Click here to see our new website: www.vaticancatholic.com

Print this page

 

E-Exchanges Archive 2

 

*This section of our website will contain some less formal – and short – e-mail exchanges that we’ve had which we feel may be of value to our readers.  This is the Archive for old E-Exchanges.  For current ones, go here: E-Exchanges  We will include those portions of the exchanges we deem relevant and valuable.  We often add bolding and underlining which are not necessarily that of the other party.  The statements from MHFM are in red and begin at the far left of the page.  The statements from the other side are indented.*

 

New V-2 Debate

 

MHFM: This is a debate on the issue of whether Vatican II (and the Vatican II sect) teaches the heresy that non-Catholics may lawfully receive Holy Communion.  William, with whom we had a more formal debate, came back to debate on this topic.  

 

Debate: does Vatican II teach that non-Catholics may lawfully receive Holy Communion? [39 min. audio]

 

This will be found permanently in the Telephone Conversations section of our Traditional Catholic Audio Programs.  For a file relating to some of the quotes mentioned in this debate, see: The Vatican II sect vs. the Catholic Church on non-Catholics receiving Holy Communion [PDF].

 

Listened

 

I wanted to tell you that I had my friend's mother listen to a little bit of some of your audio programs that I had on my iPod. She really liked what she heard. She said that they were very well done… She asked me to give her a copy of them so her and her husband could get a chance to hear the rest of them( they are both a little computer shy). I have discussed a few of the issues with the V2 church with them, but we really don't get that much time together. They have admitted they have had their own problems with the V2 Church. Hopefully once they hear what you have to say they will be fully convinced and leave the New Mass.

 

MHFM: Thanks, hopefully they will come around. 

 

Bad Confessions

 

MHFM,
 
Hello, I have two questions.  First is about St. Teresa of Avila when she said that bad confessions damn the majority of Christians.  Aside from making sure that one does not hide any sin out of pride, is there anything else one should do to ensure avoiding a bad confession? Second, I saw your headline about BeXVI changing the stations of the cross.  Are the stations of the cross that have been used previously traditional, and if not then what are the traditional stations of the cross? I would appreciate your help.
 
Kenneth

 

MHFM: We think that people can make bad confessions by attempting to justify their sins while confessing them.  In other words, they might give so many reasons or explanations, etc. that they basically excuse themselves for the sins they have committed, and in so doing can make a bad confession.

 

Benedict XVI is eliminating certain Stations of the Cross for World Youth Day, so as not to offend members of false religions.  You can find the Stations of the Cross in a traditional missal. 

 

Returned

 

Thank you for the critical information and good counsel that has helped me return to Catholicism.

 

Gloria Howard

California

 

College Blasphemy

 

Greetings, Brothers. 

 

Just couldn't resist a comment.  In your telephone debate with the NO apologist in Chicago (whose ignorance was astounding!), I, too wondered about his continual use of the term "the Deity".  However, after reading the e-mail about this abominable woman at a "Catholic" college allowing only gender-neutral terms for God, I understand why!   Of course, the most important prayer which Jesus himself taught us called the "Our Father" (do you suppose they've ever heard of it?) must be a horror to them. These people get wackier by the minute. 

 

I thank you from the bottom of my heart for all you do to spread the truth.

 

Sincerely in Christ Jesus,

Margaret Moore

 

What Heresy?

 

Really?  What heresy do I adhere to?

 

MHFM: The dogma you deny is that heretics are not members of the Catholic Church. 

 

Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, “Cantate Domino,” 1441:

“The Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that all those who are outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans but also Jews or heretics and schismatics, cannot share in eternal life and will go into the everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels, unless they are joined to the Church before the end of their lives…”

 

Pope Pius XII, Mystici Corporis Christi (# 23), June 29, 1943:

For not every sin, however grave it may be, is such as of its own nature to sever a man from the Body of the Church, as does schism or heresy or apostasy.”

 

We can see that it’s the teaching of the Catholic Church that a man is severed from the Church by heresy, schism or apostasy.

 

Pope Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum (# 9), June 29, 1896:

“The practice of the Church has always been the same, as is shown by the unanimous teaching of the Fathers, who were wont to hold as outside Catholic communion, and alien to the Church, whoever would recede in the least degree from any point of doctrine proposed by her authoritative Magisterium.”

 

Pope Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum (# 9):

“No one who merely disbelieves in all (these heresies) can for that reason regard himself as a Catholic or call himself one.  For there may be or arise some other heresies, which are not set out in this work of ours, and, if any one holds to a single one of these he is not a Catholic.”

 

Pope Innocent III, Eius exemplo, Dec. 18, 1208:

“By the heart we believe and by the mouth we confess the one Church, not of heretics, but the Holy Roman, Catholic, and Apostolic Church outside of which we believe that no one is saved.”[1][v]

 

Thus, it’s not merely the opinion of certain saints and doctors of the Church that a heretic would cease to be pope; it’s a fact inextricably bound up with a dogmatic teaching.  A truth inextricably bound up with a dogma is called a dogmatic fact.  It is, therefore, a dogmatic fact that a heretic cannot be the pope.  A heretic cannot be the pope, since one who is outside cannot head that of which he is not even a member.

 

“Catholic College”

 

Subject: An excerpt from a “Catholic college”

 

In a syllabus for Moral Theology, a nota bene appears from the ex O.P. nun who was hired as chair of theology:

A "requirement" for my class is that you will NOT refer to God as "FATHER" (Emphasis mine). The following gender 'neutral' references for God, i.e., Creator, the Loving One, etc. are acceptable. Your semester and final grades will reflect your adherence to this requirement."  Needless to say, that ex-blasphemer would have had seen me jumping out of a window after hearing that trash.

The blasphemy continues:

"Mother God, overshadows Daughter Mary."  A student in this moral theology class questioned this ex-nun by asking two questions:  The first: "What does moral theology" have to do with the incarnation? The second: "In stating that God is female and therefore "overshadowed" Daughter Mary, you are making the blasphemous assertion that Jesus Christ was born of a lesbian union!" From what I gathered, the walls of the classroom practically disintegrated.  Kudos to the student.

Again, God is so good to us for giving the truth of the Catholic Faith, and then we have these nitwit ex-nuns… While it is true that God being eternal is beyond the confines of time, space and gender,it was JESUS who REVEALED God to us as FATHER- therefore, the matter has been settled.

MOTHER GOD?? May God have mercy on those who dare even think this, much less profess it.

[Name Withheld]

 

Affected

 

DEAR BROTHER

 

I AM SO DEEPLY AFFECTED BY THE THINGS I AM READING IN YOUR BOOK.  I THINK HAVING A PRIEST TO CONFESS TO WOULD FREE ME UP INSIDE FROM A LOT OF THE BURDEN OF YEARS OF MIS-INFORMATION THAT I HAVE BEEN ABIDING BY.  I SEE IT AS A CLEANSING STEP.  BUT, TO REJECT THE MASS ALTOGETHER KNOWING THAT I AM DISABLED AND WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO TRAVEL TO A CHURCH TOO FAR AWAY I AM WORRIED.  WHAT WOULD I DO WITHOUT MASS?... 

 

PLEASE REPLY AND THANK YOU..........THERESA

 

MHFM: We’re glad to hear about your interest, but you must realize that the New Mass is not a Mass.  Why is this so hard for some people to understand or accept?  It’s not valid.  You’re not going to a Mass if you go there.  God doesn’t want you to go there.  It’s nothing more than a Protestant service: The Invalid New Mass.

 

False Traditionalist Cowards

 

MHFM: A false traditionalist named Michael Hamilton wrote to us criticizing our views on sedevacantism.  We asked him if he would be willing to have a recorded conversation, in which we could respond directly to his points and ask him our own.  He has refused.  This is not a surprise.  All of these heretics are the same.  They like to hide behind their computers and send out their arrogant and false arguments.  But they refuse to get into a conversation where their points could be directly addressed and refuted, where they can’t run and hide from the facts.  They are pathetic, and they are not of the truth.

 

V-2 Schism

Did you read in the subscriber comments for the article Orthodox bishop shares Communion with Catholics posted in "News and Commentary:"

My Greek Orthodox friend, who accepts the authority of the pope but not the filioque, will soon be formally welcomed into the Catholic Church -by the nuncio, no less- WITHOUT CEASING TO BE ORTHODOX!! This is a VERY new thing! It shows just how little separates Catholics from Orthodox and how the Catholic Church is willing to accomodate. My friend's been receiving communion in the Catholic Church -with permission- for years.

MHFM: That certainly shows how people are imbibing the heresies of the new religion and losing their souls as a result.

Cheat

 

To The Brothers Dimond:
 
While I wholeheartedly agree with 99.9 % of what's on your website, I must disagree with your views on cheating as a mortal sin for the following reasons:
 
First: As you are well aware, mortal sin must have three SIMULTANEOUS properties: grave matter, sufficient reflection and complete consent. I hardly think that
one who cheats at a game of monopoly can justifiably before God be damned for all eternity. To me, that's plain meaness and if one is sorry for such an act, it's NOT going to affect someone's salvation. While the act of cheating is indeed wrong, it cannot be compared to one who plagarizes a dissertation or paper as part of a graduation requirement and then ends up with a degree with work that was not his own, because all three elements of mortal sin were concurrent when the  act occurred.
 
Secondly: If the game of monopoly was a game in which money was being exchanged, that is gambling and this can quickly become a mortal sin if one
were to squander his wages on such a game when the revenue is needed to support himself and/or family.
 
Lastly, I don't think that any traditional Catholic would condone cheating, and as you cite, "if we were only honest in our daily lives." Yet, if we really examine our consciences, are any of us really that honest- be it with God, our neighbor or ourselves? I certainly cannot say that by any means, because in the course of a day, there are times that I stumble and fall. If we were, there would be no need for confession, correct?
 

MHFM: In response to your points: First, cheating at a serious game does constitute grave matter, as we’ve explained.  To respond by saying that it would seem “mean” for God to damn someone over that, well, then you need to read some of the Old Testament.  You need to see how God looks at disobedience to Him and a failure to live up to His truth. 

 

Second, the question of whether money was exchanged is irrelevant to the point.  We were talking about a normal game of monopoly. 

 

Third, people who would cheat at a serious game of monopoly have some significant spiritual problems.  They choose the fleeting pleasure of victory in the game over honesty; they choose to deceive their fellow men and operate dishonestly to win a game.  It’s very bad.  You seem to be justifying such mortally sinful cheating by saying “everybody stumbles and falls.”  No, people shouldn’t cheat; people shouldn’t commit mortal sin.  That’s not to say, of course, that if a person does commit a mortal sin that he cannot be forgiven.  But cheating, dishonesty and mortal sin are not things to be swept away as: “everybody stumbles and falls.”

 

Heresy

 

The Only Heresy I see is you and your website

 

[fraterjohn]

 

MHFM: That means that you don’t think that this is heresy:

 

Benedict XVI, Zenit News story, Sept. 5, 2000: “[W]e are in agreement that a Jew, and this is true for believers of other religions, does not need to know or acknowledge Christ as the Son of God in order to be saved…”

 

So that shows us what kind of person you are; you totally reject the truth of God.  So when a person like you says that the only heresy he sees is us and our website, well that speaks in our favor.

 

Supporting Heretics

 

Dear Brothers,

A lady at my work had her van repossessed and was given 2 weeks to get the money or lose the van.  She was talking about how she was going to be $200 short, so I loaned her the money so she will have her own ride to work.  This is her family's only vehicle so I felt like it was good idea to loan her the money.  Since this was a loan, would this count for supporting heretics.  Technically I'm still a N.O., so I suppose it doesn't matter as much.  Sedevacantism sounds convincing, but I am still on the fence about it.

Sincerely,

Jude Miller

 

MHFM: No, we don’t think so.  It’s possible that such an act of generosity might make her more receptive to the information you would give her about the traditional Catholic faith.  But if she shows herself to not be receptive – or to be friendly, but not intent on doing anything about the information – then you shouldn’t help her at all in the future.  We think you should recommend the website to her or give her a DVD.

 

Also, you need to become convinced of the sedevacantist position.  Heretics cannot be Catholics, and the Vatican II antipopes are heretics.

 

Debates

 

Brothers,

 

I listened to your e-exchange debates this morning as well as the latest section of the Papacy program.  Of course, I will need to listen to the papacy segment again to really take it all in.  It's fascinating to me.  The debates, on the other hand…  that first guy: the 'apologist.'…  I must say I agree with one of your readers that said only an evil spirit could argue in such a twisted way.  And he wouldn't even properly let you speak. His 'arguments' were sheer lunacy.  The second guy, the baptism,heresy,schism guy. . . I just don't know what to say.  One minute he seemed to genuinely want to learn from you, then the next minute he's saying you haven't proven the point because he himself disagrees with certain teachings of the Church which you quoted for him.  A bit of bad will there, me thinks.  Either way, I always learn alot by listening to you instruct and refute.  I love learning the history of the Church and the truths of our Faith.

 

S…

 

Reader on Cheating

 

Dear MHFM,

 

This is dedicated to the person on the e-exchange's who claimed that cheating at a serious game of Monopoly (or any other competition for that matter?) does not constitute a grave matter.

 

I am now going to quote something I read recently from the the book, The Secret of Confession by Fr. Paul O'Sullivan (Tan Pub., 1992 edition; orig. published in 1936; pages 65-66) I think you will find it relevant:

 

   "Yet, dear Madam, the sin of the Angels was a thought of revolt, and as a result a third part of those glorious spirits lost their thrones in Heaven. It was the eating of a little fruit by our First Mother , Eve, that proved the undoing of the human race. Was it not an act of disobedience that deprived Saul of his throne, and was it not a sinful glance that led holy David to the commision of a heinous crime? An act of vanity too, lost him 70,000 of his subjects. Did not the venerable Eleazar sacrifice his life rather than eat swine's flesh? And what about the death of Oza and Ahio for daring to touch the Ark?

 

   "Dear Madam, you fail to see that it is not the trifling act which is wrong, but the principle involved: the malice of the offense against an infinite God, to whom we owe our love, our gratitude and our allegiance. Surely, if God died on account of sin, sin must be dreadful. If sin is punished by Hell-fire, sin must be enourmous. When you make light of sin, you judge not Catholics, but God Himself." (emphasis my own)

 

Overwhelmed

 

I was, since yesterday, reading and listening to some of the information i came across the internet particularly in your website, mostholyfamilymonastery.com, regarding this issues about Vactican II.  the truth is i am overwhelmed about the information i have been reading and listening to that, until now, i never thought that our Catholic Church is greatly divided between bishops/priests that supported the Vatican II teachings and to those who did not. for a while now, this created a sad note in my heart for i did believe we are one united church under the Catholic Church, the one true Apostolic Church founded by our savior, Jesus Christ. i never had any idea that their is a wide schism going on underneath the Catholic Church and i believe many catholics in my parish doesn't even know about the existence of this division" (my lack of better word to describe it).


i am troubled about these things which i've read and listened to...i will pray for enlightenment and please pray for me that i will be enlightened about the real issues and to the Truth  thank you and peace be to all of you!

 

MHFM: Well, there isn’t a schism going on in the Catholic Church.  It’s that the Vatican II “Church” is not the Catholic Church, and that those who incorporate themselves into this new, false, phony, counterfeit “Church” by embracing its heresies have left the Catholic Church.  You must recognize that the New Mass is invalid (The Invalid New Mass), and that you must therefore get out of your parish.

 

Baptism

 

Dear Brothers, I have recently come across your web site and am trying to take it all in. I have felt like a lot of the holiness has been removed from the mass ever since vatican II. When I took classes to have my children baptised 20 some years ago I was told then that it was not really necessary, that God would take care of them. I have many questions for you but right now if you could answer one for me. What about the good people that died before the coming of Jesus who were not baptized. Where are they? I think of what Jesus told the man being crucified beside him, who asked Jesus to remember him when he entered his kindom and Jesus said this day you will be with me in my kindom.   Thank you    

 

Pat

 

MHFM: We get this question a lot.  It’s addressed in our book.  The law of baptism became obligatory on all after the Resurrection.  The requirements to be saved under the Old Law, or to get to the Limbo of the Fathers, were not the same as the requirements to be saved under the New Law.  The Good Thief was saved, or made it to the Limbo of the Fathers, under the Old Law.

 

Catechism of the Council of Trent, Baptism made obligatory after Christ’s Resurrection, p. 171: “Holy writers are unanimous in saying that after the Resurrection of our Lord, when He gave His Apostles the command to go and teach all nations: baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, the law of Baptism became obligatory on all who were to be saved.”

 

Medjugorje

 

Greetings again!
 
I keep reading interesting things from your website. I didn't see anything on Medjugorje so I would be interested in knowing what you think of it. Maybe you can do an article telling people your thought on Medjugorje. I'm Croatian but I don't know much about Medjugorje…

 

MHFM: Medjugorje is proven to be false because it has blatant heresies in its messages.  Here are some quick facts: The False Apparitions at Medjugorje [PDF].

 

Limbo

 

Dear Brothers,

 

A Novus Ordo friend is now perplexed about its recent demolition of the existence of Limbo,  and has asked me, a Traditional Roman Catholic,"How can they keep changing so much of what we formerly believed?"  I want to answer correctly since her doubt must be a gift from God, but can only find original references to the existence of Purgatory.  Can you help me in directing her to a specific encyclical or biblical reference?  It could be crucial in getting her to understand the deform of the Reformation revisited by imposters within the Church! 

 

                       Wishing you God's continual blessings,

                                          Cecilia Buse 

 

MHFM: Yes, all the references are found in sections 10 and 11 of our book: Outside the Catholic Church There is Absolutely No Salvation [pdf file].  There one will find numerous dogmatic statements which teach that all infants who die without Baptism are not saved.  One will find the infallible statements which declare that all who die in original sin only (i.e. unbaptized infants) or in mortal sin go to Hell, and that infants who die without Baptism go to a part of Hell where there is no fire.  This place is known as “the Limbo of the Children.”

 

Website

 

I really enjoy your website and I think it should be ranked number ONE in the whole world.  Truly God is watching you guys on this great mission to save souls especially in the darkess times in Church History.  God bless you and I will keep you in my prayers.  Good day.

Bernardo
Oregon

 

Comment

 

I just listened to your recent telephone debate with the Vatican II apologist.  What I found interesting, and perhaps revealing, was his repeated use of the phrase "that would be between him and the deity."  He used this response at least twice, I think actually three times, when you asked him if a particular hypothetical person (a non-baptized infant, a Rabbi, etc) could be saved.  That choice of a word to describe God (as opposed to say "Jesus" who is our judge) struck me as more appropriate for a Mason, or a Unitarian, than for a Christian.  Of course if you really dissect the Vatican II belief system there really isn't much difference.  

