Missae was to be implemented. There was no reason given. Since the order came from Rome it was obeyed without any protest (Roma locuta est, causa finita est). I retired in 1993, 23 years after my episcopal consecration. Since my retirement, I discovered the real reason for the illegal suppression of the traditional Latin Mass. The ancient Mass was an obstacle to the introduction of ecumenism. The Catholic Mass contained Catholic dogmas, which Protestants denied. To achieve unity with Protestant sects, the Tridentine Latin Mass had to be scrapped, being replaced by the Novus Ordo Missae. The Novus Ordo Missae was a concoction of Monsignor Annibale Bugnini, a freemason. Six Protestant ministers helped Monsignor Bugnini in fabricating it. The innovators saw to it that no Catholic dogmas fully and replaced them with very ambiguous Protestantizing and heretical things. They even changed the form of the consecration given by Jesus Christ. With these modifications, the new rite of the Mass became more Protestant than Catholic. The Protestants maintain that the Mass is a mere meal, a mere communion, a mere banquet, a memorial. The Council of Trent emphasized the reality of the sacrifice of the Mass, which is an unbloody renewal of the bloody sacrifice of Christ on Mount Calvary. "He, therefore, our god and Lord, though He was about to offer Himself once to God the Father upon the altar of the Cross… offered to God the Father His own body and blood under the species of bread and wine… at the last supper on the night He was betrayed, so that He might leave to His beloved Spouse the Church a visible sacrifice (as nature of man demands), whereby that bloody sacrifice once to be completed on the Cross might be represented…" (Dz 938). The Mass is also as a consequence a communion to the sacrifice previously celebrated: a banquet where one eats the immolated Victim of the sacrifice. But if there is no sacrifice there is no communion with it. Mass is first and foremost a sacrifice and secondly a communion or a meal. It is also noted that in the Novus Ordo Missae, Christ’s Real Eucharistic Presence is implicitly denied. The same observation is also true concerning the Church’s doctrine of Transubstantiation. Connected with this, in the Novus Ordo Missae, the priest has been demoted from a priest who offers a sacrifice to one who merely presides over the assembly. Now he is the president of the assembly. For this role he faces the people. In the Traditional Mass, the priest, on the contrary, faces the tabernacle and the altar where Christ is. After having known those mutations, I decided to stop saying the New Rite of Mass, which I was saying for more than twenty-seven in obedience to ecclesiastical superiors. I returned to the Tridentine Latin Mass because it is the Mass instituted by Jesus Christ at the Last Supper which is the unbloody renewal of the bloody sacrifice of Jesus Christ on Mount Calvary. This Mass of all times has sanctified the lives of millions down the centuries. Holy Father, with all the respect I have for you and for the Holy See of St. Peter, I cannot follow your own teaching of the "universal salvation", it contradicts Sacred Scripture. Holy Father, are all men going to be saved? Jesus Christ wanted all men to be redeemed. In fact, He died for us all. Still, not all men are going to be saved because not all men fulfill all the necessary conditions in order to be numbered among the elects of God in Heaven. Before Jesus Christ ascended to Heaven, He entrusted to His Apostles the duty of preaching the Gospel to every creature. His instructions already hinted that all souls were not going to be saved. He said: "Go into the whole world, and preach the Gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved, he that believeth not shall be condemned." (Mk. 16:15-16). St. Paul supported this in his instruction to his converts: "Know you not that the unjust shall not possess the Kingdom of God? Do not err, neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterous, nor the effeminate, nor sodomites, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor railers, nor extortioners shall possess the Kingdom of God." (I Cor. 6:9-10) Holy Father, should we respect false religions? Jesus Christ founded only one Church in which one can find eternal salvation. This is the Holy Roman Catholic and Apostolic Church. When He gave all the doctrines and all the truths needed to be saved Christ did not say: "Respect all false religions." In fact, the Son of God was crucified on the cross because He did not compromise His teaching. In 1910, in his letter "Our Apostolic Mandate", Pope St. Pius X warned that the interdenominational spirit is part of the great movement of apostasy being organized in every country for a one world church. Pope Leo XIII warned that to "treat all religions alike… is calculated to bring about the ruin of all forms of religion, and especially of the Catholic Religion, which, as it is the only one that is true, cannot, without great injustice, be regarded as merely equal to other religions (Encyclical Humanum Genus). The process is this: FROM CATHOLICISM TO PROTESTANTISM; FROM PROTESTANTISM TO MODERNISM; FROM MODERNISM TO ATHEISM. Ecumenism, as practiced today, flies in the face of traditional Catholic doctrine and practices. It places the one true Religion established by Our Lord on the same base level with false, man-made religions —something that popes throughout the centuries absolutely forbade Catholics to do: "It is clear that the Apostolic See can by no means take part in these (ecumenical) assemblies, nor is it in any way lawful for Catholics to give to such enterprises their encouragement or support" (Pope Pius XI, Mortalium Animos). I am for eternal Rome, the Rome of Ss. Peter and Paul. I do not follow Masonic Rome. Pope Leo XIII condemned Freemasonry in his encyclical Humanum Genus in 1884. Neither do I accept modernist Rome. Pope St. Pius X also condemned modernism in his encyclical Pascendi Dominici Gregis in 1907. I do not serve the Rome that is controlled by Freemasons who are the agents of Lucifer, the Prince of devils. But I support the Rome that leads the Catholic Church faithfully to do the will of Jesus Christ —the glorification of the most Holy and Triune God —God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Ghost. I consider myself fortunate because in this present crisis of the Catholic Church I received the grace to have returned to the Church that adheres to Catholic Tradition. Thank God, I am again saying the traditional Latin Mass —the Mass instituted by Jesus at the Last Supper, the Mass of my ordination. May the Blessed Mother Mary, St. Joseph, St. Anthony, my patron saint, St. Michael and my Guardian Angel assist me to remain faithful to the Catholic Church founded by Jesus Christ for the salvation of men. May I obtain the grace to remain and die in the bosom of the Holy Roman Catholic Apostolic Church that adheres to the ancient traditions and be always a faithful priest and bishop of Jesus Christ, the Son of God. Most respectfully, + Salvador L. Lazo, D.D. Bishop Emeritus San Fernando Diocese of La Union Philippines sspx.org © 2010 home contact