 

William T. Mulligan, Jr.

 

Europe

 

I'm live in France and more and more people begins to awake now.  It would be nice to have your videos translated in french and also in spanish, italian and german.
I think many poeple in Europe wants to know the truth now, but they need news and documents like those...

 

Regards,

Yann de Grendel

 

Bad Companies

 

Brother Michael and Brother Peter,

 

Thank you for all the info on the website. It has been a great resource for me over the years. I want to ask you a question.......

With the incredible number of corporations that either directly or indirectly support causes which are anathema to our Catholic faith, is it necessary, or better yet even possible, for me to insulate myself against companies that support homosexual causes, abortion, perversion, sinful behavior etc. etc?......

 

It seems the list continues to grow every year, and I would be changing companies constantly. Also, I really don't believe that the companies that claim not to support these causes don't support them. I think they just insulate themselves by funneling money through different channels, all the while getting money to these causes........

 

I'm just a little man out here in this cesspool of a society trying to practice my traditional Catholic faith, stay in a state of grace and save my soul. I try to lead an extremely simple Catholic life ........Am I in a state of sin because the cereal I ate for breakfast was manufactured by a company who makes donations to homosexual causes, or the insurance I have on my 17 year old car is from a company who donated to planned parenthood?...............Why do I have the feeling, the next choices I would make would also support something just as reprehensible to me..........

 

God Bless you both and the zeal you have to help people come to the Catholic faith and save their souls...........

 

Ray............

 

MHFM: Thanks for the question.  Since almost every company with which one would do business is involved with or supportive of something bad, we don’t know how one would avoid it.  So we don’t believe there is any sin in the things you mentioned.  To buy a product from a company which supports bad things is not to compromise the faith.   We would say that if it’s easy to avoid – if there’s known and easy-to-use better alternative – then one should obviously take that option in purchasing things, but one could spend his life trying to avoid getting things from companies implicated in bad causes.  When it comes to investing, however, we would say that you should try to avoid companies supportive of notoriously evil causes. 

 

One should focus his or her efforts on what really matters and makes a difference: adhering to, living, promoting and spreading the true Catholic faith and not compromising with heresy. 

 

More on Cheating

 

Dear Brothers Michael and Peter,

 

How could you say that cheating at Monopoly is a mortal sin! A mortal sin requires 3 important parts: Serious matter, sufficent reflection and full consent of the will. If any 3 are lacking there is no mortal sin. Cheating at Monopoly while not a nice thing, does not constitute serious matter. It's a shame that you tend to offer your opinions and then post them.( your opinions are not always accurate, whose opinions are?)…

 

                                                                           In true charity,

                                                                           Janet P.

 

MHFM: Cheating during a serious and competitive game of monopoly between adults who expect it to be played fairly is a serious matter.  To deliberately and clearly cheat in such an atmosphere is a grave thing.  To say that it's definitely not is absurd.  Of course, our answer presupposes that it’s a friendly but serious game between adults.   Obviously we’re not talking about a father who is playing monopoly with his 6-year old daughter who barely understands how to play the game, and slips some extra properties to end the game before her bedtime; nor are we talking about a game where no one is taking it seriously and the rules are being violated in a flagrant way and no one cares.

                          

It’s quite unsettling that you seem to think it’s not that big a deal to cheat at a game.  What kind of traditional Catholic would do that?  That’s very bad.  Perhaps if people gave more value to being honest in day to day dealings, they would be more receptive to Catholic truth.  We think that’s why so many reject or compromise the truths of faith: they are not of the truth and this is displayed in other aspects of their lives.

 

Also, you don't seem to understand that with many questions of moral theology, there is no infallible definition to consult.  Catholic principles, Catholic sense and opinions are what are advanced.  Certain things are clearly mortal sins, while others might be borderline.  On those matters, there could be a legitimate difference of opinion.

 

Cheating

 

Cheating is a mortal sin.  But I do not know if I did commit one.  I cheated at Monopoly over at my friends house and won.  But does it matter as it was just a board game?  As hard as it is to find a validly ordained priest ordained before 1968, I am not sure.

 

MHFM: We think that such cheating – if it was definitely cheating – is a mortal sin, even if it involves a game of monopoly.

 

 Comment

 

Thank you for posting that debate.  The "apologist" has no clue of the truth and suffers from the same fog as most V2 sect members.  None of them want to accept dogma "as it is written."

 

With that said, I must let you know that Fr. Pfieffer at the SSPX Chapel in Syracuse suffers from the same fog.  I recently confronted him on a tale of two priests in the society, one refers to the V2 Church a s "the true Church" while another preaches the V2 sect is "false, bastard, and invalid."  I asked him how can the society allow such a contradiction.  Fr. Pfieffer's response was "its not a contradiction based on the circumstances and that it is necessary to separate the V2 leadership from the faith."

 

Just complete ridiculousness.  He cannot and will not accept the obvious.

 

Keep up the good work.

 

Yours in Christ,

Bill Boyd

NY

 

New Info

 

MHFM: We just came across a new piece of information which is relevant to further refuting radical schismatic views today, according to which there is nowhere to go to receive sacraments at all.  Certainly the options are limited today, and in many cases there is nowhere to go.  We hope to post and discuss this point soon, when we get a chance.

 

Back

 

Thank you so much for welcoming me back-I know I have alot to do but with your support and help (if you want to), I know I can accomplish this.  I don't get to my email every day, but I will follow your advice and make this a priorty when I go online.  One question (for now)-if I cannot go to the new mass, what do I do about Church?  I live in a very small town (Oscoda Mi), and I don't think there is a Traditional Church around me.  Again-thank you again,

 

Margaret

 

MHFM: You can contact us about where to go.  In the meantime you should just stay home and pray the Rosary.  There is no obligation to attend Mass if the Church doesn't provide you with a fully Catholic one in your area.  This is explained in this file: Where to go to Mass or confession today?

 

More Feedback

 

After listening to 28 minutes of your most recent conversion caller, I am now fit for a padded room, a nice fuscia straite jacket and a nice long rest.

 

I truly appreciate the virtue of patience a lot more after listening to your conversation with an an a-typical V2 person.

 

As for me, I think I'll go hide and bury my treasure, just like Jesus said. And I promise, I won't debate whether Jesus made a dogma or not.

 

Sincerely,

 

Howard S.

Arkansas

 

MHFM: Thanks for the e-mail.  Since a person like that is of such bad will, the value in debating and discussing the issues with him is to be able to demonstrate to others the true position. 

 

-----

Dear MHFM

 

I just got done listening to your debate with Mr. Golle and I must tell you THANKS.  I am more sure in my Faith because of your clear defense against Mr. Golle and his constant rambling.

 

His idea that you are wrong because the Church is in a situation that he can not explain is simply illogical.

 

His constant refusal to answer your questions because he is not "clear of the intent" of the heretical quote made by his false popes or bishops is so revealing of the bad will he posesses.

 

 Thank you again for all you do and may Our Lord continue to bless you.

 

 Robert Blascyk

 

MHFM: This person is referring to the more formal: Debate on Sedevacantism: Are the post-Vatican II claimants to the Papacy true popes?

 

----------

Pertaining to the debate with the novus ordinarian..... OH, he's not catholic! and a liar! and a heretic! and a complete apostate!...

 

stu, montana

 

More Reader Comments

 

It was sad to listen to that V2 apologist from Chicago. It was pitiful how little he knew of Catholic teaching. It was so obvious that he was clueless.

Patrick Walsh J+M+J

--- 

I just finished listening to your debate with the so-called apologist from Chicago. He obviously doesn't understand real Catholic teaching, but that is to be expected by a modernist in the Novus Ordo. It was aggravating listening to him speak, because he just didn't have a clue and was trying desperately to debate matters he just doesn't have any knowledge of. It must be very trying on your part to speak with people who are so ignorant of true Catholic teaching. My nine year old son knows and understands more about the Catholic faith than he does. Oh well, it just goes to show that some men are just not of good will and refuse to seek and accept the truth.

 

MU

 

MHFM: Yes, of course the real problem is not primarily the fact that he was unaware of a fact or facts he should probably know.  It’s that 1) he had a chance to look at the truth, 2) rejected it, 3) convinced himself that he understood such matters and 4) refused to listen when someone was offering to share what the Church actually teaches with him.  With all of that considered, his ignorance of the basic facts he was arguing about is intolerable, in addition to his utter rejection of clear Catholic dogmas.

 

Comments

 

Dear brothers in Christ,

I've just listened the telephone conversation you had with V2 apologist.  All I can say about the apologist's position on Catholic Church teaching is that he was making a mockery on Jesus words:"But let your speech be yea, yea: no, no: and that which is over and above these, is of evil."  (Matthew 5,37). Indeed, a modernists's view (i.e. the devil's view) that every notion and the meaning of every word in the gospel and Church's teaching is fuzzy has just one purpose--to destroy the Tradition and the gospel.  Of course, that view is autodestructive too, but that IS the devil's aim—to lead his adherents to total destruction…

 

Let our Mother protect you. Please remember me in your prayers.

Vladimir

------

The gist of this Vatican II "apologist's" argument seems to be that If someone doesn't know about Christ and the true church, , then how can they be responsible for what they don't knowNevertheless  the Catholic church has dogmatically defined that outside of the Catholic church there is no salvation. 

 

God does not condemn the innocent to hell.   The fact is, they don't know because they don't want to know.  "Seek and ye shall find...."  They've stopped seeking and therefore they are not innocent. 

 

I think that poor man tied himself into a knot and was left without words.  Only an evil spirit could argue in such a twisted manner and believe he was being logical.  It's frustrating to argue with these people, but there's always hope that a spark of truth might enter their minds and change their thinking…

 

PM

 

New Debate

 

MHFM: The guy who wrote in below defending Vatican II, who called us “loons,” agreed to debate/discuss these issues on a recorded phone call.  He turns out to be an apologist for the Archdiocese of Chicago (that’s what he claims).  This audio is revealing.  It covers Vatican II and whether it teaches heresy, the salvation dogma and salvation issues, what is dogma and more…

 

Debate with Vatican II apologist [47 min. audio – May 21, 2008]

 

This will be found permanently in the Telephone Conversations section of our Traditional Catholic Audio Programs.

 

Loon

 

I think you folks are a bunch of loons.  The Council of Vatican II was rightly called by The Bishop of Rome.  You don't like it's contents so you choose to distort it.  I think you need to wise up and stop being as little bishops unto yourselves turning people away and causing confusion.  To me you are no better than the person Christ spoke of in Scripture where He said  most succinctly, "It is far better for that person to have a mill tied around their necks and be thrown into the sea than to have them deceive even just one of My Little ones".  Hey, that wasn't me and The Catholic Church didn't start in 1960. 

 

MHFM: Any honest person who knows the Catholic faith and reads this file can see that it’s you who are the bad willed loon: The Heresies in Vatican II [PDF File].  Vatican II was called by a manifest heretic who, according to Catholic teaching, could not have been a valid pope.  No, the Catholic Church didn’t start in 1960.  The Vatican II sect promulgated its many heresies against the Catholic faith in 1965.  You are no better than the person Christ spoke of in Scripture when he said, most succinctly, “He that is of God, heareth the words of God. Therefore you hear them not, because you are not of God” (John 8:47).  When you go to bed at night, think about the fact that you have defended Vatican II’s heresy that non-Catholics may lawfully receive Holy Communion.  We recognize that you heretics care almost nothing about the issues of faith, but some of you get sentimental and defensive at the thought that non-Catholics may receive it.  Yet, you remain oblivious to the fact that your sect officially teaches that it’s okay and therefore rejects Catholic teaching.

 

Meditation

 

Would it be possible for you to recommend some books for personal Catholic daily Meditation?  Thank you in advance for taking the time to consider my e-mail.  A reply would be most welcomed.

 

I remain,

Jane

 

MHFM: We recommend lives of the saints and other books of that nature.  We offer some of these at our ONLINE STORE.  Preparation for Death, True Devotion to Mary and The Secret of the Rosary are among the most important.

 

Woman who converted

 

Blessings to all  brothers & sisters in Christ;

 

As I read through the e-exchanges posted on the MHFM website, it is apparent that the truth is being presented to many.  Many website visitors voice heartfelt gratitude that they have finally found a source of the truth about Catholic dogma, as it has been, unchanged, from Christ, through the apostles, and remaining unchanged today.  I share this deep gratitude, and I owe my "discovery" of the true Christian (Catholic) faith to Brothers Michael and Peter.  Their patient guidance, willingness to speak truths that are painful to hear, and humble reassertion of truth in the face of spiritual, verbal, and physical realm attacks is utterly unique in my experience. 

 

I came to find the true faith after a lifetime of spiritual confusion.  Three years ago, my desire to know the truth intensified to the point that I spent much of my spare time, and neglected other concerns, to study the scriptures and the various sects which claimed to hold the truth.  During that time, I essentially learned what was contained in the scriptures, and repeatedly could not resolve scriptures with the teachings of the various "Christian" religions.  Simultaneously, I was becoming increasingly aware of the deteriorating condition of the world, and Satan's many ways of corrupting society (political, social, cultural, and supernatural/spiritual). 

 

Though I often went to the internet to research various religious issues, I really only stumbled on MHFM's website.  I was riveted to my computer screen until the wee hours of the morning, only to dose for a while, and go back and read more.  With a combination of elation and horror, I realized that the truth had laid buried in the dogma of the Catholic Church, all along.  (Elation, because I had finally confirmed the truth, and the promises of Christ; horror, because I was suddenly painfully aware of how much my life had offended God).  My joy, however was greatly increased when I was finally able to speak with one of the brothers by phone. 

 

Because of the condition of the world, I have, of necessity, become skilled in sensing persons' motives and degree of honesty.  Over the course of our conversation, I realized that the brother to whom I was speaking was free of guile, ruthlessly committed to the truth, completely loyal to Christ's church, while having perfect charity toward God (first) and me, in my awkward childlike need for the milk of the Word.

 

This has been the single most important information of my life, and indeed, my salvation.  It was without hesitation that I donated to MHFM, according to my means.  I continue to do so, as it is our sacred responsibility to support the Church, in its undefiled, undiluted form.  I know of no other organization that is presenting the whole truth, which is the only truth (since a half truth is a lie).

 

More recently, I have become increasingly aware of how effective MHFM's website has been in "finding" others out there, who are fertile ground, ready to receive the seed of the gospel, in its whole, undefiled purity… But, in this Great Apostasy, many seeds of the Word must fall on rocky, infertile, dry soil, for each seed that takes root on fertile, well-watered soil.  MHFM is successful in finding, and skilled in nuturing, those good-willed recipients of the Word.

 

…That's wonderful news, but there are also other, maliciously heretical websites out there, designed to confuse the people, and destroy souls.  Satan is the deceiver and the author of confusion.  This lamp, which is Most Holy Family Monastery's website, must not be allowed to be hidden or obscured by those who would create confusion and uncertainty. 

 

We are clearly in the midst of the Great Apostasy.  A succession of antipopes has been seated in Rome.  The battle lines are drawn.  Billions of people are oblivious to Satan's increasingly successful plans to destroy God's creation… 

  

Gratefully, In Jesus Christ,

 

Linda Low

 

V-2 Seminaries, EWTN

 

The more I read your website- the more I'm CONVINCED that this Vatican II garbage is just that...GARBAGE!  The Vatican II Sect claims to be oh so in tune with the Lord, yet, when I visited a friend of mine at the local seminary- I was encouraged to attend a concert by a band named "VATICAN JUSTICE" and what I saw absolutely horrified me. Seminarians dropping the proverbial "F-Bomb", engaging in what is no more than "dirty dancing" and the list goes on. Add to that, the Vice-Rector of the place has a J.C.L., yet they have a radical O.P., nun as the Canon Law Professor PLUS a 'FORMATION" advisor! Needless to say, I got out of there rather quickly. My attachment to the Vatican II Sect was left at the door after that disgraceful spectacle.

You might also be interested to know that having gone through the EWTN Archive, Father Benedict Groeschel (ANOTHER MANIFEST HERETIC OF THE WORST BREED)
was interviewed about the vocation crisis which has been brought about by idiots like him who are "clinical psychologists!" His comment was, "Don't come to us just to try us out- come to us because Christ is calling you!"  What Father Psycho-Babble has said has alienated NUMEROUS GOOD POTENTIAL VOCATIONS. Perhaps he forgot simple logic??? If one believes Christ is calling and you're rejected by a HERETIC before you can even test the call, how can you know?

There is FAR TOO MUCH WRONG with this Vatican II nonsense- it's been going on since I was in 7th Grade. As I've mentioned before, I know the theology from A-Z. The question now becomes, what are the options, AND is there a bishop who would ordain me? There are souls to be saved- and I'm ready for battle!

I look forward to your reply.
-[Name removed]

 

Resources

 

All of your resources have provided me with the invaluable assistance in my regular evangelical work among the disbelieving and the deceived.

 

Mark Stabinski,

New Jersey

 

Mother of God

 

I'm going to order your dvd's and delve deeper into this issue with them, thanks for your response. 
 
Now I'm not much of a theologian but I do have another question for you maybe you can answer.  Is it correct to say that Mary is the Mother of God, or should it be said that Mary is the Mother of God the Son, because she didn't actually Mother the Father or the Holy Ghost?  Thanks for your help on these issues.
 
Brandon

 

MHFM: It is absolutely correct to say that Mary is Mother of God.  Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is God; and Mary is His Mother.

 

Council of Ephesus, Can. 1, 431: “If anyone does not confess that Emmanuel is God in truth, and therefore that the holy virgin is the Mother of God (for she bore in a fleshly way the Word of God become flesh), let him be anathema.” 

 

The key to understanding the accuracy of the title “Mother of God” is recognizing that Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is one divine person who had two births.  He was begotten before time of the Father, and born in time and in His humanity of the Virgin Mary.  Of course it’s true (and should be understood) that Mary did not give birth to the divine nature of the Son of God (which is uncreated and from the Father from all eternity), but to His human nature. 

 

Dogmatic Athanasian Creed: “The Father uncreated, the Son uncreated, and the Holy Spirit uncreated.  The Father incomprehensible, the Son incomprehensible, and the Holy Spirit incomprehensible. The Father eternal, the Son eternal, and the Holy Spirit eternal. And yet they are not three eternals but one eternal.  As also there are not three uncreated nor three incomprehensible, but one uncreated and one incomprehensible.  So likewise the Father is almighty, the Son almighty, and the Holy Spirit almighty.   And yet they are not three almighties, but one almighty…. We believe and confess, that our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God is God and man.  He is begotten of the substance of the Father before time, and he is man born of the substance of his mother in time: perfect God, perfect man…”

 

Since Jesus Christ is one divine person (contrary to what the heretic Nestorius taught), she truly and absolutely is the Mother of God. 

 

Nestorius said that Mary should be called “Christ-bearer,” not God-bearer or Mother of God, because he heretically divided the one Christ into two persons and said that Mary gave birth to the human person.  But the truth is that Jesus Christ is one divine person with two natures, and Mary is truly His Mother for having given birth to Him in regard to His humanity.

 

Council of Chalcedon, Definition of Faith, 41: “Therefore, following the holy fathers, we all with one accord teach men to acknowledge one and the same Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, at once complete in Godhead and complete in manhood, truly God and truly man, consisting also of a reasonable soul and body; of one substance with the Father as regards his Godhead, and at the same time of one substance with us as regards his manhood; like us in all respects, apart from sin; as regards his Godhead, begotten of the Father before the ages, but yet as regards his manhood begotten, for us men and for our salvation, of Mary the Virgin, the God-bearer; one and the same Christ, Son, Lord, Only-begotten, recognized in two natures, without confusion, without change, without division, without separation…”

 

Council of Ephesus, Can. 2: “If anyone does not confess that the Word of God the Father was united to a body by hypostasis and that one is Christ with his own body, the same one evidently both God and man, let him be anathema.”

 

Council of Ephesus, Can. 5: “If anyone dares to say that Christ was a God-bearing man and not rather God in truth, being by nature one Son, even as “the Word became flesh,” and is made partaker of blood and flesh precisely like us, let him be anathema.”

 

Creation Video, Protestant writes

 

…I am a Christian, and also an engineer; and loved your Creation video.  What is interesting is that I was once a geotechnical engineer and often had to work with geologists that used the theories of stratification.  Also watched some of the video with respect to rock music, abortion, and the Masons; also good stuff; some that I was aware, some of it new revelation, especially the ties with he Mofia.  Also read some of the Vatican II article and when you look at the pictures and the methods of worship; I concur that something definitely looks wrong!

 

I also do like that you do take a stand on many issues with respect to the Catholic Church and the Protestant movement; but just as even Paul was often in error, (he even admitted it) so was Peter; so was Mary; and all of mankind. All of them needed Jesus Christ as their savior and Lord. Jesus himself rebuked even his mother Mary in the Book of John when he said it was not his time to show himself to the world. Despite this knowledge, he still honored his mother and thus, the miracle of Water to wine occurred.  These are some of the issues I have that I struggle with in the Catholic Church…

 

The video goes on and discusses that a infallible Pope is needed to make decisions when there is controversy; in this I question the circular reasoning that was conveyed when it said of the problems in the Protestant movement and that they supposedly listen to the holy spirit and yet constantly argue over doctrine.  Isn't it true that the Catholic church is in the same dilemma? …

 

John 21:15-17 

 15When they had finished eating, Jesus said to Simon Peter, "Simon son of John, do you truly love me more than these?"
      "Yes, Lord," he said, "you know that I love you."
      Jesus said, "Feed my lambs."

 16Again Jesus said, "Simon son of John, do you truly love me?"
      He answered, "Yes, Lord, you know that I love you."
      Jesus said, "Take care of my sheep."

 17 The third time he said to him, "Simon son of John, do you love me?"
      Peter was hurt because Jesus asked him the third time, "Do you love me?" He said, "Lord, you know all things; you know that I love you."

    Jesus said, "Feed my sheep.

 

This is another popular scripture that leads us into the Pope being infallible.  I look at it and the first thing I notice is that Peter was hurt; and he was hurt because Jesus asked the question 3 times reminding him that he denied Jesus 3 times. This in some ways shows how, despite Peter being imperfect; the Lord had destiny and purpose for him; but once again; only if Peter chose to walk into the revelation and say yes.  If he had said no; just as Ester; God would have found someone else to fulfill his will.  In reading the scripture; I sense the acknowledgement that Jesus is truly the son of God, perfect in every way; and by faith alone in Christ alone; am I saved…

 

I have been a Presbyterian, saved as a Baptist, baptized in the Gulf of Mexico, married as a Methodist; been a member of the Lutheran Church; have attended many Catholic services; and am currently a non-denominational… I have come to the conclusion that no one sees perfectly, no one knows all; and that only by the acknowledgment of our sins and the blood of Jesus Christ are we saved.   Yes, baptism of water is important, but the Lord also says that we shall be baptized with fire also.  I still bank on John 3:16 myself. 

  

Cameron A Moline, P.E.

 

MHFM: We’re glad that you contacted us.  You need to look at this section of our website: Refuting Protestantism and Eastern "Orthodoxy" * Audio Programs.  In it you will find audio programs which prove, from the Bible, that Jesus made St. Peter the first pope and that Justification by faith alone is rejected by the Bible.  The verse you quote from John 21 clearly proves Catholic dogma on the Papacy.  Jesus entrusts all of His sheep to Peter.  What does that mean?  It obviously means that Jesus put him in charge of His whole flock.  It’s really simple, if you look at it honestly. 

 

As far as water baptism goes, the Bible could hardly be more clear that it’s necessary for salvation (John 3:5; Mk. 16:16; 1 Peter 3:20-21; etc.).  The “Refuting Protestantism” section of our website addresses some of the other things you bring up, such as the infallibility of the pope.  Papal Infallibility is found in Luke 22:31-32, which mentions Peter’s unfailing faith.  The audios explain under what conditions a true pope is infallible.  Christ founded one Church, the Catholic Church.  It’s the only historical, logical and Biblical one.  You cannot be saved if you remain outside of it, for the version of “Christianity” you are following is a man-made separation from the one Church Christ established.

 

Baptism of Desire

 

Dear Dimond Brothers,

     I have listened to some of your radio programs and read some of your stuff.  I like a lot of it, its good to listen to something that has to do with Catholic stuff once in while instead of the normal crap that is on the radio or TV. 

     Now I have one question for you regarding your position on Baptism.  In the Gospel when Christ was being Crucified he told the thief who was also about to die 'Today shall you be with Me in Paradise' to the robber.  Now what I think happened was that the robber was not baptized by water but he had received grace from God.  I would like to know what you think of this.  Also another point I would like to point out is that Saint Thomas wrote about other forms of Baptism, like Baptism of Desire, of Blood so on, and so forth.  And I heard on one of your programs you guys stated that you can't read what a Saint says and rely on it.  Well in my understanding that in order for someone to be Canonized the Church conducts a huge investigation of their lives and all their works.  Specifically anything they wrote is examined for any bit of heresy or false doctrine.  This indicates to me that Saint Thomas' writings on Baptism of Desire were not contrary to the teachings of the Church.  One final point I would like to make on this issue.  You also cite that a manifest heretic is "ipso facto" excommunicated from the Church.  So if believing Baptism of Desire is a heretical, how can Saint Thomas and all the many other Saints that wrote about Baptism of Desire be in Heaven?

     I am not asking these questions to be quarrelsome but I just want to know how you reconcile these things with your position of no Baptism but the Baptism of Water.  I thank you guys for your radio program and for the work you are doing in exposing the false Vatican II church and I wish you the best.  God Bless.

Brandon Martinez

 

MHFM: All of those things you asked about were addressed in our book.  Outside the Catholic Church There is Absolutely No Salvation [pdf file].  There is a section on each point; the issues involved are discussed in detail.  First, the Good Thief was saved under the Old Dispensation, before the law of baptism became obligatory on all.  Second, saints can be wrong and have made many mistakes.  That’s why a few E-Exchanges back we cited St. Thomas himself on how one must follow the teaching/Tradition of the Church over the opinion of any doctor whatsoever, if the two authorities should ever be in disagreement.

 

St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, Pt. II-II, Q. 10, A. 12: “The custom of the Church has very great authority and ought to be jealously observed in all things, since the very doctrine of Catholic doctors derives its authority from the Church.  Hence we ought to abide by the authority of the Church rather than by that of an Augustine or a Jerome or of any doctor whatever.”

 

Saints are human beings and can make mistakes, even on matters pertaining to truths of faith.  This is especially true when we’re talking about finer points or points where there has been some disagreement or reason for confusion.  A heretic is someone who is obstinate against a teaching of the Church. 

 

You also mention that the Church made an investigation into the writing of St. Thomas.  Yes, the same goes for the writing of St. Gregory Nazianzen, Doctor of the Church.  He rejected baptism of desire and, guess what, the Roman Breviary even says that there is nothing in his writing that can be called into question! 

 

St. Gregory Nazianzen, 381 AD: “Of those who fail to be baptized some are utterly animal and bestial, according to whether they are foolish or wicked.  This, I think, they must add to their other sins, that they have no reverence for this gift, but regard it as any other gift, to be accepted if given them, or neglected if not given them.  Others know and honor the gift; but they delay, some out of carelessness, some because of insatiable desire.  Still others are not able to receive it, perhaps because of infancy, or some perfectly involuntary circumstance which prevents them from receiving the gift, even if they desire it

     “If you were able to judge a man who intends to commit murder, solely by his intention and without any act of murder, then you could likewise reckon as baptized one who desired Baptism, without having received Baptism.  But, since you cannot do the former, how can you do the latter?  I cannot see it.  If you prefer, we will put it like this: if in your opinion desire has equal power with actual Baptism, then make the same judgment in regard to glory.  You will then be satisfied to long for glory, as if that longing itself were glory.  Do you suffer any damage by not attaining the actual glory, as long as you have a desire for it?” (Jurgens, The Faith of the Early Fathers, Vol. 2: 1012.)

 

Here is what the liturgy has to say about the teaching of the great St. Gregory Nazianzen, who clearly rejected baptism of desire.   A reading for the feast of St. Gregory Nazianzen (May 9) in the Roman Breviary states:

 

The Roman Breviary, May 9: “He [St. Gregory] wrote much, both in prose and verse, of an admirable piety and eloquence.  In the opinion of learned and holy men, there is nothing to be found in his writings which is not conformable to true piety and Catholic faith, or which anyone could reasonably call in question.”

 

Most importantly, the dogmatic teaching of the Church agrees with St. Gregory’s position on this point; it doesn’t agree with the position of St. Thomas.  The dogmatic teaching of the Church doesn’t leave room for any salvation without water baptism.  That’s why we reject “baptism of desire,” and why everyone else should as well.

 

Baptizing while rejecting Original Sin

 

[NOTE: THIS E-EXCHANGE IS ALSO RELEVANT FOR THOSE WHO SAY THAT BAPTISMS IN THE NOVUS ORDO RITE OR BY NOVUS ORDO “PRIESTS” CANNOT BE VALID IF THE PRIESTS DENY ORIGINAL SIN OR USE THE NEW MUTILATED RITE OF BAPTISM WHICH PRESUPPOSES ITS DENIAL.  THERE ARE SOME OUT THERE AMONG THE “TRADITIONALISTS” WHO PROMOTE THIS IDEA.]

 

Brothers,

 

You are truly doing an important work in these times. You seem to be making one mistake though, and that is assuming that protestant baptisms are probably valid and therefore infants baptized by such are somehow in the Catholic Church as a result... While the Church has declared that heretics can baptize validly, the key to understanding this is to realize just what "kind" of heretics the church was refering to when she made that caveot so long ago. Historically speaking, at the time, the "heretics" in question were not protestants who DENIED the effect and meaning of the sacrament of baptism. No, the heretics in question at the time BELIEVED as the Church believed REGARDING the sacrament of Baptism. So, the orthodox, for example, while heretics, believe in the effect of removal of original sin and hence INTEND to do what the church intends to do (namely remove original sin and infuse with santifying grace). A protestant on the other hand is a different sort of heretic. A protestant does not believe that baptism actually removes sin and infuses sanctifying grace. When a prot baptises he intends only to perform an outward ritual to SYMBOLIZE faith in Christ. I don't believe there is a single prot sect that holds baptism to be regenerative. There is NO WAY most prots intend to do what the catholic church does in confering this sacrament. Actually their intentions run contrary by their explicit heresy concerning what the sacrament IS and DOES. A prot would have to believe he is removing original sin when performing the baptism or it lacks INTENTION. Perhaps some out there do,,, you never know, but as a rule,,,, we should not consider their baptisms as valid and lead others to think that. You can only say that the "intention" is "assumed" in the form IF there is no explicit public denial contrary that would indicate the person does not intend to do what the church does. Protestants by the very definition, absolutely make it clear in all their confessions and doctrine that they DENY any removal of original sin by pouring water and saying the words. I hope you agree with me on this. It needs to be made clear because most if not all protestants are not validly baptized due to their contrary intentions when performing it. If you don't believe me on this, just ask any protestant if he INTENDS TO: a.) Remove Original Sin b.) Infuse sanctifying grace c.) Incorporate into the mystical body of Christ when he baptises...So, while heretics CAN validly baptise, we have to be careful that the heretic's heresy doesn't impart a contrary intention to doing what the church does when baptizing.

Keep up the great work!

 

Joe S.

 

MHFM: No, you are not correct.  The intention required in conferring the Sacrament of Baptism is extremely minimal.  It’s simply to pour the water and say the correct words and not to interiorly fail to intend to perform the outward action.  Therefore, even false ideas about original sin do not vitiate the intention to do what the Church does.  This was confirmed by Pope St. Pius V, as shown in the quote below.  So you are not at all correct in stating that the Church has not confirmed the validity of baptisms performed by Protestants or by those who hold heretical beliefs on original sin:

 

According to Calvin baptism had not the power of taking away original sin, and the French preachers, in consequence, made it clear that in baptizing they had no intention of doing what the Roman Church understood by baptism.  The Council [of Trent] had declared that the baptism of heretics was only valid if they intended to do what was intended by the Church of Christ, and the French Catholics therefore felt serious doubts as to the validity of Calvinist baptisms.  The Congregation of the Council decided in favor of their validity, on the ground that, in spite of their errors as to the effects of baptism and the true Church of Christ, the preachers steadily maintained their intention of administering true Christian baptism, and of doing what the Christian Church had always done in conferring it.  This decision was confirmed by [Pope St.] Pius V.” (Dr. Ludwig Pastor, History of the Popes, Vol. 17, p. 205) 

 

Note: WE DO BELIEVE THAT CONDITIONAL BAPTISM SHOULD BE DONE IN MOST CASES WHERE THE BAPTISM WAS PERFORMED EITHER IN A PROTESTANT SETTING OR A NOVUS ORDO ONE.  THIS IS BECAUSE UNLESS ONE IS SURE THAT IT WAS DONE WITH THE CORRECT MATTER AND FORM, ETC., IT SHOULD BE DONE CONDITIONALLY JUST IN CASE.  ANYONE CAN DO IT.  THE FORM OF CONDITIONAL BAPTISM IS HERE: File

 

But this has been posted to correct an error which has been spread, that heretics who deny original sin cannot validly baptize because they “don’t intend to do what the Church does.”

 

Not with Him

 

Good day,

Very recently I discovered your website.  For me it is filled with many eye opening articles.  I have begun to study them and am left with questions as a result.  For instance the topic of salvation outside of the Catholic Church where below I have copied and pasted a piece of the article.  The use of Luke 11:23 for me brought to mind Luke 9:50- Jesus said to him, "Don't stop him! Whoever isn't against you is for you." The two verses seem to contradict each other.  If you could please reply to increase my understanding in this matter I would greatly appreciate it.

Pope Pius IV, Council of Trent, Iniunctum nobis, Nov. 13, 1565, ex cathedra: “This true Catholic faith, outside of which no one can be saved… I now profess and truly hold…” (Denz. 1000)

Pope Gregory XVI, Mirari Vos (# 13), Aug. 15, 1832:  “With the admonition of the apostle, that ‘there is one God, one faith, one baptism’ (Eph. 4:5), may those fear who contrive the notion that the safe harbor of salvation is open to persons of any religion whatever.  They should consider the testimony of Christ Himself that ‘those who are not with Christ are against Him,’ (Lk. 11:23) and that they disperse unhappily who do not gather with Him.  Therefore, ‘without a doubt, they will perish forever, unless they hold the Catholic faith whole and inviolate (Athanasian Creed).”

Sincerely,

Lee Alexander

 

MHFM: Actually, when you look at the two statements they mean exactly same thing. 

 

WHOEVER ISN’T WITH HIM IS AGAINST HIM

THEREFORE,

WHOEVER IS NOT AGAINST HIM (OR THEM) MUST BE WITH HIM (OR THEM)

 

If everyone who is not with Christ is against Him (Luke 11:23), then it follows that whoever isn’t against Him and His followers would be for them (Luke 9:50).  But the liberals don’t like to think of it that way.  They like to give the passage a heretical connotation, as if Jesus is saying that different religions or versions of Jesus’ Church are okay as long as they respect Jesus and His followers.  In fact, one of us was conversing with a member of the Novus Ordo who quoted the words of Luke 9:50.  We responded by quoting the words found in Luke 11:23.  She didn’t think that our citation was correct.  She failed to see that the two statements mean the same thing, and that she had a predisposition to interpret Luke 9:50 in a liberal sense, which is not in any way demanded by the text.  

 

The person who is mentioned in Luke 9:50 was a person who was applying the teaching of Jesus, but wasn’t going around with the twelve at the time.

 

Mt. Sinai

 

Hello,

I was viewing your Creation and Miracles video online and at the very beginning you present Mount Sinai as the location of the covenant site between God and Moses. However, you also state in the same slide that Mount Sinai is located in Saudi Arabia. Mount Sinai is located as part of Sinai Peninsula which is actually part of Egypt. Thought I should bring this error to your attention.

--Jeremy

 

MHFM: No, it’s not an error.  We and many others believe that the real Mt. Sinai is not in the Sinai Peninsula, but in Saudi Arabia.  This very interesting DVD, which we sell, covers the issue of the real location of Mt. Sinai and the actual spot where Moses and the Israelites crossed the Red Sea.

 

The Exodus Revealed DVD

 

How can we know?

 

Hello,

I have several questions regarding your web site. For instance, if Pope Benedict 16 is not the legitimate Pope, who is?, and where is this person? Are you people at the monastery considered to be R. Catholics? How can one know whether or not you people are simply anti-Catholics seeking to bring down the church?

Thanks for taking the time to read this E-Mail, and I hope you find the time to answer my questions.

Frank Connelly

 

MHFM: There is no pope, just as there was no pope every time the true pope died.  Yes, we are Roman Catholics.  You can know that what we’re saying is correct because we’re backing it up with the teachings of the Catholic Church, the infallible teachings of the popes.  That’s how you know that what we’re saying is true.  That’s how you judge everything, by the standard of the Magisterium.