HEAVEN, HELL, PURGATORY & LIMBO

The Oath Against
Modernism Betrayed
by John Vennari

September 1, 2010, marks the 100th anniversary of Pope
St. Pius X’s promulgation of the Oath Against Modernism...
The spirit of infidelity to traditional Catholic doctrine, the lust towards change and novelty that Pius X’s anti-Modernist measures condemned, and the violation of a Sacred Oath against God by highly-placed Churchmen, is the true legacy of the Second Vatican Council and its consequence reforms

The Oath Against Modernism

Pope Saint Pius X • Sept. 1, 1910

"I sincerely hold that the doctrine of faith was handed down to us from the apostles through the orthodox Fathers in exactly the same meaning and always in the same explanation

PRAYER FOR PRIESTS

PRAYER FOR PRIESTS: "HOLY CARD IMAGE
A Prayer for Priests

O Jesus, Eternal Priest, keep Thy priests within the shelter of Thy Sacred Heart, where none may touch them.
Keep unstained their anointed hands, which daily touch Thy Sacred Body.
Keep unsullied their lips, daily purpled with Thy Precious Blood.
Keep pure and unworld!y their hearts, sealed with the sublime mark of the priesthood.
Let Thy Holy Love surround them from the world's contagion.
Bless their labors with abundant fruit, and may the souls to whom they minister
be their joy and consolation here and their everlasting crown hereafter.

Mary, Queen of the Clergy, pray for us: obtain for us numerous and holy priests. Amen.

This image is not for downloading; to order the beautiful holy card [HC-O41 ]with prayer for priests, visit

- Sent using Google Toolbar"

SEDEVACANTISM BY GERRY MATATICS

uesday, September 11, 2007

Gerry Matatic's sedevacantism

Why the FACTS Simply Support "Sedevacantism"

My objective in... is the same: to deliver in that city or town what I truly believe to be the most important talk I have ever given in my entire life.

At each venue I speak on "Counterfeit Catholicism: Why Vatican II, the New Mass, and Benedict XVI Are Not What They Claim to Be." I try to provide everything necessary to help the audience understand the magnitude of the current crisis in Catholicism, the worst ever in the 2,000-year history of the Church.

My message, summed up in one sentence, is that a) the Catholic Faith and the Catholic Church are the one true Faith and the one true Church, outside of which there is no salvation (as both Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition repeatedly affirm and as the Sacred Magisterium (Teaching Office) of the Church has infallibly defined many times), but that b) that authentic Catholic Faith and that authentic Catholic Church are no longer found at the local parish, in the local diocese, or even ruling from Rome in our day.

Since I know from experience that many people's initial reaction to this message is, "But God wouldn't let this happen!", in my talk I thoroughly demonstrate that, in fact, God already HAS let this happen several times before in Church history (though never on such a sweeping scale as today), and that God repeatedly warned us that He would let it happen again in the last days, this time on an unprecedented global scale.

In my talk I stick to easily provable facts, some of which facts many people in my audiences say they have never heard before:

Fact #1: The Vatican II Church, though it has much in common with the Catholic Church, does teach doctrines, offer worship and sacraments, and promulgate laws that have all been previously condemned by the Catholic Church as being fundamentally incompatible with the Catholic Faith.

Because there is no salvation outside of Christ (John 14:6, Acts 4:12, 1 John 5:12), and to be "in Christ" means, in Biblical terms, to be in His Mystical Body, there is thus no salvation outside of the Roman Catholic Church (extra ecclesiam nulla salus), which is Christ's Mystical Body, nor is there salvation outside the Catholic Faith perennially professed by His Church.

(Note: the Roman Catholic Church, down through Pius XII, has always unambiguously taught that She is Christ's Mystical Body; She is not merely an entity in which Christ's Mystical Body fully "subsists," so that His Body might also "subsist" -- partially but sufficiently for salvation -- in other "churches" as well. The latter is an ecclesiological novelty, and heresy, taught at Vatican II.)

Because Christ established His Mystical Body to continue His saving presence and mission in the world, and because He indwells His Church, She thus has a three-fold mission to teach, sanctify, and govern, corresponding to His three-fold office as Prophet, Priest, and King.

To effect the salvation of His elect, Christ's Church must therefore always 1) teach the same doctrines, 2) offer the same holy sacrifice of the Mass and sacraments, and 3) enforce the same divine law until the end of time, without obscurantism, distortion, violation, or pollution. As Pius XII states in his 1943 encyclical Mystici Corporis Christi, paragraph 66, "Certainly the loving Mother [Holy Mother Church] is spotless in the Sacraments, by which she gives birth to and nourishes her children; in the faith which she has always preserved inviolate; in her sacred laws imposed upon all," and similar magisterial statements.

And yet what purports to be the Catholic Church in our day -- the entity currently in possession of the infrastructure of the Church at the parish level, the diocesan level, and in Rome itself, i.e. in possession of the "real estate" formerly owned and operated by Christ's one, holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church -- manifestly violates the immutable integrity of Catholicism in all three areas:

1) The Vatican II Church teaches doctrines previously condemned by the Church as being antithetical to Catholicism, such as ecumenism, religious liberty, the salvific efficacy of Talmudic Judaism and Islam, denial of the historicity of fundamental narratives of Sacred Scripture, etc, etc. (See Fact #5 below.)

2) The Vatican II Church provides worship and sacraments that flagrantly violate the two-thousand-year teaching of the Church on what constitutes worship acceptable to God and valid and efficacious for man, such as the New Mass's radically altered words of consecration, altar girls, communion in the hand, the invalid new rite of episcopal ordination, etc., etc. (See Facts #7 and 8 below.)

3) The Vatican II Church promulgates legislation that permits things previously abominated by the Church as utterly immoral, such as cremation, membership in Freemasonry, interfaith worship and attendance at non-Catholic worship, giving sacraments to non-Catholics, etc., etc.

How can this be? To assert that this is the same Church which formerly denounced and abominated these things is to attack the divine origin, the infallibility, the indefectibility, the very credibility of the Church. It is also to speak blasphemy, to accuse the spotless Bride of Christ of spiritual adultery, of infidelity to her heavenly Bridegroom. To those reluctant to come to the logical conclusions which my talk demonstrates are unavoidable by the intellectually honest, I point out that the moment they admit that such things as the promotion of ecumenism, or altar girls, or communion in the hand are contrary to Catholic Tradition and are undesirable, they already concede the point that the Church which promotes these things CANNOT be the Catholic Church, since that Church would no longer be "spotless" in its teaching, worship, and laws, as Pius XII asserts the Catholic Church always has been and always will be.

Fact #2: The rise of such a counterfeit "church," successfully masquerading as the Catholic Church because a) composed of nearly all the former clergy and laity of the Catholic Church who lost their membership (and, in the case of the clergy, their offices) in the true Church by being spiritually seduced into subscribing to heresy, and b) possessing the real estate and controlling the infrastructure (chanceries, marriage tribunals, schools, colleges, universities and seminaries, publishing houses, etc.) formerly owned and operated by the true Church, has been foretold by numerous prophecies given, not only in Sacred Scripture but also by Our Lady and numerous saints -- including, Popes, Fathers, and Doctors of the Church.

In these prophecies God clearly warns us that prior to the Second Coming of Christ we will witness the greatest apostasy (falling away) of all time from the True Church and the True Faith, and that it will be so enormously successful precisely because it will be a "disguised apostasy," one in which God will permit a counterfeit Catholic Church to a) arise -- complete with counterfeit popes and a counterfeit hierarchy, a counterfeit Mass and sacraments -- and to b) persuade nearly all (Luke 18:8) the remaining Catholics to migrate, subtly and gradually -- "on the installment plan" -- from the real Catholic Church to the counterfeit one. This is exactly what has been going on over the last 50 years, as I show in my talk.

To prepare us for this Great Apostasy of the last days, God has permitted previous apostasies, crises, and schisms to trouble and test His Covenant People, His Church, down through the ages. Each of these foreshadows one or more aspects of the final apostasy, so that this final crisis would simply be the combination of all these previous crises, and would involve no element that had not already been undergone by the Church before, although in piecemeal fashion.

These prophecies and types fall into several logical subdivisions:

I. Biblical Prophecies and Types

Just as God provided throughout Old Testament history various prophecies and types (foreshadowings) of His Son's first coming, and of the accompanying circumstances of that advent, so that His elect would be prepared for it, so too God in His mercy has provided, throughout the Old and New Testaments, various prophecies and types of His Son's Second Coming and of its accompanying circumstances, including the great apostasy that must precede His coming.

A. Old Testament

1. Prophecies, e.g., the apocalyptic visions of chapters 7-12 of the Book of Daniel, which describe the reign of Antichrist, his suppression of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass by replacing it with "the abomination of desolation," and the consequent apostasy of nearly all of those who profess to be "the people of God".

2. Types, e.g., the fall of Lucifer, who was the head or "pope" of the angelic church; the fall of Adam and Eve, and in them the whole of humanity; the slaying of Abel by Cain, and the Scriptural type this provides of the persecution of the True Church by the Antichrist; the destruction of nearly the entire human race by the Flood in Noah's day, from which -- by means of the Ark, a type of the Church -- only a handful were saved, which Our Lord warns us foreshadows a similar situation at His return (Matthew 24:37); the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, whose all-too-obvious parallels to our time need no explanation; the pagan worship of the golden calf led by the high priest Aaron, the "pope" of the Old Testament church, which resulted in the deaths of thousands of Israelites; the extinction of all but two (Joshua and Caleb) of the adults of the Exodus generation during 40 years of wandering in the desert; the Babylonian Captivity, during which for 70 years the Israelites lost their Temple and the priesthood became non-functioning, so that the people were deprived of their normal "sacramental" life; the attempted imposition of syncretism by Antiochus (IV) Epiphanes and the Maccabean resistance to this; and various miscellaneous apostasies of Israel throughout their history in the Promised Land, culminating in her definitive apostasy at the time of Our Lord's first advent -- designed to be a type in many ways of His second advent -- with usurpers in both Church and State. (The high priests of Christ's day ere not descended from Zadok, nor were the Herodian dynasty descended from David, nor even of the tribe of Judah, nor were they even Jews!)

St. Paul teaches us in 1 Corinthians 10:1-13 that these various apostasies of the Old Testament era were written down for the instruction of Catholics -- especially the final generation of Catholics, those who will see the "ends of the ages."