 

No Cardinals?

 

Dear Brothers,

I was reading an online discussion of Sedevacantism in which a Vatican II sect member asked this question to a Sedevacantist: "what does it mean for the concept of the Apostolic Succession once all your validly elected Cardinals die out and those remaining have all been appointed by an Antipope? As far as I can see then it would ultimately lead to a break in the succession and with that, the end of the Catholic Church."

Could you provide an explanation to this statement?

Thanks,
Dylan.

 

MHFM: First we would point out that “Apostolic Succession” refers to bishops, not cardinals.  Second, cardinals didn’t elect the pope until the 11th century.  It was the clergy of Rome.  So it’s possible that in the future a true pope could be elected by the clergy of Rome.  Third, an argument only has validity if a person makes it specific and backs it up with a specific teaching of the Church.  Thus, the Vatican II sect member would have to cite a dogmatic statement which declares that “x” number of bishops with ordinary jurisdiction must be around for the Church to exist, and then show that the sedevacantist position contradicts that statement.  The Vatican II sect member cannot do that, of course, because no such Church teaching exists, and there is no proof that our present situation contradicts that specific number of required bishops.  So his argument fails on all fronts.  There is nothing whatsoever contrary to the indefectibility of the Church in what sedevacantists recognize. 

 

Here are some additional thoughts on the matter: Must the Catholic Remnant Have Governing Bishops?

 

Zambia

 

Dear Brothers,
 
I do not know any priest here in Zambia who was ordained in the Catholic traditional rite.  Most of those who where have since died or are retired. I do not even know, have never heard of any parish where the Latin Mass is offered.
 
Apart from under the Orthodox Church, I do not know any Priest ordained under the eastern rite.
 
I have read a few of the documents on your site and will be reading more though I rarely have access to the Internet.
 
Tell me, With these difficulties how do I deal the case of converting to the true Catholic faith under the traditional rite? Where would I go for Mass since there is no parish that I know of that is offering the Latin Mass in Zambia?...
  
In the Cross of Jesus,
Joseph Simushi.

 

MHFM: Thanks for the e-mail.  This file will give you the steps to convert.

 

The Steps to convert to the traditional Catholic faith and for those leaving the New Mass - Baptism and Conditional Baptism - the Council of Trent's Profession of Faith for Converts

 

As far as attending Mass goes, it looks like you will probably just have to stay home on Sundays.  There is no obligation to attend Mass if you don’t have an acceptable option in your area, as explained in: Where to go to Mass or confession today?  If you can find one of those retired priests you mentioned, you could go to confession to him.  Just make sure that he was ordained before 1968 and says: “I absolve you from your sins in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost.”

 

Disturbed

 

I have listened to some of your audios and read your website and feel most disturbed especially about fatima and Sr Lucy.


Geraldine Dobson

 

MHFM: People should be relieved to know what’s going on.  We hope that you do recognize what’s happening.

 

Wants to convert

 

Subject: I am interesting in converting to the Roman Catholic faith

 

Hi

My name is Sarah and I live In Tennessee and have attended mostly Baptist churches. I want to be a member of the Lord's one true church but I need to convert and I'm confused about where worship. Could you possibly help me to find a good church in the Knoxville Tennessee area for myself and my family. If you could take the time to do this for me since I am a little ignorant of what to look for and basically the entire Catholic faith I would greatly appreciate it.

Thanks
Sarah

 

Baptized children debate

 

MHFM: The following two audio files concern a recent telephone conversation/debate one of us had with a person who has to be considered a radical “traditionalist” schismatic.  (This person and his family had converted from the Novus Ordo through our website.)  The two parts together are over 1 hr. and 30 minutes in length.  This person holds the sedevacantist position and the necessity of water baptism, but he has fallen into certain schismatic positions.  This conversation/debate concerns the theological question of when the baptized infants of heretics/schismatics (the infants are made Catholics at baptism) become schismatics and/or heretics themselves.  The issue of the infallibility of canonizations also comes up in this conversation.

 

Baptism, Heresy, Schism - Tel conversation- Part 1 [1 hr.4 min. audio]

 

Baptism, Heresy, Schism - Tel conversation- Part 2 [27 min. audio]

[Note: this conversation concerns a finer point, which might not be relevant for those new to this information.  It is posted primarily to refute the schismatic errors which have been embraced by a small number of radical “traditionalists.”]

 

Many are falling into disastrous errors and schismatic positions as a result of a failure to understand and accept the Church’s teaching on what constitutes heresy, schism, subjection to the Roman Pontiff, etc.  This conversation/debate concerns, for example, the baptized children of Protestant heretics or the baptized children of Eastern “Orthodox” schismatics.  It also concerns the baptized children of those who profess to be Catholics, but aren’t.  Examples of this would include false traditionalist heretics/schismatics who obstinately agree with the heresies of the Society of St. Pius X and other false traditionalists who deny the dogma Outside the Church There is No Salvation.  Their children, who are baptized as infants, are Catholics.  So at what point do the children of these heretics become schismatics and/or heretics? 

 

We point out that any person baptized as an infant would cease to be part of the Church when the baptized person obstinately rejects a Catholic teaching (heresy) or obstinately separates from the Catholic hierarchy or the true pope (schism) or true Catholics.  This radical schismatic and others like him say that our position is actually heretical.  They say that these people become schismatics as soon as they hit the age of reason and/or go to a building which would be deemed out of communion with the Church. (These schismatics don’t like to make it clear whether they hold that these baptized infants become schismatics and/or heretics at the age of reason or whether it’s when they go to a building out of communion with the Church.  This is because their position is false and contradictory, as the conversation shows.) 

 

The tone of this conversation is at times intense and heated.  This is because this person was not simply inquiring about our position or trying to learn more about the topic.  He had already concluded that our position is heretical, after having had certain information available to him.  This conversation is another example of how people are dishonest at heart and are liars.  After contradicting himself repeatedly in this conversation, as well as changing his position and even admitting our position numerous times, this person remained obstinate in his schismatic position.  This also shows how, not just liberal heresies, but also radical schismatic positions are ensnaring souls, separating them from the Church and leading them to Hell.

 

The reason that this issue becomes very relevant is because these schismatics believe that every church building where the leading pastor is out of communion with the Catholic Church is a non-Catholic church building.  They further argue that, since it’s a non-Catholic church building, every person above reason at that church building becomes a schismatic at the age of reason.  So they hold, for example, that every person above reason who goes to the SSPX churches is a schismatic.  They would also have to apply this to every church building which recognized the post-Vatican II antipopes as true popes.  Some of them stay faithful to their schismatic position in this regard.  They conclude that Fr. Feeney (who died in 1978), Padre Pio (who died in 1968), etc. were all schismatics and/or heretics, as well as every person who thought that Paul VI was the pope – essentially every person who professed to be Catholic since 1965.  Others abandon their schismatic position when the issue of the post-Vatican II buildings come up, thus demonstrating their hypocrisy.  The point is that none of these schismatics understand the issue, and they are all schismatic for calling our correct position heretical. 

 

One of the main errors of these schismatics is their argument that one doesn’t have to be obstinate to be a schismatic.   That is wrong, as we see here.

 

St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, Pt. II-II, Q. 39, A. 2: “Hence the sin of schism is, properly speaking, a special sin, for the reason that the schismatic intends to sever himself from that unity which is the effect of charity: because charity unites not only one person to another with the bond of spiritual love, but also the whole Church in unity of spirit.  Accordingly schismatics properly so called are those who, willfully and intentionally separate themselves from the unity of the ChurchWherefore schismatics are those who refuse to submit to the Sovereign Pontiff, and to hold communion with those members of the Church who acknowledge his supremacy.”

 

Pope Clement VI, Super quibusdam, Sept. 20, 1351: “…We ask: In the first place whether you and the Church of the Armenians which is obedient to you, believe that all those who in baptism have received the same Catholic faith, and afterwards have withdrawn and will withdraw in the future from the communion of this same Roman Church, which one alone is Catholic, are schismatic and heretical, if they remain obstinately separated from the faith of this Roman Church.  In the second place, we ask whether you and the Armenians obedient to you believe that no man of the wayfarers outside the faith of this Church, and outside the obedience of the Pope of Rome, can finally be saved.” (Denz. 570b)

 

Another one of their primary errors is their argument that since people become heretics by denying the Trinity, even if they don’t know the Catholic Church condemns their heresy, that proves that heretics don’t need to be obstinate.  They fail to understand that false opinions on the Trinity and the Incarnation, which destroy essential faith in them, always entail heresy.  However, false opinions on other matters do not necessarily entail heresy unless obstinacy is present.  This is pointed out in the conversation.  This quote of St. Thomas is very interesting because it expresses exactly the position we hold and what was told to this schismatic in the conversation.  It refutes the position of the schismatics.  

 

St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, Pt. I, Q. 32, A. 4: “Anything is of faith in two ways; directly, where any truth comes to us principally as divinely taught, as the trinity and unity of God, the Incarnation of the Son and the like; and concerning these truths a false opinion of itself involves heresy, especially if it be held obstinately.  A thing is of faith, indirectly, if the denial of it involves as a consequence something against faith; as for instance if anyone said that Samuel was not the son of Elcana, for it follows that the divine Scripture would be false.  Concerning [these other] such things anyone may have a false opinion without danger of heresy, before the matter has been considered or settled as involving consequences against faith, and particularly if no obstinacy is shown; whereas when it is manifest, and especially if the Church has decided that consequences follow against faith, then the error cannot be free from heresy.  For this reason many things are now considered heretical which were formerly not so considered, as their consequences are now more manifest.  So we must decide that anyone may entertain contrary opinions about the notions, if he does not mean to uphold anything at variance with faith.  If, however, anyone should entertain a false opinion of the notions, knowing or thinking that consequences against the faith would follow, he would lapse into heresy.”

 

This is a file which contains some quotes which are relevant to the teaching of the Church on these matters:

 

Quotes on Schism, Baptism, Heresy, Subjection to the Roman Pontiff, the Trinity and Incarnation

 

Doctors

 

MHFM: This is an interesting quote with regard to the authority of the Church – and the authority of the custom/tradition of the Church – over that of Doctors of the Church and theologians.

 

St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, Pt. II-II, Q. 10, A. 12: “The custom of the Church has very great authority and ought to be jealously observed in all things, since the very doctrine of Catholic doctors derives its authority from the Church.  Hence we ought to abide by the authority of the Church rather than by that of an Augustine or a Jerome or of any doctor whatever.”

 

This would be relevant to the issue of the tradition of the Church which forbids prayer or sacrifice for catechumens who died without the Sacrament of Baptism.

 

The Catholic Encyclopedia (1907): “A certain statement in the funeral oration of St. Ambrose over the Emperor Valentinian II has been brought forward as a proof that the Church offered sacrifices and prayers for catechumens who died before baptism.  There is not a vestige of such a custom to be found anywhereThe practice of the Church is more correctly shown in the canon (xvii) of the Second Council of Braga (572 AD):  Neither the commemoration of Sacrifice [oblationis] nor the service of chanting [psallendi] is to be employed for catechumens who have died without baptism.’” (The Catholic Encyclopedia, “Baptism,” Volume 2, 1907, p. 265.)

 

Non-Catholic College

 

Is it a sin to attend a non-catholic college.

Amanda Valles

 

MHFM: No, it’s not.  They’re basically all non-Catholic anyway.  However, we would say that one should try to avoid living on campus or with a pagan roommate, if that’s at all possible.  Yes, one should avoid that like the plague.  Living in a dorm with young college-age pagans (for whom the commission of mortal sin is basically a way of life is) would be, for almost everyone, a very bad spiritual situation.  Even the spiritual life of a staunch traditional Catholic might suffer greatly in that situation.  But, to simply answer the question, “is it a sin to attend a non-Catholic college,” the answer is no. 

 

We would add, however, that if the college has a deep religious affiliation (e.g. some Protestant or Bible college), which would require some sort of acceptance of that sect, then obviously that would be a sin.  But if it’s just a matter of taking secular classes, which don’t involve any acceptance of their beliefs, then it wouldn’t be a sin.

 

Lapsed

 

I have been a lapsed Catholic for years and wish to return to my faith.

In search of support to do so, I came across your website and to say the least, I am truly shocked and dismayed.  I left the Church years ago for many reasons-I am not proud of most, but I felt inside a great hypocrisy in the Church that was part of my turning away.

Now, I am confronted with your website and in great need of true spiritual counseling to help me in my quest.

Would I be able to count on you to help me?  I am truly sorry about my transgressions and want very much to return to the Faith but where else do I have to go but to people you say are not truly part of the Church?

Please, help me.

Thank you and God Bless,


Margaret

 

MHFM: It’s good to hear that you wish to return to the Catholic Faith.  What needs to be emphasized, however, is that there isn’t hypocrisy in the Catholic Church.  Rather, the Vatican II Church is a counterfeit Church; it’s not the Catholic Church.  Our website explains what one needs to do to become a traditional Catholic.  There are also many materials to listen to (Archived Radio Programs, Traditional Catholic Audio Programs) which can assist you with many of the questions you have.  We hope you take a careful look at the website.  We would also strongly recommend our DVD special from our store, as well as the important spiritual books we offer.  We hope that you recognize what’s gone on with the Vatican II sect, and that you must not go to the New Mass, etc.

 

Justification Audio

 

Dear Brother,


I have been listening to your talk on the above subject.  Apart from your interpretation of various passages which is a matter of honest debate, it is obvious that you are a very bigoted person. This attitude does nothing to bring about the Kingdom of God… What a pity this is when the world is looking for a clear message to help solve so many personal and social problems.

Yours sincerely

Rex Cousins

 

MHFM: If you can listen to the facts and passages which are quoted in that audio, and not see that the Bible rejects Justification by faith alone, then you have a problem with bad will.

 

Constantinople, Ephesus, Chalcedon

 

MHFM: This is a new audio on the Papacy.

 

Constantinople, Ephesus, Chalcedon  - The Early Church recognized the Bishop of Rome as the successor to St. Peter's authority - Section E of Part 2 [22 min. audio]

 

This section covers the evidence for the primacy of the Roman Pontiff at the second, third and fourth ecumenical councils (Constantinople, Ephesus and Chalcedon).  It also covers St. Jerome.  This evidence from the councils is especially important because the Eastern “Orthodox” and many Protestants accept the first seven ecumenical councils.  This section also responds to objections from certain canons of Constantinople and Chalcedon.  These objections are frequently raised by critics of Catholic teaching.  The section ends with more evidence from the early Church historians Socrates and Sozomen. 

 

While this information from the early Church, which demonstrates that the full primacy of the Roman Pontiff was recognized, isn’t necessarily as “exciting” for some as the Biblical proof that St. Peter was the first pope, it is nevertheless important.  This information from the early Church demonstrates to the Eastern “Orthodox,” and to many Protestants who look to these centuries, that what Jesus founded in St. Peter continued in the Roman Pontiffs and was recognized that way from the earliest centuries.

 

This is found permanently in our: Refuting Protestantism and Eastern "Orthodoxy" * Audio Programs.

 

Potential Convert Call

 

MHFM: This is a telephone conversation we recently had with a potential convert.  We post this for those who might find it interesting or are looking for more information.

 

Potential convert calls [9 min. audio]

 

Perhaps Catholic readers can also say a few prayers that this potential convert follows through and converts.  We have created a section in our Traditional Catholic Audio Programs for these less important audio files, which are posted for those who are looking for more information or for more to listen to on these topics.

 

Jurisdiction

 

MHFM: Here’s a quote which is interesting to consider.  It concerns the fact that Pope Leo X prohibited the printing of books without special approval:

 

Therefore the pope [Leo X] forbids, with the approval of the [Fifth Lateran] Council, under pain of excommunication and of heavy fines, the printing of any book without the approbation of the Bishop and the Inquisitor, and in Rome of the Cardinal Vicar and the Mastery of the Palace.” (Dr. Ludwig Pastor, History of the Popes, Vol. 8, p. 398)

 

This law of Pope Leo X is obviously disciplinary in character.  In our day, it is no longer in force.  This is the kind of law which can be overturned or can pass out of force.  However, it serves as another example of the drastic errors and contradictions into which people fall when they fail to distinguish between dogmatic teachings and disciplinary pronouncements – i.e, when the treat the latter like the former.  Such errors are especially prevalent with those “traditionalists” who hold that no one today has jurisdiction.  Their false position is refuted in this article:

 

Facts which Demolish the "No independent priest today has Jurisdiction" Position - Did St. Vincent Ferrer have jurisdiction? If you hold the position that "no independent priest today has jurisdiction," then your answer must be no. [pdf]

 

These people are prone to lifting ecclesiastical laws from past popes and councils – laws which were in force for a specific period in the past – and rigidly applying them to our present situation.  In so doing, they demonstrate their complete failure to understand Catholic principles.  As a result, they wind up coming to utterly false conclusions, such as the false idea that no priest today has jurisdiction or the false idea that every priest must be specifically sent by an ordinary.  It’s also very common for these individuals to fall into schism.  Yet they remain oblivious to the fact that ecclesiastical laws, such as the one quoted above, condemn them.  If they want to be dogmatic with ecclesiastical laws, then they are excommunicated by the above law for publishing their schismatic and false writings on Jurisdiction and other matters.

 

West Africa

 

Hello, Bros Dimond!!!!!

 

I read with amazement some information on your website. I was seriously shocked to see so much evidence gathered against a church in which I was baptised and in which I spent the thirty years of my life so far. It's really terrible but fortunately true. I now feel as if I just woke up from a long nightmare. The first time I came across your website was by "sheer luck" if I can speak so.  When I came acroos it, my first action was to close the window. But I told to myself: "I know that something was wrong about John Paul II but what exactly I can't specify. So I will read about John Paul II's heresies and get some information". So I opened your website again, clicked on the link to the article and started reading. Then I read many other articles. What I read shed a new light on my understanding of the PostVatican II Church.

 

Today all I learnt from your website seriously shook me… The popes from JohnXXIII are fake popes of a fake Church. The New Mass is not  Catholic Worship. I radically stopped going to Novus Ordo Masses.  The problem is that here in Burkina Faso (West Africa) and particularly in the "diocese" where I am there are no traditional priests ordained according to the Traditional Rite as far as I know. Even The bishops are Novus Ordo Bishops. I just stay at home. NO Mass and NO Confession. That is very dangerous for me. In my present state, I need some guidance as far as prayers and SPIRITUAL COMMUNION(I saw it mentioned in one of your articles, but I don't really understand how it is performed) are concerned.