B. New Testament prophecies (e.g., Matthew 24, Luke 18:8; 2 Thessalonians 2, the Apocalypse of St. John)

II. Extra-biblical types and prophecies

A. Types in the form of previous crises in the Church:

Here I discuss elements of the Arian crisis, the Nestorian crisis, the reign of antipopes (over 40 before the twentieth century), the Eastern Schism of 1054, the Great Western Schism, the various Protestant "Reformations" (Lutheran, Calvinist, English, etc.), the martyrdom of the clergy in the Japanese Church so that Japanese Catholics had no priests for over 200 years (and the similar situation in Korea), etc.

B. Specific prophecies of the end times

1. Our Lady's appearance and prophecies at LaSalette, France, on September 19, 1846: "In the last days, Rome itself will lose the Faith and become the seat of the Antichrist ... the Church will be in eclipse."

2. St. Nicholas of Flue (15th century): "The Church will sink deeper and deeper until she will at last seem to be extinguished, and the succession of Peter and the other Apostles will seem to have expired."

3. The vision of Pope Leo XIII in 1888 and his prayer to St. Michael (long, original version)

4. Prophecies and visions of the Venerable Anne Catherine Emmerich

5. Prophecies and visions of the Venerable Mary of Agreda

6. Prophecies and visions/locutions of Blessed Marie-Julie Jahenny

7. A remarkable prediction of Bishop Fulton Sheen in his 1948 book, Communism and the Conscience of the West

8. Other miscellaneous prophecies

Fact #3: The Book of Job, Pope Leo XIII's vision, and other prophecies we look at earlier in the talk make it clear that God brings about this universal apostasy by granting His enemies unprecedented access to and control over His Church, in order to bring the remnant of the end times to the ultimate testing of their Faith. The instruments of this final apostasy, under God's permissive Providence, are the long-standing plans of Talmudic Judaism, Freemasonry, Communism, Modernism, and other occult and revolutionary groups to infiltrate and subvert the Church, plans revealed in various public documents, such as the Masonic Permanent Instruction of the Alta Vendita, which I provide to my audiences, and which serve to corroborate what God's prophecies warn us to expect in the last days.

Fact #4: Since, as was mentioned above in Fact #2, section II.A, one of the crises the Church has had to undergo in her past is the reign of antipopes -- a feature we would therefore expect to reappear during the final crisis -- next in the talk we examine the beliefs of the men who have sat on the throne of St. Peter since the death of Pius XII in 1958: John XXIII, Paul VI, John Paul I & II, and Benedict XVI.

An examination of their writings, speeches, and actions readily reveals that these men were not orthodox Catholics -- even before their elections -- but modernists and manifest heretics, Freemasons, and abettors of Communism (yes, even John Paul II) and Talmudic Judaism.

As Leo XIII's 1896 encyclical Satis Cognitum, Pius XII's 1943 encyclical Mystici Corporis Christi, and many other authorities I cite clearly prove, the Church has consistently taught that anyone who knowingly embraces even a single heresy automatically severs himself from membership in the Church. That is why Pope Paul IV's 1559 bull Cum Ex Apostolatus Officio and many other authoritative statements teach that a heretic cannot be validly elected to the papacy, even if elected by the unanimous consent of all the cardinals, and even if acclaimed as pope by the whole world: one simply cannot be the head of that of which he is not even a member!

This same impossibility of membership in the Catholic Church for heretics applies also to Freemasons, Communists, and Talmudic Judaizers, by the way, so that all of these modern-day antipopes actually have several strikes against them, as stated above.

The alarming but inescapable conclusion which emerges from this is that, according to the constant teaching of the Catholic Church, John XXIII through Benedict XVI cannot be lawful successors to St. Peter, i.e. valid occupants of his papal throne. The see of Peter is thus vacant, not de facto but de jure, i.e., not actually but legally. From the Latin legal term, sede vacante ("the seat being vacant"), used by the Church to describe such a period between the previous legal papal reign and the next legal one (such a period occurs every time a pope dies, for example), the nickname "sedevacantist" has been inappropriately and inaccurately (as I show in my talk) applied to those who recognize the unlawful character of the reign of these five usurpers. (I prefer the term "consistent Catholic," for reasons I explain in the talk.)

Each of these five men is thus an example of "the Man of Lawlessness" described by St. Paul in 2 Thessalonians 2 as "sitting in the Temple of God" (i.e., the Church, which is the temple of God under the New Covenant; see, e.g., 1 Corinthians 3:16), wreaking havoc on the faithful and fomenting the Great Deception described in that chapter, one that leads nearly all Catholics into what has rightly been called the "silent apostasy" of the post-Vatican II era.

Fact #5: This in turn means that, as unlawful usurpers of the papacy, John XXIII had no authority to call, and Paul VI no authority to consummate, a lawful and valid general council of the Church. The therefore illicit and invalid council John XXIII and Paul VI did, respectively, call and conclude would not and could not enjoy the protection and infallibility of the Holy Ghost.

A careful examination of the teachings of the Second Vatican Council (1962-1965) shows them to contain numerous errors previously condemned by the Magisterium of the Catholic Church. These errors -- officially promulgated in the sixteen documents of Vatican II and eventually codified in the New Catechism of the Catholic (sic) Church promulgated by John Paul II in 1992 -- include, as their root error, a new ecclesiology (doctrine of the Church), by which the Church of Jesus Christ is no longer equated with the Catholic Church (as it is in all previous magisterial teaching) but is said rather to "subsist" in the Catholic Church, but to also be sufficiently present in heretical churches and even pagan religions so as to be able to impart salvation to practitioners of these false, diabolically-inspired religions. Flowing from this novel ecclesiology are several consequent errors, such as ecumenism; religious liberty; the ongoing validity of the Old Covenant today; the "truth, beauty, and goodness" of such blasphemous religions as Talmudic Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, Voodoo, animism, etc., and too many other heresies to mention.

Vatican II's official promulgation of heresies -- something a true ecumenical council of the Church, even a "pastoral" one, is incapable of doing -- shows it to be but another "robber council" like 17 others previously condemned by the Church.

Fact #6: The Church's constant teaching is that public heresy automatically excommunicates & deposes all office holders in the Church -- up to and including even a pope -- from their offices, as we've seen in the case of a pope in fact #4 above, and as Canon 188.4 of the 1917 Code of Canon Law and other proof texts make clear.

Applying this to the bishops who signed the heretical decrees of Vatican II, we conclude that, though they may have come to the Council as bishops of the Catholic Church (some had clearly become heretics even before the council), they would nevertheless have ceased to be bishops of the true Church and instead returned home to their respective dioceses as bishops of the new, counterfeit (pseudo-Catholic) church -- just as all the Catholic bishops in England during the English "Reformation" of the 1500's (except St. John Fisher, who refused to subscribe to Henry VIII's proposed schism and was martyred as a result) ceased to be bishops of the Catholic Church once they embraced the new religion and became instead the bishops of the Anglican Church, while wearing the same miters, occupying the same sees, owning the same real estate, controlling the same infrastructure, and holding sway over the same priests and laity (or claiming to) as before.

Fact #7: Moving from doctrine to worship and sacraments, we see that the Mass has been illicitly subjected to radical revisions in the wake of Vatican II. These revisions are in many cases identical to, and in some cases even worse than, the revisions made by the Protestant Reformers, all of which revisions were condemned for all time by the Catholic Church. These revisions even include tampering with the form of the sacrament, the very words which must be pronounced to make the sacrament take place. This change alone has rendered the New Mass invalid, making it the "abomination of desolation" predicted by the prophet Daniel and Our Lord. This is proven from numerous documents of the Magisterium (teaching office) of the Church.

As an aside, not only do all the Rome-approved "traditionalist" groups, such as the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter (FSSP) and the Institute of Christ the King (ICK), use the 1962 Missal when they "celebrate the Tridentine Mass," so do the priests of the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) and many other non-Rome-approved "traditionalist" clergy. As I show in my talk, the 1962 Missal is not the Tridentine Mass promulgated by Pope St. Pius V in his 1570 bull Quo Primum, but an unauthorized revision of the Mass by antipope John XXIII, which therefore provokes "the wrath of God and of the blessed Apostles Peter and Paul, as Pope St. Pius V warned in that bull.

Fact #8: Similar changes to the other sacraments render the validity of several of them suspect as well. Particularly alarming is Paul VI’s new (1968) rite for consecrating bishops, which mimics the rite composed by apostate Archbishop Thomas Cranmer during the 16th-century English “Reformation,” a rite officially declared “absolutely null and utterly void” by Pope Leo XIII in his 1895 encyclical Apostolicae Curae. Furthermore, any such revision as Paul VI's new rite is already declared invalid in advance by Pius XII in his 1947 Apostolic Constitution Sacramentum Ordinis, as by several other theological considerations which I outline in my talk.

The logical consequences of this are disturbing but undeniable. The invalid "bishops" produced by this new rite cannot help but ordain invalid "priests" (since one must be a real bishop in order to ordain a priest). And invalid "priests" -- even if they use the valid pre-Vatican II rites, as do the priests of the FSSP, the ICK, and other clergy (ordained since 1968) who offer "indult Masses" -- in turn cannot help but celebrate invalid "Masses," confer invalid absolutions, and perform invalid "extreme unctions" (since one must be a real priest to do these things). (Baptisms and marriages could, if performed properly, still be valid, since they do not require a priest. Thus, even a layman who thinks he's a "priest" would still validly dispense these sacraments, provided he does them with proper matter, form, and intention.)

Fact #9: Moving from worship and sacraments to laws, the Vatican II revolution produced not only new (previously condemned) doctrines and new (invalid) sacraments, but also new but immoral laws, finally codified in the New Code of Canon Law promulgated by John Paul II in 1984. These new laws drop the Church's historic condemnations and prohibitions of Freemasonry (membership in which meant automatic excommunication under the old 1917 Code), of mixed marriages, of intercommunion and participation in non-Catholic worship, of cremation, etc. etc.

Fact #10: The logical conclusion of all of the above is inescapable: The Vatican II church currently occupying Rome, the dioceses of the world, and the local parishes, thus teaches a different faith, offers different worship and sacraments, and imposes different laws than does the Catholic Church. By all accounts it offers a faith, worship, sacraments and laws that would not have been considered "spotless" by all the popes of the past, as Pius XII said the Church's faith, worship and sacraments, and laws will always be. Unless we are to (heretically and blasphemously) accuse the Church herself of adulterously betraying her husband (Christ) and ceasing to be the faithful steward of the message, grace, and morality He has entrusted to her, the only possible conclusion is that what is found in Rome, in your diocese, and at your local parish is no longer the Catholic Church, but the above-mentioned clever counterfeit that God Himself has permitted to take over the infrastructure of the Church, in order to fulfill His prophecies and plans.

One who denies this conclusion by arguing that, while these modern doctrines, worship, and laws are not fully Catholic, the Vatican II Church which offers them is nevertheless the Catholic Church, rejects the teaching of Pius XII (and other popes) that the true Church can never offer such aberrations. In thus rejecting the Church's authoritative teaching regarding its own fidelity and purity, such a person shows he is not a Catholic at all -- he himself has become a "counterfeit Catholic".

After fully demonstrating the above ten facts, I conclude my talk by showing that there is nothing in this "sedevacantist" position that is in any way contrary to the teachings of the Catholic Church. (On the contrary, it is the only position that is logically consistent with those teachings, and preserves those teachings from corruption or compromise.)