 

I am thinking of ordering your  6DVD Special at the end of this month.. .Thanks very much and keep on fighting so that the true Catholic Faith shall ENDURE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Yours,

 

Michael ZOUBA, BURKINA FASO

 

MHFM: Thanks for the e-mail.  Since you have no other option, we would recommend looking for an old Novus Ordo priest, who was ordained before 1968.  He could hear your confession, but you couldn’t go to his invalid Mass, of course.  As long as he says “I absolve you from your sins in the name of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost,” that would be valid.  Also, this file sets forth certain guidelines on the issue: Where to go to Mass or confession today?.  Again, it’s great to hear about your interest.  Keep praying and fighting for the faith.

 

Priests marry?

 

Should Catholic priests be allowed to marry?

 

MHFM: In the Eastern Rite the discipline has been and is that married men are allowed to be ordained as priests.  This is not so in the Roman Rite, and it shouldn’t be.  This is because the Bible clearly teaches (1 Cor. 7) that the virginal state is superior to the marital state: Refuting the Protestant rejection of the Catholic and Biblical teaching on celibacy.

 

Meaningful Art

 

MHFM: This is an interesting quote about the tapestries in the Sistine Chapel.  This meaningful display of art provides a powerful panorama of salvation history:

 

“Where the galleries ended the tapestries began, two on each side of the space allotted to the laity and three on each side of the sanctuary.  On the left, or Gospel side of the wall the Call of St. Peter hung below the Destruction of Core and his Company; under the Giving of the Law on Sinai, the Healing of the Lame Man; under the Passage of the Red Sea, the Death of Ananias; under the Infancy of Moses, the Stoning of Stephen; under the Circumcision of Moses, the Miraculous Draught of Fishes.  On the right, or Epistle side, under the Baptism of Christ was hung the Conversion of the Apostle St. Paul; under the Purification Offerings of the Lepers, the Blinding of Elymas; under the Call of the first Disciples, the Sacrifice at Lystra; under the Sermon on the Mount, the Deliverance of St. Paul from Prison; under the Committal of the Keys, the Preaching of St. Paul at Athens.  This arrangement clearly shows the skill and care with which the choice of subjects for the tapestries had been made.  They cover the walls of the Chapel as far as the galleries…” (Dr. Ludwig Pastor, History of the Popes, Vol. 8, p. 304.)

 

SSPX priest writes in

 

Reverend Dimond,

I have great respect for you huge work about the doctrine of the Church refuting the errors of Vaticanum II. 

 

Saint Augustine and Churchfathers give us the right attitude in such
matters :
- in fide unitas
- in dubio libertas
- in omnibus caritas

1) - in dubio libertas : I am not sedevacantist, and you aren't, isn't it? and this is a matter of opinion. The matter of sedevacantisme is a dubium, because nobody of us has the charism of infallibility. So I accept wholly you are a (even a fervent) catholic.

2) - in fide unitas : But your letter "A Short Refutation of the Theory of Baptism of Desire" is in contradiction with the Tradition:

a) with the condemnation by Pope Pius XII of "feeneyism", by his letter to the Bisschop of Boston (DS 3866-3873) See also DS 3879, DS 3871,

b) The council of Trent about this matter (DS 3869; 1524, 1543) See also  DS 1532 (justification)

You wrote (I found it on internet: Pope St Leo .."THE SPIRIT OF SANCTIFICATION AND THE BLOOD OF REDEMPTION AND THE WATER OF BAPTISM.  THESE THREE ARE ONE AND REMAIN INDIVISIBLE. NONE OF THEM IS SEPARABLE  FROM ITS LINK WITH THE OTHERS."

We can try to understand the doctrine of Trente by this consideration: In the baptism of desire there a grace and there is no grace without the blood of Our Lord of course, all graces come from Him. This link between the grace and this baptism must be therefore spiritual, moral, e.g. through the desire which includes an (at least implicit) act of charity towards God, and love always unites according to St Thomas Aquinas. Certainly the highest love : the love of a martyr. So there is the baptism of blood. The church is celebrating therefore the Holy Innocent Children, killed for Jezus by Herodes.

Conclusion:

the practice and doctrine of the Church tells and shows us that "water" must be understood not literally as physical water, but rather as "washing".

3 traditional kinds of baptism WASH away the sins:

1) the water of the sacramental baptism washes through its link with
the Blood of Jesus and the spirit of S.,
2) the spiritual washing the desire of "the baptism of desire" washes sins away through
its link with the Blood of Jesus and the spirit of S.,
3) and the spiritual washing by the blood of the martyrs washes sins away through its link with
the Blood of Jesus and the spirit of S.

Let us stay with God trough His Holy Divine Tradition

God bless

In unione orationis Jesu Mariaeque,
E. Jacqmin +, sacerdos FSSPX                         

 

MHFM: We’re glad that you contacted us.  Allow us to address the points you raise in your e-mail.

 

1)  The sedevacantist position is not a doubtful matter.  There is no doubt that heretics are not members of the Catholic Church.  That’s a dogma.  There is also no doubt that the Vatican II “popes” are heretics.  Therefore, it’s certain that the Vatican II “popes” cannot sit in the Chair of Peter.  To affirm otherwise is to profess a unity of faith with heretics who embrace false religions, teach salvation outside the Church and hold other heresies.  That is contrary to the faith.

 

There is also no doubt that the Vatican II “popes” have used their supreme “authority” to bind their subjects (e.g. you) to Vatican II.  We prove that here: Was Vatican II infallible?.  The file proves that if they are true popes, Vatican II must be considered a true ecumenical council.  In other words, if they are true popes the Catholic Church has officially taught the doctrines of faith or morals set forth by Vatican II.  The idea that the Catholic Church could teach what Vatican II teaches is heretical.  It is certain, therefore, that the men who imposed it are not true popes. 

 

Yes, we are aware that the SSPX has attempted to explain these facts away.  But their responses don’t add up.  Our material has refuted all of those escape tactics.  There is no way around the fact that the Vatican II “popes” are clearly non-Catholic heretics, and that they approved Vatican II in a solemn and binding fashion.   Therefore, the position you currently hold is not consistent with Catholic teaching, and it must be rejected.  The fact that the SSPX’s position is false is further demonstrated by the major inconsistency in the position of the SSPX vis-à-vis the Vatican II “Church,” its leaders and their official actions.  Since the SSPX obstinately operates outside and against the hierarchy it deems legitimate, its position has to be qualified as schismatic.  Please look at this file: The File on the Positions of the Society of St. Pius X [PDF file]. 

 

2)  Allow us to address the points you raised about baptism of desire.   All of those points are addressed at length, not in our newsletter, but in our book: Outside the Catholic Church There is Absolutely No Salvation [pdf file].  We really hope that you will take the time to look at it.  You make reference to the act against Fr. Feeney, which was sent to the Bishop of Boston, dated Aug. 8, 1949.  It’s called Suprema haec sacra or Protocol 122/49.  Our book shows that this letter was not infallible.  Even someone such as Msgr. Joseph Clifford Fenton, who defended baptism of desire and concepts which lead to the idea of salvation for nonbelievers, admitted as much.

 

Msgr. Joseph Clifford Fenton, The Catholic Church and Salvation, 1958, p. 103: “This letter, known as Suprema haec sacra… is an authoritative, though obviously not infallible, document.  That is to say, the teachings contained in Suprema haec sacra are not to be accepted as infallibly true on the authority of this particular document.”

 

In addition to not being an infallible document, Suprema haec sacra is actually a heretical one.  It teaches that people who are not members of the Church, who are invincibly ignorant of the faith, and who don’t belong to the Body of the Church can be saved. 

 

“Cardinal” Marchetti-Selvaggini, Suprema haec sacra, “Protocol 122/49,” Aug. 8, 1949: “Towards the end of the same encyclical letter, when most affectionately inviting to unity those who do not belong to the body of the Catholic Church (qui ad Ecclesiae Catholicae compagnem non pertinent), he mentions those who are ‘ordered to the Redeemer’s Mystical Body by a sort of unconscious desire and intention,’ and these he by no means excludes from eternal salvation, but, on the contrary, asserts that they are in a condition in which, ‘they cannot be secure about their own eternal salvation,’ since ‘they still lack so many and such great heavenly helps to salvation that can be enjoyed only in the Catholic Church.’” (quoted and translated by Fenton, p. 102).”

 

In the process of giving its false analysis of Mystici Corporis, Suprema haec sacra teaches that people who “do not belong” to the Body of the Church can be saved.  That is heresy. 

 

Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, “Cantate Domino,” 1441, ex cathedra:  “The Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes, and proclaims that none of those existing outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews, heretics and schismatics can become participants in eternal life, but they will depart ‘into everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels’ [Matt. 25:41], unless before the end of life they have been added to the flock; and that the unity of this ecclesiastical body (ecclesiastici corporis) is so strong that only for those who abide in it are the sacraments of the Church of benefit for salvation, and do fasts, almsgiving, and other functions of piety and exercises of a Christian soldier produce eternal rewards.  No one, whatever almsgiving he has practiced, even if he has shed blood for the name of Christ, can be saved, unless he has persevered within the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church.”

 

Pope Pius XI, Mortalium Animos (# 10), Jan. 6, 1928: “For since the mystical body of Christ, in the same manner as His physical body, is one, compacted and fitly joined together, it were foolish and out of place to say that the mystical body is made up of members which are disunited and scattered abroad: whosoever therefore is not united with the body is no member of it, neither is he in communion with Christ its head.”

 

What’s interesting is that even someone such as Msgr. Fenton admitted that one cannot say that the Soul of the Church is more extensive than the Body.  Hence, to say that it is not necessary to belong to the Body is to say that it is not necessary to belong to the Church.  Therefore, by its statement above, Suprema haec sacra taught the heresy that it is not necessary to belong to the Catholic Church to be saved, the very thing denounced by Pius XII.

 

Pope Pius XII, Humani Generis (#27), 1950: “Some say they are not bound by the doctrine, explained in Our Encyclical Letter of a few years ago, and based on the sources of revelation, which teaches that the Mystical Body of Christ and the Roman Catholic Church are one and the same.  Some reduce to a meaningless formula the necessity of belonging to the true Church in order to gain eternal salvation.”

 

This is extremely significant, for it proves that the teaching of Suprema haec sacra – and therefore the teaching of Msgr. Joseph Clifford Fenton who defended it – is heretical.  They both deny the necessity of “belonging” to the true Church in order to gain eternal salvation.

 

3) You make reference to Sess. 6, Chap. 4 of the Council of Trent on Justification.  There is an entire section on this issue in our book.  We hope you look at it.  It points out that the passage says that Justification cannot take place without the water of baptism or the desire for it.  It’s just as if we said: this wedding cannot take place without a bride or a groom.  It doesn’t mean that Justification can happen with one or the other.  The section in the book on this passage also shows that “aut” (or) is used in a similar way in other Church documents. 

 

Moreover, that very sentence from the Council of Trent on Justification, Sess. 6, Chap. 4, which you reference, also says that John 3:5 is to be understood “as it is written.”  That contradicts baptism of desire, for baptism of desire necessarily means that there are exceptions to being born again of water and the Spirit.  But the passage of Trent teaches that there are no exceptions; John 3:5 is to be understood “as it is written.”  So, contrary to what some think, Sess. 6, Chap. 4 of the Council of Trent on Justification does not teach baptism of desire.

 

4) Next, you say that our rejection of baptism of desire contradicts Tradition.  That’s simply not true.  As our book shows, the ancient Tradition of the Church is that no man is saved without the Sacrament of Baptism, including unbaptized catechumens.  The book covers this in detail.  It demonstrates that St. Augustine was the only person who taught baptism of desire in the early Church.  St. Augustine also rejected the idea; he found himself on both sides of the issue, while the super-majority of the fathers opposed the concept.  Here’s just one quote to illustrate the point that baptism of desire was not the belief of the early Church:

 

The Catholic Encyclopedia (1907) had the following to say about the actual Tradition of the Church in this regard: “A certain statement in the funeral oration of St. Ambrose over the Emperor Valentinian II has been brought forward as a proof that the Church offered sacrifices and prayers for catechumens who died before baptism.  There is not a vestige of such a custom to be found anywhereThe practice of the Church is more correctly shown in the canon (xvii) of the Second Council of Braga (572 AD):  Neither the commemoration of Sacrifice [oblationis] nor the service of chanting [psallendi] is to be employed for catechumens who have died without baptism.’” (The Catholic Encyclopedia, “Baptism,” Volume 2, 1907, p. 265.)

 

It is thus a myth – and one of the biggest myths out there among “traditionalists” – that baptism of desire was a majority view among the early Church fathers.  That falsehood has been promoted by authors from the SSPX, such as Fr. Laisney.  Fr. Laisney even asserts that baptism of desire is the “unanimous” teaching of the fathers.  That’s an outrageous lie, as our book proves.  The view of the fathers is that no man can be saved without baptism, including unbaptized catechumens.  

 

5)  You make reference to our citation of Leo the Great’s dogmatic letter to Flavian. 

 

Pope St. Leo the Great, dogmatic letter to Flavian, Council of Chalcedon, 451:

For there are three who give testimony – Spirit and water and blood.  And the three are one.  (1 Jn. 5:4-8)  IN OTHER WORDS, THE SPIRIT OF SANCTIFICATION AND THE BLOOD OF REDEMPTION AND THE WATER OF BAPTISM.  THESE THREE ARE ONE AND REMAIN INDIVISIBLE.  NONE OF THEM IS SEPARABLE FROM ITS LINK WITH THE OTHERS.

 

You then argue that the water of baptism can be spiritually linked to Justification.  But that would mean that the water referred to here can be spiritual water, which would reduce the meaning of this dogmatic statement to nothing.  The water of baptism is not spiritual water; it must be actual water.  If not, then the reference to the “water of baptism” is simply mythical, not dogmatic and actual.

 

Pope Paul III, The Council of Trent, Can. 2 on the Sacrament of Baptism, Sess. 7, 1547, ex cathedra:  If anyone shall say that real and natural water is not necessary for baptism, and on that account those words of Our Lord Jesus Christ: ‘Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Spirit’ [John 3:5], are distorted into some sort of metaphor: let him be anathema.”

 

The water of baptism must be real water, as we see here.   And that real water of baptism is inseparable from the Blood of Redemption and the Spirit of Sanctification (Justification), as Leo the Great infallibly teaches.  The passage is dogmatically teaching us the real meaning of 1 Jn. 5:-8.  That meaning is that there must be three witnesses present for Justification to occur: the water of baptism, the Blood of Redemption and the Spirit of Sanctification.  But the very notion of baptism of desire is that Justification comes without the water of baptism.  That contradicts the infallible teaching of Pope Leo the Great in his dogmatic letter to Flavian.

 

Further, everyone admits that “baptism of desire” is not a sacrament.  But the Magisterium infallibly teaches that the Sacrament of Baptism is necessary for salvation.  Therefore, no man can be saved by a “baptism of desire.”

 

Pope Paul III, The Council of Trent, Can. 5 on the Sacrament of Baptism, ex cathedra: “If anyone says that baptism [the sacrament] is optional, that is, not necessary for salvation (cf. Jn. 3:5): let him be anathema.”

 

Pope Eugene IV, The Council of Florence, “Exultate Deo,” Nov. 22, 1439, ex cathedra:  Holy baptism, which is the gateway to the spiritual life, holds the first place among all the sacraments; through it we are made members of Christ and of the body of the Church.  And since death entered the universe through the first man, ‘unless we are born again of water and the Spirit, we cannot,’ as the Truth says, ‘enter into the kingdom of heaven’ [John 3:5].  The matter of this sacrament is real and natural water.”

 

Pope Clement V, Council of Vienne, 1311-1312, ex cathedra:  “Besides, one baptism which regenerates all who are baptized in Christ must be faithfully confessed by all just as ‘one God and one faith’ [Eph. 4:5], which celebrated in water in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit we believe to be commonly the perfect remedy for salvation for adults as for children.”

 

Also, the SSPX doesn’t just believe in baptism of desire.  It holds that souls can be saved in false religions.  That is blatantly heretical.  It rejects the dogmatic teaching of Pope Eugene IV, which is cited above.

 

Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, Against the Heresies, Angelus Press [SSPX], p. 216: “Evidently, certain distinctions must be made.  Souls can be saved in a religion other than the Catholic religion (Protestantism, Islam, Buddhism, etc.), but not by this religion.”

 

We are very glad that you contacted us.  We hope you can see why no true Catholic can remain part of the SSPX or hold the false positions described above.

 

Trent?

 

[We post this as an example of how the defenders of the Vatican II sect are in a state of blindness.  This person is a defender of the Vatican II sect.  He says our material is not Catholic.  You can tell that, by this question, he actually wonders how anyone who opposes the Vatican II sect could accept the Council of Trent.  He is thus totally oblivious to the fact that it’s his antipopes who deny Trent and the other councils.]

 

Do you accept the teachings of the Council of Trent?

 

R

 

MHFM: Of course we do.  It’s the Vatican II sect and its antipopes, such as Benedict XVI and John Paul II, who reject it.

 

The Vatican II sect's Protestant Revolution: the 1999 Joint Declaration with the Lutherans on Justification [PDF File]

 

Baptism of Desire

 

Bros. Michael and Peter;
  
My sincere thanks to William T. Mulligan, Jr. for pointing out that the baptism of desire fiascoe is the 'mother of all heresies.'  You took the words right out of my mouth.  I have done my best to acquire the oldest publications of the Cathechism, and, as far as I can tell, the BOD heresy has been infecting the minds of fellow Catholics since at least the 1930s.  I am sure that MHFM can attest to earlier renditions, as far back as the late 1800s. 
 
Conveniently, baptism of desire has blossomed into the universal message of false ecumenism from Benedict XVI and friends of the Vatican II circus.  This heresy, in fact, has become the religion of our friends, neighbors, and relatives as everyone preaches, 'don't worry about it, we're ALL going to heaven!!'
 
If it wasn't enough that the true church of Jesus Christ has been in eclipse by the Novus Ordo, we now stand in the face of a full blown division between true Catholicism and the so called 'traditional catholics.'  …[they] have been hoodwinked into somehow believing that although the Vatican II church and its affiliates are 'bad,' the new 'sacraments' that have emerged from it are somehow valid.  ARE YOU KIDDING ME??  What other reason would the Masons have to push for the changes to the sacraments other than to invalidate them?  Before my own eyes I have watched good Catholics (who were once informed properly on the present state of the church) evolve into what I think is the craftiest trick Satan has pulled yet:  Superficial orthodoxy!...

 
I find even more disheartening the fact that the 'superficially orthodox priests' oftentimes lead (what seems to be) a more morally upright way of life than those of the validly ordained priests.  Just more proof that there is very little left of true Catholicism amongst our fellow men.
 