Christ's promise that “the gates of hell will not prevail against the Church” (Matthew 16:18), for example, in no way precludes either the reign of antipopes (over 40 in the history of the Church, by everyone's agreement), nor the absence of a valid pope for 50 years, nor the complete usurpation of Catholic parishes, dioceses, and whole national hierarchies by heretics and schismatics (as happened during the Arian heresy, the Nestorian heresy, the Eastern Schism of 1054, the English “Reformation,” etc.). Nor has the Church's indefectibility ever been understood to mean that Catholics will always be able everywhere to conveniently get sacraments at the local parish. (The English recusants of the 16th, 17th, and 18th centuries who had no Catholic parishes anymore to go to in their homeland would certainly be surprised to hear of such a notion, as would the Japanese Catholics of the 17th and 18th centuries who went over two hundred years without a priest or a Mass, or the upholders of Nicene orthodoxy in the East during the Arian crisis, when heretics occupied 99% of the episcopal sees of the Church, or -- to revert to an Old Testament example -- the Israelites during the 70 years of the Babylonian Captivity of the seventh century, who had no Temple and no functioning priesthood.) During such times of trial and tribulation, the Church still exists, and consists of those who hold fast to the traditional Faith, even if they have lost all their buildings, as St. Athanasius famously reminded the faithful of his flock during the aforementioned Arian crisis. ...

Yours in the Sacred and Immaculate Hearts for the conversion of America to the true Catholic Faith and the triumph of the Immaculate Heart,

Gerry Matatics

See GerryMatatics.org

The Maynooth Catechism - 1951

The Maynooth Catechism - 1951

QUO PRIMUM

APOSTOLIC CONSTITUTION

QUO PRIMUM
Pope St. Pius V - July 14, 1570
From the very first, upon Our elevation to the chief Apostleship, We gladly turned our mind and energies and directed all out thoughts to those matters which concerned the preservation of a pure liturgy, and We strove with God's help, by every means in our power, to accomplish this purpose. For, besides other decrees of the sacred Council of Trent, there were stipulations for Us to revise and re-edit the sacred books: the Catechism, the Missal and the Breviary. With the Catechism published for the instruction of the faithful, by God's help, and the Breviary thoroughly revised for the worthy praise of God, in order that the Missal and Breviary may be in perfect harmony, as fitting and proper - for its most becoming that there be in the Church only one appropriate manner of reciting the Psalms and only one rite for the celebration of Mass - We deemed it necessary to give our immediate attention to what still remained to be done, viz, the re-editing of the Missal as soon as possible.
Hence, We decided to entrust this work to learned men of our selection. They very carefully collated all their work with the ancient codices in Our Vatican Library and with reliable, preserved or emended codices from elsewhere. Besides this, these men consulted the works of ancient and approved authors concerning the same sacred rites; and thus they have restored the Missal itself to the original form and rite of the holy Fathers. When this work has been gone over numerous times and further emended, after serious study and reflection, We commanded that the finished product be printed and published as soon as possible, so that all might enjoy the fruits of this labor; and thus, priests would know which prayers to use and which rites and ceremonies they were required to observe from now on in the celebration of Masses.
Let all everywhere adopt and observe what has been handed down by the Holy Roman Church, the Mother and Teacher of the other churches, and let Masses not be sung or read according to any other formula than that of this Missal published by Us. This ordinance applies henceforth, now, and forever, throughout all the provinces of the Christian world, to all patriarchs, cathedral churches, collegiate and parish churches, be they secular or religious, both of men and of women - even of military orders - and of churches or chapels without a specific congregation in which conventual Masses are sung aloud in choir or read privately in accord with the rites and customs of the Roman Church. This Missal is to be used by all churches, even by those which in their authorization are made exempt, whether by Apostolic indult, custom, or privilege, or even if by oath or official confirmation of the Holy See, or have their rights and faculties guaranteed to them by any other manner whatsoever.
This new rite alone is to be used unless approval of the practice of saying Mass differently was given at the very time of the institution and confirmation of the church by Apostolic See at least 200 years ago, or unless there has prevailed a custom of a similar kind which has been continuously followed for a period of not less than 200 years, in which most cases We in no wise rescind their above-mentioned prerogative or custom. However, if this Missal, which we have seen fit to publish, be more agreeable to these latter, We grant them permission to celebrate Mass according to its rite, provided they have the consent of their bishop or prelate or of their whole Chapter, everything else to the contrary notwithstanding.
All other of the churches referred to above, however, are hereby denied the use of other missals, which are to be discontinued entirely and absolutely; whereas, by this present Constitution, which will be valid henceforth, now, and forever, We order and enjoin that nothing must be added to Our recently published Missal, nothing omitted from it, nor anything whatsoever be changed within it under the penalty of Our displeasure.
We specifically command each and every patriarch, administrator, and all other persons or whatever ecclesiastical dignity they may be, be they even cardinals of the Holy Roman Church, or possessed of any other rank or pre-eminence, and We order them in virtue of holy obedience to chant or to read the Mass according to the rite and manner and norm herewith laid down by Us and, hereafter, to discontinue and completely discard all other rubrics and rites of other missals, however ancient, which they have customarily followed; and they must not in celebrating Mass presume to introduce any ceremonies or recite any prayers other than those contained in this Missal.
Furthermore, by these presents [this law], in virtue of Our Apostolic authority, We grant and concede in perpetuity that, for the chanting or reading of the Mass in any church whatsoever, this Missal is hereafter to be followed absolutely, without any scruple of conscience or fear of incurring any penalty, judgment, or censure, and may freely and lawfully be used. Nor are superiors, administrators, canons, chaplains, and other secular priests, or religious, of whatever title designated, obliged to celebrate the Mass otherwise than as enjoined by Us. We likewise declare and ordain that no one whosoever is forced or coerced to alter this Missal, and that this present document cannot be revoked or modified, but remain always valid and retain its full force notwithstanding the previous constitutions and decrees of the Holy See, as well as any general or special constitutions or edicts of provincial or synodal councils, and notwithstanding the practice and custom of the aforesaid churches, established by long and immemorial prescription - except, however, if more than two hundred years' standing.
It is Our will, therefore, and by the same authority, We decree that, after We publish this constitution and the edition of the Missal, the priests of the Roman Curia are, after thirty days, obliged to chant or read the Mass according to it; all others south of the Alps, after three months; and those beyond the Alps either within six months or whenever the Missal is available for sale. Wherefore, in order that the Missal be preserved incorrupt throughout the whole world and kept free of flaws and errors, the penalty for nonobservance for printers, whether mediately or immediately subject to Our dominion, and that of the Holy Roman Church, will be the forfeiting of their books and a fine of one hundred gold ducats, payable ipso facto to the Apostolic Treasury. Further, as for those located in other parts of the world, the penalty is excommunication latae sententiae, and such other penalties as may in Our judgment be imposed; and We decree by this law that they must not dare or presume either to print or to publish or to sell, or in any way to accept books of this nature without Our approval and consent, or without the express consent of the Apostolic Commissaries of those places, who will be appointed by Us. Said printer must receive a standard Missal and agree faithfully with it and in no wise vary from the Roman Missal of the large type (secundum magnum impressionem).
Accordingly, since it would be difficult for this present pronouncement to be sent to all parts of the Christian world and simultaneously come to light everywhere, We direct that it be, as usual, posted and published at the doors of the Basilica of the Prince of the Apostles, also at the Apostolic Chancery, and on the street at Campo Flora; furthermore, We direct that printed copies of this same edict signed by a notary public and made official by an ecclesiastical dignitary possess the same indubitable validity everywhere and in every nation, as if Our manuscript were shown there. Therefore, no one whosoever is permitted to alter this notice of Our permission, statute, ordinance, command, precept, grant, indult, declaration, will, decree, and prohibition. Should know that he will incur the wrath of Almighty God and of the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul.
Given at St. Peter's in the year of the Lord's Incarnation, 1570, on the 14th of July of the Fifth year of Our Pontificate.