As a good friend of mine put it to me recently, 'there is a special place reserved in Hell for those who lead good Catholics down the wrong path.'
 
May the Lord Jesus help us.
 
Michael Gregory
Washington

 

Baptism of Desire- Canon Law

 

Dear Most Holy Family Monastery,

 

My name is Rachelle Wickstrom and a few weeks ago I wrote you an e-mail about confession and I just wanted to thank you so much for taking the time to write back and for your kindness in your reply to me.

 

In your e-mail to me, you mentioned sedevacantism, baptism of desire, no salvation outside of the Church, etc., and to be honest with you, I am still reading about these things to get a better understanding.  I had always thought that Christ promised to be with the Church and that the "gates of hell" would not prevail against it and that though the Pope may be an immoral man, the Holy Spirit would not allow him to officially teach heresy, but when one sees the Pope kissing the Koran...to truly be honest, although I do not fully embrace the idea of sedevacantism yet, that does not mean I will not.  I have only just begun to explore all the information on your website.  Four or five years ago I was definitely a Novus Ordo Catholic and did not know it…

 

You mentioned going to an Eastern rite priest for confession, but I am a Latin rite Catholic.  Is this not forbidden by Canon Law?

 

Also, with baptism of desire, if a person who sincerely seeks God but does not know the Gospel, such as a person in Africa or the Middle East, can Jesus himself not pardon their ignorance?  It is not their fault where they are born.  Is this what is meant by "baptism of desire"?

 

I am sure I can find a lot of answers to these questions on your website (and believe me, I am really starting to look!) so I do not want to trouble you with a lot of questions.  I really, really just wanted to thank you with all my heart for taking the time to respond to my e-mail about confession.  I thank you for your advice about praying the Rosary and am trying to make the recitation of all three decades a daily practice.  Once again, thank you so very much.  With the Church in the state that it is today, it is hard to know who to trust anymore because all the false shepherds.   

 

Thank you, and may God bless you all and your work.

 

Sincerely,

 

Rachelle Wickstrom

 

MHFM: Rachelle, there is nothing contrary to the promises of Christ in the notion that an antipope is reigning in Rome.  It has happened before.  In our current situation, there is no law which forbids a Latin Rite Catholic from approaching an Eastern Rite priest.  But first you must be convinced on all the issues.  A heretic is not a member of the Church and therefore cannot be a valid pope: The Catholic Teaching that a heretic cannot be a valid pope [PDF file].  “Baptism of desire” can today mean a million different things to a million different people.  That’s precisely because it’s a false and man-made idea which has never been taught by the Catholic Church.  A person who sincerely seeks God will be brought into the one true faith of Christ and will get baptism.  It’s necessary to know Jesus Christ and to be baptized to be saved.  John 10:14: “I am the good shepherd, and I know mine, and mine know me.”

 

If you don’t hold that baptism and the Catholic faith are absolutely necessary for salvation, then you don’t yet accept the dogmatic teaching of the Church; you don’t yet hold the true faith of Christ.  The following quotes, which are found (with references) in our book, Outside the Catholic Church There is Absolutely No Salvation, are relevant to your questions about people who are unbaptized or ignorant of Christ.  The Church’s teaching is that if they die without the knowledge of Christ and without baptism they were not of good will and cannot be saved.

---

Fr. Francisco de Vitoria, O.P., a famous 16th century Dominican theologian, summed up the traditional teaching of the Catholic Church on this topic very well.  Here is how he put it:

 

When we postulate invincible ignorance on the subject of baptism or of the Christian faith, it does not follow that a person can be saved without baptism or the Christian faith.  For the aborigines to whom no preaching of the faith or Christian religion has come will be damned for mortal sins or for idolatry, but not for the sin of unbelief.  As St. Thomas says, however, if they do what in them lies [in their power], accompanied by a good life according to the law of nature, it is consistent with God’s providence that he will illuminate them regarding the name of Christ.”

 

St. Augustine (+426): “Consequently both those who have not heard the gospel and those who, having heard it, and having been changed for the better, did not receive perseverancenone of these are separated from that lump which is known to be damned, as all are going… into condemnation.”

 

Pope Paul III, Sublimus Dei, May 29, 1537: “The sublime God so loved the human race that He created man in such wise that he might participate, not only in the good that other creatures enjoy, but endowed him with capacity to attain to the inaccessible and invisible Supreme Good and behold it face to face; and since man, according to the testimony of the sacred scriptures, has been created to enjoy eternal life and happiness, which none may obtain save through faith in our Lord Jesus Christ, it is necessary that he should possess the nature and faculties enabling him to receive that faith; and that whoever is thus endowed should be capable of receiving that same faith. Nor is it credible that any one should possess so little understanding as to desire the faith and yet be destitute of the most necessary faculty to enable him to receive it. Hence Christ, who is the Truth itself, that has never failed and can never fail, said to the preachers of the faith whom He chose for that office 'Go ye and teach all nations.' He said all, without exception, for all are capable of receiving the doctrines of the faith…By virtue of Our apostolic authority We define and declare by these present letters… that the said Indians and other peoples should be converted to the faith of Jesus Christ by preaching the word of God and by the example of good and holy living.”

 

Mass questions

I have ordered your information on Vatican II. I am 30 years old and have never known any other church other than V2. My parents would rather die than ever admit that pope john paul is an anti-pope. My parents also taught me to  blindly follow priests as if they are infallible.

First, I want to thank you for your insightful and accurate information on the catholic church. It is the type of information that takes a while to digest since it is so contrary to the catholicism that I grew up with.

I live in CT and have searched for a Latin mass near us. There is no mass for at least 150 miles. We do not have the means to move and I am feeling quite depressed about church. My husband and I try to attend church despite the lack of decent homilies, music and reverence. However, the possibility that the V2 mass is not valid makes me very upset. It's quacky but I always thought it was valid. If the words of consecration have been changed from the original pre-vatican II, does that mean that the eucharist is NOT the body and blood of Jesus? Have I never actually received the body and blood of Jesus in a V2 church? Can Jesus still be present in His church despite the fact that his people are betraying Him?

I often go to church to pray or make a holy hour and this question just does not leave me. Any clarification would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you and God bless,
Marcelle

 

MHFM: It does mean that the Eucharist is not present at the New Mass.  If you have only received the host at the New Mass, then that means that you have never received the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ.  Jesus will not become present at a service where the form or essential rite of the Church is lacking.  It’s imperative for you to get out of there, and to fully embrace the traditional Catholic faith.

 

SSPX still not happy

 

MHFM: We found this article to be interesting: Lefebvrists still not happy

 

Think about how ridiculous this is: the SSPX is still not willing to forge an agreement with the “pope” and hierarchy it claims to recognize!  This is a joke.  Their position is schismatic.  If the differences between the SSPX and Benedict XVI are not matters of faith and salvation, then they have no right to be independent from them over these differences. 

 

St. Ignatius of Antioch, Letter to the Trallians, (A.D. 110): “He that is within the sanctuary is pure; but he that is outside the sanctuary is not pure.  In other words, anyone who acts without the bishop and the presbytery and the deacons does not have a clean conscience.”

 

If the differences between the SSPX and the V-2 hierarchy are matters of faith and salvation, as their independent stance would indicate, then Benedict XVI and his “hierarchy” have no authority in the Catholic Church.  This is what sedevacantists correctly recognize.  Yet decade after decade passes and the SSPX maintains its contradictory and schismatic stance.  It’s beyond ridiculous at this point.  These criticisms don’t just apply to the SSPX.  They apply to many other independent “traditionalist” priests and groups which operate outside of the V-2 diocese, but obstinately recognize Antipope Benedict XVI and his hierarchy as valid.  The heretic Fr. Gavin Bitzer comes to mind; in the future we’ll probably have more on this despicable heretic. 

 

Some of these independent priests, who recognize Antipope Benedict XVI but remain completely separate from him and his bishops, even kick sedevacantists out of their chapels.  In doing so they just draw further damnation down on their heads.  Some of these “traditionalist” schismatics accept the Vatican II “Church’s” new fasting laws, but reject its “canonizations.”  They like the former, but not the latter.  For more on this obstinately schismatic nonsense, which offends God, insults the Church and rejects the faith, consult this file: The File on the Positions of the Society of St. Pius X [PDF file].

 

B.O.D.

 

I absolutely loved the Duff family letter,  truly a "happy ending" story.  I pray for the same outcome in my own family.  Perhaps you can add the conversion of my wife and children to your prayers as well.

 

However one comment Mrs. Duff made regarding the baptism of desire heresy especially struck home with me. "We believed in salvation outside the church, baptism of desire, (actually we didn't even necessarily believe you needed the desire for baptism to get to heaven) and multiple other heresies".   For this is precisely what is taught, or should I say how Baptism of Desire was defined in the Novus Ordo schools I attended.  You see it is not about desiring "baptism", the sacrament, per-se' because you have knowledge and understanding of it.  What it really means is that one "would have" desired it, had he only known about it, prospectively.  In this way even the pygmy in the forest or the cannibal is saved, as long as he is a "good person", and follows the dictates of his conscience.  This is what baptism of desire really means, or comes to be understood to be, by the rank and file new churchers, and why it is indeed the central, I think mother of all heresies.  For if one believes in it, one essentially believes in nothing, or at least believes that beliefs are unimportant.  

 

William T. Mulligan, Jr.

 

Audio

 

Dear MHFM

 

Excellent audio on that demonic possession. Much valuable information. I learned a great deal about faith and the source of haunting...   

 

It seems it hates St. Michael and holy pictures.  The V2 church in Vatican II asks for less statues in the churches.  An article in Catholic Digest says something like, "I don't need Sacramentals to identify myself as Catholic," but they're coming back.  People scarf these things up.  People who have never seen a sacramental are very interested.  Most take them when they're offered….

 

And, again, it is so terribly obvious that these antipopes and their church are working for Satan.  The Vatican exorcist Gabrielle Amorth says the new rite is practically useless. Even he doesn't recognize the devil in his own false church.   Benedict XVI incorrectly baptizes and you know he knows better.  How many souls are left unbaptized?  Horrible.  Everything they've changed is so obviously designed to make it comfortable for the devil. 

 

I'm still e-mail- debating my sister.  As long as she asks questions, I'll answer.  She tells me she believes that everyone who loves God will go to heaven and that not everybody has to be Catholic.  Over and over again I quote ex cathedra declarations and saints and the fact that you do not love God when you reject his truth, etc.,   but she continues to ask me, Where is your church and who is your pope?  She is, indeed, possessed because she is, literally, blind to the truth…

 

Excellent tape. More information on how to identify how Satan works.  I used to tell these apparition chasers who claimed apparitions of their own that they should ignore them, but the things made them feel so holy that they couldn't let go.  The demon works on each soul in a different way.  We should all be on the look out for him.  He's got something for all of us.  Those he's already got, he doesn't bother much. 

 

PM    sorrie about the venting, but that's a very informative tape.

 

Tolerate?

 

Dear Brothers,

 

I live in Kissimmee, FL and have just returned from my vacation in NY.  I spent one and a half weeks there.  The last two days of my vacation I spent with a friend who lives in Staten Island.  She was born and raised Catholic although she was never religious.  She has now converted to Buddism.  In her home she chants Buddist prayers and burns some funny incense simultaneously in front of some sort of scroll with oriental writings.  While she was doing this I closed the door to the bedroom I was staying in and said my Rosary with the intention of chasing the demons present there and for the conversion of this lost soul.  Additionally, she has some odd-ball ideas such as belief in UFO's, etc.  A typical new-ager.  She invited me to the temple and of course I turned her down.  She knows I'm a strict Catholic and disapprove of her religion.  She's one of those people who no matter what you tell them they just can't see the light.  Satan has her in his grip.  I invited her to stay in my home the next time she visits Florida for she has some relatives here.  But now I am concerned because it has occurred to me that if she stays in my home she will probably chant her pagan prayers in my home.  I wonder if I should tolerate this in my home which is very Catholic because my understanding is that they invoke demons even though they may not realize it and afterwards I may need to have my home blessed to chase the demons away.  Can you please comment?  Thank you.

 

AP,

Kissimmee, FL

 

MHFM: No, you should not tolerate that in your home.  You should not have that in your home.  The following quote is relevant to your question.  It comes from our book, The Truth about What Really Happened to the Catholic Church after Vatican II, in the section on Vatican II.  While this quote pertains to Islam (a different false religion), it demonstrates the point:

 

Pope Clement V, Council of Vienne, 1311-1312: “It is an insult to the holy name and a disgrace to the Christian faith that in certain parts of the world subject to Christian princes where Saracens [i.e., the followers of Islam, also called Muslims] live, sometimes apart, sometimes intermingled with Christians, the Saracen priests, commonly called Zabazala, in their temples or mosques, in which the Saracens meet to adore the infidel Mahomet, loudly invoke and extol his name each day at certain hours from a high place… This brings disrepute on our faith and gives great scandal to the faithful.  These practices cannot be tolerated without displeasing the divine majesty.  We therefore, with the sacred council’s approval, strictly forbid such practices henceforth in Christian lands.  We enjoin on Catholic princes, one and allThey are to forbid expressly the public invocation of the sacrilegious name of Mahomet… Those who presume to act otherwise are to be so chastised by the princes for their irreverence, that others may be deterred from such boldness.”

 

V-2 Seminaries

 

I just came upon your website and I agree wholeheartedly. I've done all the academic work to be ordained, and yet, the gay subculture went against me. They were subsequently ordained and have been arrested for sexual abuse. HUMMMM... I WONDER WHY?????...

 

In Christ Jesus,

-Derek Abrajano

 

MHFM: We post this as another example of what goes on in the seminaries of the Vatican II sect, as we covered in this file: The Seminaries of the Vatican II sect are unspeakable cesspools of homosexuality and heresy [PDF File].

 

Method

 

Dear Most Holy Family Monastery,
            

…It wasn't until about a month ago that God placed in my mind a great way to spread you material.  Upon entering the library that I frequent quite regularly, there is a "Give Away" Shelf. Which is comprised of book and videos that are donated to the library that were later deemed not library quality material. I also began to noticed that the shelf empties it self quite quickly as most people seem to brows through it as soon as they walk in to library.   I'm sure you know were this is going. Well I decied to start placing some of your DVDs and then some book on the shelfs. They FLEW OFF almost immedietly. And they still continue to. DVDs of course faster than the books, however the longest I've seen a copy of "The truth about what really happend to the Catholic Church after Vatican II" was two days. DVDs, the longest I've even seen them stay there was maybe 3 days…  I write to you regarding this because I wish for you to share this with others so that this method can be applied in order to spread your material faster and more efficiently…

In the Sacred and Immaculate Hearts of Jesus and Mary,
                                                                              

Charlie
   

Islam

 

Dear Brothers

 

My name Is Robert, and I'm really grateful for your web site. I've watched all the videos about the antipopes, I'm catholic and I can't believe what there teaching. I've Just been having a conversation with a Muslim and he told me that the trinity is a lie, jesus was not crucified,  his resurrection is also a lie and st paul was a liar. It's on a web site called Answering Christianity, I thought the Catholic church came before the false Religion of Islam.

 

thank you for your time

God bless.

 

MHFM: Islam began in the 7th century with the false prophet Muhammad.  It rejects the Trinity and the Divinity of Jesus Christ.  This is a quick way to prove that it’s a false religion: Quickly Proving that Islam is a False Religion.

 

Testimonial

           

Brothers,

 

Hi! I just wanted to take a minute… and let you know the impact Most Holy Family Monastery has had on our life. I am 26 years old. My family and I were novus ordo "catholics" . We attended Franciscan University of Steubenville and thought that we were adhering to all the teachings of the church. The only problem was that we didn't know what those teachings really were. We believed in salvation outside the church, baptism of desire, (actually we didn't even necessarily believe you needed the desire for baptism to get to heaven) and multiple other heresies. We thought JPII was such a nice little old man who was surely a saint in heaven, when we knew absolutely nothing of what he really did and taught. Well, the bottom line is that we were on our way to eternal hell and we didn't even know it! We were living a lukewarm faith, with absolutely no knowledge of church history or teaching. Then a family member alerted us to the changes that had taken place in the church. When surfing the web to research the matter I came upon The Principle Heresies of Vatican II link that led me to your site. THANK GOD! It has changed our life (and hopefully our eternity) forever. The information provided took us out of our spiritual fog and brought us to the light of the true Catholic faith where finally everything makes sense! We have a zeal for the faith we never had before and we are finally beginning to learn how to really love God. We have never been happier. THANK YOU!

 

I also wanted to take a minute to tell you about my husband. When my entire family (siblings ,their spouses, and parents) were converting to the true faith my husband resisted. He did not want to hear any of it. He spent his time either avoiding the issues or trying desperately to prove that you were wrong. When I would ask him to read your material he would call it garbage. He was determined to prove that the novus ordo was right and there must be an explanation for the changes. This continued for a couple of months. In that time I would pray an extra 15 decade rosary almost every day to Our Blessed Mother that she would help him to see the truth and convert. Well in her compassion she answered those prayers. My husband has completely changed! He goes on to your site several times every day, he reads your books, watches your dvds, etc. He got so tired of trying to find answers where there weren't any (the novus ordo religion).He is now the spiritual leader of our family and our children that I always hoped he would be. Thanks to the mercy of God, the grace of our Blessed Mother and all of your hard work that brings the truth of the Catholic Church to those seeking it. We can not thank you enough. You have helped to save our family from eternal damnation. We pray that God will continue to bless all of you at Most Holy Family Monastery!

                

Sincerely,

The Duffy Family

 

New Audio

 

MHFM: This is a new audio which analyzes a story of demonic possession.  We believe that many people will find this very interesting.  We found the case (which is a true story) to have many extremely interesting facets, from which we believe that many lessons can be learned.

 

A case of demonic possession [new 44 min. audio].

 

This will be found permanently in this file: Traditional Catholic Audio Programs.

 

Pathetic

 

Dear friends.

 
You know the Bible. It doesn't say that we have to worship the pope. Even to your account, Peter was the first pope, when the man came to worship him, he humbly said he is a man. All men sinned and we only rely on the blood of Christ for salvation. We shouldn't worship Mary, but take her as an example of a blessed woman. After Christ was born, Mary had a normal marital life with Joseph. What is so difficult to understand? Read the Bible, believe more the Word than the pope, who is a sinner just like you, if not more.

In love, fabio ferreira

 

MHFM: Your e-mail can only be described as pathetic.  Of course we don’t worship the pope or Mary.  The Catholic Church has never taught that. But Jesus made St. Peter the head of His Church.  Why can’t you get that through your head: The Bible teaches that Jesus made St. Peter the first pope [51 min. audio].