THE OATH AGAINST MODERNISM

Given by His Holiness St. Pius X September 1, 1910.
To be sworn to by all clergy, pastors, confessors, preachers, religious superiors, and professors in philosophical-theological seminaries.
I . . . . firmly embrace and accept each and every definition that has been set forth and declared by the unerring teaching authority of the Church, especially those principal truths which are directly opposed to the errors of this day. And first of all, I profess that God, the origin and end of all things, can be known with certainty by the natural light of reason from the created world (see Rom. 1:90), that is, from the visible works of creation, as a cause from its effects, and that, therefore, his existence can also be demonstrated: Secondly, I accept and acknowledge the external proofs of revelation, that is, divine acts and especially miracles and prophecies as the surest signs of the divine origin of the Christian religion and I hold that these same proofs are well adapted to the understanding of all eras and all men, even of this time. Thirdly, I believe with equally firm faith that the Church, the guardian and teacher of the revealed word, was personally instituted by the real and historical Christ when he lived among us, and that the Church was built upon Peter, the prince of the apostolic hierarchy, and his successors for the duration of time. Fourthly, I sincerely hold that the doctrine of faith was handed down to us from the apostles through the orthodox Fathers in exactly the same meaning and always in the same purport. Therefore, I entirely reject the heretical' misrepresentation that dogmas evolve and change from one meaning to another different from the one which the Church held previously. I also condemn every error according to which, in place of the divine deposit which has been given to the spouse of Christ to be carefully guarded by her, there is put a philosophical figment or product of a human conscience that has gradually been developed by human effort and will continue to develop indefinitely. Fifthly, I hold with certainty and sincerely confess that faith is not a blind sentiment of religion welling up from the depths of the subconscious under the impulse of the heart and the motion of a will trained to morality; but faith is a genuine assent of the intellect to truth received by hearing from an external source. By this assent, because of the authority of the supremely truthful God, we believe to be true that which has been revealed and attested to by a personal God, our creator and lord.
Furthermore, with due reverence, I submit and adhere with my whole heart to the condemnations, declarations, and all the prescripts contained in the encyclical Pascendi and in the decree Lamentabili, especially those concerning what is known as the history of dogmas. I also reject the error of those who say that the faith held by the Church can contradict history, and that Catholic dogmas, in the sense in which they are now understood, are irreconcilable with a more realistic view of the origins of the Christian religion. I also condemn and reject the opinion of those who say that a well-educated Christian assumes a dual personality-that of a believer and at the same time of a historian, as if it were permissible for a historian to hold things that contradict the faith of the believer, or to establish premises which, provided there be no direct denial of dogmas, would lead to the conclusion that dogmas are either false or doubtful. Likewise, I reject that method of judging and interpreting Sacred Scripture which, departing from the tradition of the Church, the analogy of faith, and the norms of the Apostolic See, embraces the misrepresentations of the rationalists and with no prudence or restraint adopts textual criticism as the one and supreme norm. Furthermore, I reject the opinion of those who hold that a professor lecturing or writing on a historico-theological subject should first put aside any preconceived opinion about the supernatural origin of Catholic tradition or about the divine promise of help to preserve all revealed truth forever; and that they should then interpret the writings of each of the Fathers solely by scientific principles, excluding all sacred authority, and with the same liberty of judgment that is common in the investigation of all ordinary historical documents.
Finally, I declare that I am completely opposed to the error of the modernists who hold that there is nothing divine in sacred tradition; or what is far worse, say that there is, but in a pantheistic sense, with the result that there would remain nothing but this plain simple fact-one to be put on a par with the ordinary facts of history-the fact, namely, that a group of men by their own labor, skill, and talent have continued through subsequent ages a school begun by Christ and his apostles. I firmly hold, then, and shall hold to my dying breath the belief of the Fathers in the charism of truth, which certainly is, was, and always will be in the succession of the episcopacy from the apostles. The purpose of this is, then, not that dogma may be tailored according to what seems better and more suited to the culture of each age; rather, that the absolute and immutable truth preached by the apostles from the beginning may never be believed to be different, may never be understood in any other way.
I promise that I shall keep all these articles faithfully, entirely, and sincerely, and guard them inviolate, in no way deviating from them in teaching or in any way in word or in writing. Thus I promise, this I swear, so help me God. . .