 

It’s sad to say, but with ridiculous arguments like that one can see why Protestants are left in spiritual blindness and cut off from the one Church of Christ.

 

Strange

 

It is strange that I came across your website when I did, it was quite accidental…. I clicked on a link to what Catholics say about this subject, and it brought me to your website, otherwise I would never have know there was a difference in the Mass.  Was this a sign for me to get right with the Church and God?  In the last couple of years I have become very close to Jesus and I feel that I have a good personal relationship with him although I hadn't been to Church in years.  I have had some very strange and frightening occurrences in my home lately, and have felt threatened by something I feel is evil.  These events is what sent me to the Christian book store where I purchased my new bible, and to the internet where I found you.  This is all very confusing for me.  I don't know what to believe anymore.  If I take the information that is on your website and a copy of the letter you wrote to me, to my Priest, will he be able to clarify these things for me, or is he not really ordained because of the Vatican ll Council not being truly Catholic? 

 

Thank You,

 

Terese

 

MHFM: Yes, God wanted you to come across the information because you must believe and practice the traditional Catholic faith to be saved.  You have to get out of the New Mass and reject the false Vatican II sect.  Discussing these matters with your priest would not be a good idea.  He will just try to convince you to remain with the New Church.  You need to look at this information more carefully and act upon it.

 

Appalled?

 

To whom it may concern:


I came across your website purely by accident.  I was appalled at the negativity throughout all of your articles.  What order is your monastery following?  I would like more information so that I can understand what basis you have for publishing such bizarre statements about the Holy Fathers, present and recently deceased.  I consider myself to be a good Catholic and as a good Catholic, I would like to analyze this more closely.  I have e-mailed my ministry partner so she too can take a look at these documents.  We will pray that this information is not
displeasing to God.

Sincerely yours in Christ,
Mary Teresa

 

MHFM: We hear from people all the time who consider themselves Catholics and knowledgeable Catholics.  The truth, however, is that most of them don’t understand the Catholic faith or fidelity to the Papacy.  If you think that the information on our website is not true or consistent with the Catholic faith, then you are very mistaken.  You need to look at the facts more carefully, and understand that fidelity to the Papal office is fidelity to the dogmatic teaching of the popes.

 

E-Mail

 

Dear Brothers, I have to commend you on your email commentaries. They are so refreshingly honest and forthright. They are inspiring and of course informative at the same time. Keep up the great work you are doing. God bless.

 

Barbara

 

Not in Bible

 

Dear Michael and Peter,

 

I appreciate your strong commitment to God's Word and for taking a strong stand against all apostates that plague the church in these last days (even some high profile figures). I find many of your articles quite interesting in this and other respects. May the Lord bless your efforts and use them to help many Christians get out of Error and stand for the Truth ! So, keep up the good work !

 

Nevertheless I have come across some of your statements  which made me rise my eyebrows, and I think the best way to figure that out is to talk them over with you.

 

For instance I found this book on your website  "Outside the Catholic Church there is Absolutely no Salvation". The problem is, this expression may sound great, but unfortunately it doesn't appear anywhere in the whole Bible, and even the expression "Catholic church" doesn't appear in the Bible either.

 

The apostle Jude in his letter says : I found it necessary to write appealing to you to contend for the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints.

So, according to God's Word, the true faith has been delivered unto us once for all. This means that we have in the Holy Bible all what's needed for our Salvation and for living a life of faith pleasing to God… Further, the absence of a Catholic church in the NT is confirmed by God's way of Salvation, which is as simple as this : "Whosoever shall call upon the Name of the Lord shall be saved" Romans 10:13, which is also explained in other terms: if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved" Romans 10:9… 

 

Praise God, we have a great Lord and Savior !

John

 

MHFM: The word Trinity is not the Bible.  That doesn’t mean the truth is not taught there.  The Bible teaches that there is no salvation outside of Jesus Christ and His one Church, which is founded upon Peter.  That one Christian Church, outside of which you cannot be saved, is the Catholic Church.  Wake up; start to be logical and of good will and you will see that Catholicism alone is true Christianity.  You need to look at this file: Refuting Protestantism and Eastern "Orthodoxy" * Audio Programs. Down the road we will be adding a specific audio against the false idea of “Scripture alone.”  See 2 Thess. 2:14-15 for the proof that Scripture itself teaches that you must heed Tradition in addition to Scripture.  Jesus says you must hear the Church (Mt. 18:17), which is the pillar and foundation of the truth (1 Tim. 3:15).  Also, you don't even have a Bible without the Catholic Church.

 

Quote

 

MHFM: This is a new quote we recently came across.  We found it to be somewhat interesting:

 

“When asked by the emperor to approve the consecration of Peter the Fuller, [Pope] Symmachus [498-514] answered that a penitent’s stool, not a bishop’s throne, was the place for that heretic.” (Leo Donald Davis, The First Seven Ecumenical Councils, p. 212.)

 

Dread?

 

"Out of one hundred thousand people whose lives have always been bad, you will find barely one who is worthy of indulgence."  -St. Gregory, as quoted on the MHFM website.

 

When I read that quote for the first time, my heart practically jumped out of my chest in fear and trepidation over my coming judgement and very potential damnation. Dear brothers, such a quote hardly gives me comfort, but rather instill such a fear as to want to continue sticking my head in the sand and mak ebelieving that all is okay, much like my prior life in the N.O. How can I overcome this fear and follow a life of contrition? I'm so afraid that I continue doing the very things I know will damn me. Please help...

 

MHFM: It’s not that attaining salvation is exceedingly difficult: “For my yoke is sweet and my burden light” (Mt. 11:30).  It’s simply that people must show interest, they must believe and adhere to the full truth without compromise, and they must avoid mortal sin.  (We assume that you have made a good and complete confession to a validly ordained priest.) Have a true devotion to the Blessed Virgin to overcome the fear you have.  Obtain the book True Devotion to the Blessed Virgin by St. Louis De Montfort and make the consecration explained in it.  A soul that is in a good state before God has a deep interest in God, His faith and the things of God.  That is not to say that just because one has interest in Catholic matters that one is of God.  But if there is little interest in studying the faith or in doing spiritual reading or in trying to spread it to others or in spiritual things, etc. then you’re probably dealing with a dead soul. 

 

Who is the Pope?


Hello...I heard about you on we the people radio.  I am Catholic.  Since you are teaching that our past recent popes are not the true popes, who is the real pope then?  Where is he?  The early Christian writings say to look to Rome for the true vine.  Do you have information that you could send to me about the real pope?  Thanks so much and you are in my prayers, in Jesus,

 

Sandra

 

MHFM: There is no pope at this time.  The Chair of St. Peter is vacant, just like it is every time a pope dies.  Yes, we must look to the Papacy; we must look to the popes for the teaching we must follow to be true Christians.  And it is those very teachings which show us that the Vatican II sect and its “popes” are not Catholic but false and invalid:  The Catholic Teaching that a heretic cannot be a valid pope [PDF file].

 

Faith Alone

 

Dear Brothers

 

I Have been listening to a Christian Apologist on the web and He was giving a talk On Catholicism and He said that he was a catholic for many years but has now left the faith because he said that what the catholic church teachers is false and all you have to do Is have faith in Jesus Alone to be saved.

 

God Bless

 

Robert.

 

MHFM: He should listen to this: Justification by Faith Alone refuted and the Catholic teaching on Justification proved by the Protestant Bible [1 hr. 30 min. audio].

 

Great Western Schism

 

MHFM: We post this link below to remind people of the facts which are covered in this important article.  This article on the Great Western Schism can also be found in our book The Truth about What Really Happened to the Catholic Church after Vatican II.  In one sense, the crisis which we’re dealing with now – with the post-Vatican II Counter Church – is unprecedented and unique, due to its scope, duration and some of its particulars.  But in another sense, it is not unique, as this article demonstrates.  It’s important for Catholics to be acquainted with some of these facts, that there were antipopes in Rome, that there was an antipope accepted by all of the cardinals, etc.:

 

The Great Western Schism (1378-1417) and what it teaches us about the post-Vatican II apostasy - Massive confusion, multiple antipopes, antipopes in Rome, an antipope recognized by all the cardinals; The Great Western Schism proves that a line of antipopes at the heart of the post-Vatican II crisis is absolutely possible-

 

More on K.C. performance

 

Dear Bros Michael and Peter Dimond,

 

Sorry, Lyndon Olson, but I too watched both those performances on U-tube and I have to say that Kelly Clarkson's dress in her rendition of Ave Maria in front of the so called papal audience including antipope Benedict XVI was even more immodest than at the Youth Rally…

   

David Shone

New Zealand

 

L.A. Novus Ordo

 

Thought you might find it interesting

 

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-rutten19apr19,0,527001.column

 

The article says there is 288 parishes within the Los Angeles archdiocese"Penal Code 288" - in the State of California is the beginning of sex crimes against children.

 

-A.J.

 

Telephone Conversation

 

MHFM: This is an audio of a telephone conversation one of us recently had with a very nice woman who is on the fence about leaving the New Mass.  We will be posting these conversations from time to time.  (We always get permission from the other party before recording such a conversation.)  The quality of the audio is not great, but we post it because it might be of interest or of some benefit to those who are looking for more information or informal discussions of these topics.  This conversation is somewhat atypical from those we normally have in so far as this woman remains unconvinced of the necessity to get out of the New Mass.  Most of those with whom we speak at length come to full agreement on all the issues.  But we feel that this conversation does capture how some people are laboring in a spiritual fog, which causes them to be unable to grasp the main points and act upon them, even when they admit points which should lead them to no other conclusion:

 

Nice woman who is not yet convinced [30 min. audio]

 

K. Clarkson

 

Dear Brother(s) Dimond:

Thank you for your website!  You provide a wealth of very interesting information, much of which is persuasive and enlightening, and all of which is thought-provoking.  I must admit that much of it is inspiring a plethora of questions from me, but I'll try to cover more of your available material before I risk inundating you with them, as many of them may be addressed in existing website material I haven't yet studied.  Having said that, I was motivated to send you a question about the latest entry on your "News and Commentary" page.  You refer to a performance for Benedict XVI by pop singer Kelly Clarkson as persuasive evidence that he is heading a "new phony religion", and you offer a link to illustrate your point, expressing your regrets for exposing your website visitors to "inappropriate dress and music".  However, the link that pops up appears to be that of Kelly Clarkson in an unrelated performance, while that new page in turn offers a separate link to a video of a modestly-dressed Kelly Clarkson singing "Ave Maria" for Benedict XVI.

I'm not sure what point you're making with this.  Are you claiming that the secular video on your link is from the performance attended by Benedict XVI?  Are you admitting that this isn't from the same performance, but suggesting that this particular performance is so offensive that Benedict XVI is proving his heresy by having any association at all with the same performer, even in a different setting that isn't, in itself, offensive?  Are you saying that, even in the "Ave Maria" performance, there was something so inappropriate about the attire and the music that it proves your point about Benedict XVI being an Anti-Pope?

At the risk of appearing to defend Benedict XVI, I'll note that he probably doesn't spend a lot of time checking YouTube videos to make sure that a singer scheduled to perform for him hasn't ever done a secular performance that might not be well-suited for a Papal audience; it's entirely possible that he wasn't familiar with Kelly Clarkson at all before this meeting.   And, while I'm not suggesting that we "grade on a curve" and lower our respect for God's standards in the process, it's worth noting that Kelly Clarkson, even at her most questionable, is probably less morally offensive than most secular artists.  Where should the line be drawn when it comes to what kind of association a true Christian leader should have with someone with whom we can find some faults?  Granted, you don't regard Benedict XVI as a true Christian leader to begin with, but, since you offered this link to embellish your point, it's only fair to ask the question as a matter of general principle.

You seem to have such a huge volume of evidence to support your positions in general, and you seem to be so sincerely convinced of the validity of all your views, that I trust you not to feel the need to intentionally exaggerate or distort a point in order to make your case for anything.  Given this fact, I'm a little puzzled about this latest website entry.   If you would clarify your position for me, I would appreciate it.

As I noted at the outset, I have far more substantive questions about your views on spiritual matters, and I don't want to make an excessive sticking point about your Kelly Clarkson comments, but, since you chose to highlight the point yourself on your News and Commentary page, I hope I'm not seen as belaboring a minor matter by raising my questions about this.  I welcome any comments you may have in reply.

Thanks again for all of your efforts.  I'll keep digging into your existing material on the website, and try to keep up with new entries as they come along.  God bless all of you at the Monastery.


                                           Lyndon Olson
                                           Arizona

 

MHFM: It’s obvious that you failed to notice that the performance to which we linked was a performance sponsored by Antipope Benedict XVI.  You can see his anti-papal seal in the video.  It was for his World Youth Day Rally.  Even though he wasn’t there on stage, it was specifically for him and for his visit; it was done under his auspices and specifically for the “Catholic” audience which showed up for him.  So it was brought to people for the antipope and by the antipope.  If one cannot see that such a thing strikingly captures that the Vatican II religion is simply the “Church of man,” then one really isn’t seeing things very clearly.  It captures that Antipope Benedict XVI and the New Church deliver a new and nothing false gospel of the world.  This new Church and new gospel of man accept people in their worldly mortal sins, and they don’t give them the true message of the Catholic faith and salvation.  The very fact that the “pope” has such a performer at his event demonstrates that the New Church accepts the evil of the world and is therefore an enemy of God (James 4:4). 

 

“Fr.” Richard McBrien

 

Father Richard McBrien of Notre Dame was on T.V. praising this Pope.  Back in the 80's Father McBrien was one of the biggest heretics in the Church. Conservative catholics used to point out his errors all the time.  If this isn't an example of how phony this Pope is then I don't know what is!

 

Ed of St. Lou.

 

MHFM: Thanks for the e-mail..  Yes, for those who know about McBrien, that is definitely interesting.  For those who don’t know, McBrien is so liberal and such a horrible heretic that even some of the defenders of the Vatican II sect criticize him.  (We would also mention that people should try to call this guy Benedict XVI or Antipope Benedict XVI, not “Pope.”)

 

Insight, questions

 

I am a practicing Catholic and have held the institution of the Catholic Church in suspicion for most of my post-Vatican II life.  Your website certainly gives me some insight as to what I may have been witnessing. 

 

My question to you is simple: A pre-Vatican II premise, based on the Biblical text, is, to paraphrase, "What is bound on Earth is bound in Heaven and what is loose on Earth is loose in Heaven".  To me, this means that the authority of the Church, directed by the Holy Spirit, can facilitate change, including liberalism and possibly Freemasonry.  Humbly I keep thinking to myself, if the Church has been infiltrated by devils, could this not be God's Will and part of His plan?  Meaning, in my theologically weak thought pattern, that maybe this event is God's precursor to the Second Coming.  Or, even more reasonably, as in periods past, bad Popes and schismatic heresy have created a crisis from which true, spiritual Catholicism can emerge.  No one looks back on Church history and says the Church followers/believers were bad. . . criticism and judgment has always been directed toward the hierarchy or Pope(s) who, through their own free will choose evil.

 

Note:  I am not suggesting God's Will is to Will something evil. . . but rather it is from our sin that salvation is possible.  As an example, it was evil men (and the devil) who put Jesus to death on the Cross; therefore, from our sins (and that of Adam and Eve) God died as the ultimate sacrifice of Himself as the Pascal Lamb to God.  Ultimately, through His death and resurrection he opened the Gates of Heaven and gave us the hope of salvation.   

 

The second part of this question is, for me, what can I do about it?   Do I leave the mainstream Catholic Church and find myself unchurched?  What if I am wrong in this analysis and I, unwittingly, left the one true Church and thus, salvation?  There are no traditional Catholic groups or churches on Maryland's Eastern Shore or in Washington, DC or Baltimore (that I know of).  Finally, by staying true to the mainstream Catholic Church, even if evidence points to it's corruption and decay, will God condemn me for being deceived by some of it's Priests, Bishops and Popes?   After all, there are some holy and believing people who love God with their whole heart and follow the Sacraments faithfully. . . are they condemned for eternity for this?  Clearly the general congregration sees form and intent from the outward sign of the particular Sacrament. . . changed it may be, but some believers still see it as instituted by Christ to give Grace.

 

My guess is that you will say that if I know that evil has infiltrated the Church and sit back and do nothing, that is a tacit endorsement of the violation.  Well, what I am to do, Lord?  All I can think to do is defend the Faith, stay close to the Sacraments, say the Rosary, teach my family the Catholic tradition and, yes, ask for God's forgiveness.    Maybe, I can be watchful for whatever He has planned for us.

 

So, that is my question to you.

 

God Bless you,

 

Garrett M.,

Grasonville, Maryland

 

MHFM: No, God watches over His Church.  His Church is the pillar and foundation of the truth (1 Tim. 3:15).  Thus, the power of the keys involves a protection from binding error.  That which is bound in Heaven cannot be false.  So if whatever a true pope binds on Earth is bound in Heaven then whatever a pope binds on Earth must be true.  When you’re convinced of the fullness of the Catholic faith, follow the steps to convert which are posted on our website and contact us. We can help you with where to receive sacraments.  Right now you have a problem with papal infallibility and with faith in the dogmas, however. 

 

To your other question, the mainstream “Church” is not the real Catholic Church, but the prophesied Counter Church of the last days.  The true Church exists with the remnant of traditional Catholics.  That’s what you have to join by believing everything the Church has taught and by converting to the faith.  In the meantime you should begin to pray the Rosary each day.  You ask about whether you will be condemned for being deceived by supposed bishops and priests.  You will be condemned if you don’t have the true faith of God, the Catholic Faith, which right now you still doubt.  You will also be condemned if you don’t die in the state of grace and out of mortal sin.

 

Antipope

 

Dear Brothers,

i have just found your site and i am frankly amazed at the amount of good work you do!  While in America, i attended a SSPX chapel in Miami, but i now live and work in Europe, currently in Spain and would like to know if there are any sedevacantist priests here that you know of?  Thanks to your website, i have changed my opinion on the SSPX and will no longer support them!

i humbly offer to suggest that you should classify the current popes as Pseudo-popes or Quasi-popes,  since the term Anti-pope implies 2 opposing popes and may be shocking to some Catholics.

Whereas, Pseudo implies false and Quasi implies almost or semi… please continue your good work!

Herman Mullis
Malaga, Spain

 

MHFM: Thanks for the e-mail.  There were definitely antipopes whose reigns continued during periods when there was no true pope.  They continued to be antipopes, even though there was no true pope for a certain period of time.  That demonstrates that there doesn’t have to be a pope reigning for an “antipope” to exist.  Certainly the term arose to describe an uncanonically elected “pope” whose reign opposed the true pope.  But that’s simply because we’ve never had a situation like this, during which the antipope has gained control of Rome and the Church’s physical structures during an extended interregnum. 