UNAM SANCTAM OUTSIDE THE CATHOLIC CHURCH THERE IS NO SALVATION.

UNAM SANCTAM

Bull of Pope Boniface VIII promulgated November 18, 1302
Urged by faith, we are obliged to believe and to maintain that the Church is one, holy, catholic, and also apostolic. We believe in her firmly and we confess with simplicity that outside of her there is neither salvation nor the remission of sins, as the Spouse in the Canticles [Sgs 6:8] proclaims: 'One is my dove, my perfect one. She is the only one, the chosen of her who bore her,' and she represents one sole mystical body whose Head is Christ and the head of Christ is God [1 Cor 11:3]. In her then is one Lord, one faith, one baptism [Eph 4:5]. There had been at the time of the deluge only one ark of Noah, prefiguring the one Church, which ark, having been finished to a single cubit, had only one pilot and guide, i.e., Noah, and we read that, outside of this ark, all that subsisted on the earth was destroyed.
We venerate this Church as one, the Lord having said by the mouth of the prophet: 'Deliver, O God, my soul from the sword and my only one from the hand of the dog.' [Ps 21:20] He has prayed for his soul, that is for himself, heart and body; and this body, that is to say, the Church, He has called one because of the unity of the Spouse, of the faith, of the sacraments, and of the charity of the Church. This is the tunic of the Lord, the seamless tunic, which was not rent but which was cast by lot [Jn 19:23- 24]. Therefore, of the one and only Church there is one body and one head, not two heads like a monster; that is, Christ and the Vicar of Christ, Peter and the successor of Peter, since the Lord speaking to Peter Himself said: 'Feed my sheep' [Jn 21:17], meaning, my sheep in general, not these, nor those in particular, whence we understand that He entrusted all to him [Peter]. Therefore, if the Greeks or others should say that they are not confided to Peter and to his successors, they must confess not being the sheep of Christ, since Our Lord says in John 'there is one sheepfold and one shepherd.' We are informed by the texts of the gospels that in this Church and in its power are two swords; namely, the spiritual and the temporal. For when the Apostles say: 'Behold, here are two swords' [Lk 22:38] that is to say, in the Church, since the Apostles were speaking, the Lord did not reply that there were too many, but sufficient. Certainly the one who denies that the temporal sword is in the power of Peter has not listened well to the word of the Lord commanding: 'Put up thy sword into thy scabbard' [Mt 26:52]. Both, therefore, are in the power of the Church, that is to say, the spiritual and the material sword, but the former is to be administered for the Church but the latter by the Church; the former in the hands of the priest; the latter by the hands of kings and soldiers, but at the will and sufferance of the priest.
However, one sword ought to be subordinated to the other and temporal authority, subjected to spiritual power. For since the Apostle said: 'There is no power except from God and the things that are, are ordained of God' [Rom 13:1-2], but they would not be ordained if one sword were not subordinated to the other and if the inferior one, as it were, were not led upwards by the other.
For, according to the Blessed Dionysius, it is a law of the divinity that the lowest things reach the highest place by intermediaries. Then, according to the order of the universe, all things are not led back to order equally and immediately, but the lowest by the intermediary, and the inferior by the superior. Hence we must recognize the more clearly that spiritual power surpasses in dignity and in nobility any temporal power whatever, as spiritual things surpass the temporal. This we see very clearly also by the payment, benediction, and consecration of the tithes, but the acceptance of power itself and by the government even of things. For with truth as our witness, it belongs to spiritual power to establish the terrestrial power and to pass judgement if it has not been good. Thus is accomplished the prophecy of Jeremias concerning the Church and the ecclesiastical power: 'Behold to-day I have placed you over nations, and over kingdoms' and the rest. Therefore, if the terrestrial power err, it will be judged by the spiritual power; but if a minor spiritual power err, it will be judged by a superior spiritual power; but if the highest power of all err, it can be judged only by God, and not by man, according to the testimony of the Apostle: 'The spiritual man judgeth of all things and he himself is judged by no man' [1 Cor 2:15]. This authority, however, (though it has been given to man and is exercised by man), is not human but rather divine, granted to Peter by a divine word and reaffirmed to him (Peter) and his successors by the One Whom Peter confessed, the Lord saying to Peter himself, 'Whatsoever you shall bind on earth, shall be bound also in Heaven' etc., [Mt 16:19]. Therefore whoever resists this power thus ordained by God, resists the ordinance of God [Rom 13:2], unless he invent like Manicheus two beginnings, which is false and judged by us heretical, since according to the testimony of Moses, it is not in the beginnings but in the beginning that God created heaven and earth [Gen 1:1]. Furthermore, we declare, we proclaim, we define that it is absolutely necessary for salvation that every human creature be subject to the Roman Pontiff.