 

Without question the term “antipope” applies to these false popes because they are invalid and they oppose the papacy.  They oppose the true Church, the true dogmas, and all the true popes.  Moreover, it’s likely that the first one, Antipope John XXIII, began his reign during an uncanonical election in the 1958 conclave, which set aside the election of the true pope.  Nevertheless, we definitely believe that “antipope” is the most effective, accurate and concise way of describing what you’re dealing with in the false “pope” who leads the Vatican II sect.

 

Burial concerns

 

MHFM: We are frequently contacted by people who are very concerned with the question of who will be able to take care of their Catholic funeral and burial.  This concern arises obviously because there are almost zero truly Catholic priests today.  But the insistence with which some people pursue this issue, often to the detriment of much more important things, is problematic.

 

Just today we were contacted by a person, who is coming out of the Novus Ordo, who was extremely concerned about a proper funeral.  He was also expressing this concern for another.  It’s almost as if they were more concerned about having someone to properly bury them and take care of their Catholic funeral than they were about the necessity to break from the Novus Ordo!  With some people it’s almost as if they won’t stand against the Counter Church or some other heretical priest if it means that they won’t have a Catholic funeral.  We’ve seen this kind of attitude very frequently, and we must say that it’s quite frustrating.  It reveals a spiritual blindness, for they are truly missing what’s important! 

 

Matthew 8:21-22- “And another of his disciples said to him: Lord, suffer me first to go and bury my father. But Jesus said to him: Follow me, and let the dead bury their dead.

 

If you don’t die with the fullness of the Catholic faith and in the state of grace, then it’s not going to matter one bit whether you have the most complete Catholic funeral of all time!  You will die and go to Hell.  And if you die with the fullness of the Catholic faith and in the state of grace, you will be dead and belong to God and there is nothing anyone on Earth can do to you to take you from God – even if they dig your body up and throw it to the dogs.  Therefore, focus on being a true Catholic and dying in the state of grace.  Let the spiritually dead, who blindly run down the path to Hell, worry endlessly about what’s going to happen to their rotting corpses when they’re gone.  Yes, you should make sure that you are buried, not cremated.  But other than that, don’t worry about it.  Focus on following Jesus, practicing the Catholic faith and spreading it to others, and everything else will fall into place. 

 

Sadness

 

Dear Brothers,

 

I found your website from a link on Rush Limbaugh's website, and have spent the last 2 hours reading and reading. I ordered some of your books also this morning.

 

Please know that all of you will be remembered in my daily prayers, and I humbly beg you to please remember me in your prayers also.

 

As I am prayerfully considering everything on your website, and it is quite a body of work, I have this deep feeling of sadness for our church and its members who really do not have any knowledge of the truth.  I deeply love my Catholic Faith...it IS my rock and my salvation.  I have always considered myself a very orthodox conservative Catholic, to the best of my knowledge, and so reading through your website, the articles and several of the videos was a bittersweet experience. I could not find one thing that I read so far, that I could say was doubtful to me or not truth. So I continue to read and pray.

 

As I grew up near Pittsburgh and St. Vincent's, and also attended Franciscan University of Steubenvlle, I know from some personal experiences how the Charismatic Movement there made me feel as I have always been a Traditional Catholic. I do not wish to speak badly about either of the two places, because there is also so much good that comes from them both, like yourselves.

 

My concern Brothers, is where can I find a "true" traditional Mass, can I continue to attend my home Parrish, receiving the Sacraments authentically? May I send you Mass Stipends?  I also want to thank you for having on your updates, the ad from American Life League, as I have actively fought the abortion cause since 1973. I sent the ad to every Catholic and Pro Life person that I know. Thanks!

 

My Prayer is that all of you are kept in the most tender of places, within The Hearts of Jesus & Mary!

 

PAX CHRISTI

 

Antonia B.

Hope Mills, NC

 

MHFM: We’re glad you found the site.  In one sense, there is definitely sadness which is experienced by those who are coming to the full realization of what’s happening.  But the overriding sense should be joy and hope for having discovered the real Catholic faith.  It should be indescribably relieving to know that this farce (i.e. the Vatican II sect) is not the Catholic Church.  It should be tremendously enthusing for people to know exactly what’s happening, to know exactly what to do to be saved and help others be saved.

 

Regarding Steubenville, they do some good things.  However, they are very far from real Catholicism.  They don’t believe in the dogma Outside the Church There is No Salvation.  They thus lack a real faith in Christ, His necessity, and the power and truth of dogmas.  Many of them are also papolaters: they essentially idolize the man they think is the pope.  They thus demonstrate a completely false understanding of the papal office, as well as Catholic history.  The Charismatic movement is not of God, as we show here: EWTN and the Charismatic Movement [PDF File].  You must be completely convinced on all the issues before you would receive the traditional sacraments.  One must be committed to never attending the New Mass, completely rejecting the Vatican II sect, holding Outside the Church There is No Salvation, etc., as we explain in our file: Where to go to Mass or confession today?.  When you are, please let us know.

 

Rat

 

Brothers:  You might want to go to ewtn.com and click on their webpage about Ratzinger's visit to America - click on the shorter interview with Bush and go to the end - Raymond Arroyo asks him what he sees when he looks into the Pope's eyes and Bush quickly answers, "God."

 

Also, did you notice the change from the satanic broken cross to an ecumenical/protestant cross?

 

FYI

 

Debbie

Oklahoma

 

Embraces sedevacantist point of view

 

Dear sir(s),

 

I find your website to be a wealth of information with great references. Sadly, I get the feeling that we've all been de facto ex communicated through no fault of our own. I agree with you about the heresy of Vatican II, and I ask myself how God could have let this happen? I thought I was coming back to the Church last November after 35 years of being an unobservant sinner, but I had to walk out of a Mass last Sunday(Easter) because I couldn't stomach the irreverence going on. My friend, who prompted me back to the Church, thinks I'm teetering on heresy over my feelings about V-2. His only response seems to be that Jesus promise that the gates of hell would not prevail against His Church. I've come to embrace the sedevacantist point of view. I wish I was 20 years younger. I'd love to be a seminarian at Bishop Sanborn's Most Holy Trinity Seminary in Florida.

Thank you for your website, and God bless you,

 

Ed Comerford

 

MHFM: Thanks for the interest.  You need to stop going to the New Mass.  We would encourage you to continue to look at the information.  God allowed this to happen because people don't care very much.  The gates of Hell have not prevailed; the Church has simply been reduced to a remnant in the Great Apostasy.  Also, Bishop Sanborn holds heresy against the dogma Outside the Church There is No Salvation.  He holds it so aggressively, in fact, that one couldn't even attend his Mass: Sanborn, Bishop – believes that pagans and idolaters can be saved.

 

Real pope contra Luther

 

MHFM: Considering the fact that both John Paul II and Benedict XVI have spoken of Martin Luther in positive terms, we found the quote below to be interesting.  It shows how a true pope, Pope Leo X, was consumed with reading works which refute the arch-heretic Martin Luther.  How different is the real Catholic Church from the phony Vatican II sect and its antipopes?  The latter have not only praised Luther but taught their sect to exhibit a general acceptance of the heretic’s heretical legacy and the sects which came from him:

 

At that time the Lutheran affair occupied the mind of the Pope [Leo X] almost to the exclusion of anything else.  The Venetian Ambassador testifies that Leo spent many hours in reading a work against Luther, probably written by the Dominican, Ambrogio Catarino.” (Dr. Ludwig Pastor, History of the Popes, Vol. 8, p. 24.)

 

B.O.D., extraordinary?

 

Hello MHFM,

How would you answer to a question when a priest or anyone who say that Baptism of Water IS the ordinary way, but BOD/BOB may also take effect?  I've the book, but maybe I might of missed this, that is if its in the book.  I would love to read whatever feedback you have.  Thank you and God bless you.

Bernard T.

 

MHFM: We would answer by pointing out that the dogmatic teaching of the Catholic Church is infallible, and that teaching declares that no one can be saved without water baptism.  If there were exceptions to the (infallible) declaration that no one can be saved without it, then the declaration would be false, which is impossible.  So it comes down to what the Church has declared on the issue.  If the Church has infallibly taught that baptism of desire can substitute for water baptism, then they would be correct; if the infallible definitions have not taught it and have not left room for it, they are wrong.  The latter is the truth. 

 

Moreover, if exceptions could be admitted in regard to what the Church has infallibly taught on the necessity of baptism, as they argue, then exceptions could be admitted on the related dogma: the necessity of Jesus Christ and the Catholic Faith.  In that case, one could legitimately hold that certain Jews or Muslims can be saved by an extraordinary means.  That is clearly heretical.  But that’s actually what those priests who are arguing for “extraordinary” means on baptism hold.

 

It really comes down to whether one really believes that the dogmatic definitions are infallible.  We do; they don’t.  We really believe that God watches over those dogmatic definitions, to protect their declarations from any error.  We hold, as the Church teaches, that they possess a divine protection that is not necessarily given to the teaching of theologians and other fallible texts.  On the other hand, the faithless priests with whom you’re conversing look at the dogmatic definitions in the same way that they consider fallible texts.  Therein lies their problem – a problem one which springs from a nonexistent supernatural faith in Christ and His divine institution (the Church and the Papacy).

 

Caged Cars?

 

Hi Brothers,

 

Tonight I saw something very interesting.  I saw a train of what looked like caged cars.  No joke.  I was coming out of H & R Block (I totally spaced off my taxes until that last minute!), it was just past dusk, and as I was turning the key in the lock I glanced at the passing train and gasped at the sight.  I stared and stared to make sure I was seeing things correctly.  I was.  It was caged car after caged car.  And they were all empty.  Maybe this means nothing and my imagination is running wild, but you know what my first thought was.  Yup.  They're gettin' ready…

 

Last Will

 

Permalink: http://www.zenit.org/article-12691?l=english
 
This link is of Anti-pope JPII last will and testament. It's kind of creepy. It's the devil speaking. He doesn't mention Mary's name once....and never Jesus's name. It has a couple different entries, I think the last one was 2000. He also praises Anti-Paul VI and asks for all of his journals to be burned.....(gee - I wonder why). Thought I'd pass it along!
 
God Bless, and may the Most Blessed Immaculate Heart of Mary be with you always!
 
MaryAnne

 

Spit

 

Dear whoever,
 
I happen to read your website www.mostholyfamilymonastery.com. I must agree that it is very fictionally interesting with facts you provide. What I want to say is that I would like to spit you in your face if you stand in front of me.
 
Thank you,
Brian

 

MHFM: There is certainly a lot of spit and other foul things in Hell, which is where you’re headed.

 

Stumbled

 

Dear Sirs,

I stumbled upon your website, and have found the information it contains to be greatly disturbing. It answers many of the questions, I have had over the terrible decline of our church and culture. I look forward to ordering your books and videos and learning more… Keep up the good work. Now where do I go to attend mass. There are two churches in Montreal which offer the traditional Latin mass. One is associated with SSPX, the other is a regular Catholic church (Ste Irénée). Keep up the good work.

Luigi Sain

 

MHFM: Thanks for the e-mail.  We would direct you to this file: Where to go to Mass or confession today?.

 

Do I sin?

 

Dear Most Holy Family Monastery:


Please tell me what to do. I have a ticket to attend the Yankee Stadium Mass of Benedict XVI on Saturday. Do I sin if I attend? Next, in July, my brother is scheduled to get married in a Catholic Church that celebrates the Novus Ordo. All of the nearby churches do the same. What can we do? My brother has to get married because the priest told him he cannot give the Holy Communion until after marriage. Pleae I beg you, guide us properly and quickly. Also, what church here in Bronx or Manhattan that offers the real authentic Catholic Mass that I could attend? Thanks and GOD bless us for opening our eyes,

 

Juanita of
Bronx,NY

 

MHFM: Yes, you would sin if you attend.  Regarding the marriage, you cannot go.  As far as you receiving sacraments, when you’re convinced on everything let us know and we can help you.  But there is a section on our website called “Where to Go to Mass” which gives certain guidelines on that issue.

 

Time to fight

 

Brothers,

 

The N.O priest whom I work for, but do not attend "mass" with, has tried to commit my terminally-ill mother to the flames of hell by "converting" her on her deathbed and giving her the "host," which was completely unknown and unauthorized by me.

 

I was fit to be tied when he said this last night.  Therefore, I have instructed my N.O. following wife, that:

 

This priest would be barred from access to my mom for the duration of her remaining days

That this priest would no longer be welcome in our home

That our daughter would no longer be allowed to attend the N.O. "mass"

 

The result is now I am packing up my belongings, separating from my wife according to the gospel and Canon Law, until such time as she comes to her senses.

 

In the mean time, I will explore the legal options in to bring suit against my wife for the endangerment of my daughter's immortal, eternal soul. I have also instructed my daughter to receive a "blessing" only until I can sort this matter out.

 

I am willing to expend the few resources I have to publically expose the horrors of the N.O. "church."  There is no turning back, otherwise, like Jesus said, "one who looks back is not fit for the kingdom of heaven."  Right now, brothers, I need the intercession of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit, the Most Holy Trinity, the Most Blessed Virgin Mary, the Most Holy Family, Saint Michael the Archangel, all of the other Angels, all of the Saints, your prayers and the prayers of all who thirst for truth.   

 

Shocked in Nicaragua

 

Hi, my name is Paul, and i live here in Nicaragua (central america) and am 18 years old and I am and always have been and will be a Catholic, my family is Catholic and I myself resolved to discover the Truth and find out what it is we are destined for and well all that led to me to study more deeply my Catholic Faith and to my conversion.  What i wanted to say is that i am very shocked about all that you say in your site about the last five Popes, antipopes as you say they are and well all the things about the Vatican Council II and the New Mass, because well like i said i've always been a Catholic and gone to Church and believed in al, but now i'm not so certain about anything after i read all the things you say here, so i wanted to know if you yourselves were Catholics and turned away after the II Vatican Council or what, and well explain/tell me if this really is what is happening right now and if it is true, because now i don't know what to do or to believe. Please respond as soon as possible,

 

Paul.

 

MHFM: Yes, Paul, it’s really happening.  This is what’s going on; what’s covered on our website is what the Catholic Church teaches.  The Vatican II “Church” is not Catholic and this entire situation has been predicted.  We hope you continue to look at the information.  If you do sincerely, and pray the Rosary well each day, you should see that this is the truth.  These introductory audio programs, which cover what has happened, might help you as well:

 

The Truth about What Really Happened to the Catholic Church after Vatican II Audio Program, Part 1, Part 2

 

Prots and Birth Control

 

Dear Brothers Michael and Peter:

 

I was astonished by the boldness of the person who wrote in accusing you of being nuts for repeating the truth about birth control. I guess it reflects the sad state of morality in general outside of the Catholic Church. What is really outrageous is how he accuses you of being a fundamentalist when, in fact, he is using a literal interpretation of sacred scripture in order to justify his sinful lifestyle. This is the height of hypocrisy!  The more I read comments like his, the more I am convinced of the danger of those who don’t accept the authoritative teachings of the Catholic Church and Her true understanding of sacred scripture. Once saved always saved??? Where in the world did he come up with that idea? It must be from that same wacky fundamentalist who founded his false church who had frequent anal battles with the devil. Seriously, is he nuts???

 

-John

 

MHFM: Yes, and that brings up another point.  We were thinking about a different way of illustrating, to supposed Catholics who have trouble believing it, that Protestants are not true Christians and are not on the path to salvation.  Since the man who e-mailed seems to be a Protestant who defends birth control, the following point applies to him. 

 

Some people, especially among the Novus Ordo, have a hard time believing that Protestants are not saved.  There is another another interesting way of proving that they aren’t saved.  This is done by citing the infallible teaching of the Catholic Church against contraception/birth control.  Pope Pius XI infallibly taught that any use of matrimony in which the act is deliberately frustrated in its natural power to generate life is a MORTAL SIN.

 

Pope Pius XI, Casti Connubii (#’s 53-56), Dec. 31, 1930: “Since, therefore, openly departing from the uninterrupted Christian tradition some recently have judged it possible solemnly to declare another doctrine regarding this question, the Catholic Church, to whom God has entrusted the defense of the integrity and purity of morals, standing erect in the midst of the moral ruin which surrounds her, in order that she may preserve the chastity of the nuptial union from being defiled by this foul stain, raises her voice in token of her divine ambassadorship and through Our mouth proclaims anew: any use whatsoever of matrimony exercised in such a way that the act is deliberately frustrated in its natural power to generate life is an offence against the law of God and of nature, and those who indulge in such are branded with the guilt of a grave sin.”

 

That means that it’s INFALLIBLE THAT ANYONE WHO DOES THIS COMMITS MORTAL SIN.  Since most conservative members of the Novus Ordo claim to be faithful to Catholic teaching against contraception, they would have to admit that this teaching proves that most of their “separated brethren” [Protestants] are in mortal sin and on the road to Hell for using contraception.  (Obviously this teaching, by itself, would not prove that all Protestants are on the road to Hell because not all Protestants use contraception.  But it’s safe to say that most modern adult Protestants do use it.)  But the Novus Ordo heretics would surely compromise this teaching, if asked about it.  For example, the people at EWTN certainly don’t hold that the vast bulk of married Protestants are in mortal sin.  Thus, they would wind up arguing that one could use contraception without being branded with the guilt of grave sin.  And that contradicts the infallible teaching of Casti Connubii, as we saw above.  This just shows us, from another angle, how these people cannot even be faithful to Catholic dogma against contraception when they reject the Catholic dogma on the necessity of the Catholic faith for salvation. 

 

More on SSPX

 

Greetings Brothers,

 

Thank you for the response to my last question. Unfortunately, it raises a couple others: First, if the sspx believes in the new rite of Episcopal Consecration, did Archbishop Lefeve use it? If not, has the sspx used it since the passing of the Archbishop? Third, how can they not see the hypocrisy of their own ways? Isn't mixing the good with the doubtful (priests ordained under doubtful and valid rites) just as intellectually dishonest as mixing together consecrated hosts with unconsecrated hosts in "indult masses"? It makes so much more clear the admonishments in your site from the Saints and Fathers of the Church that we need to be on guard in these last days.

Thank you and pray for me, as I do for you and the Church,

 

Michael

                                                                                                                           

MHFM: They certainly don’t use it now.  We have no knowledge that Lefebvre ever used the New Rite.  Yes, their positions are hypocritical and contradictory.  They cannot see it because they don’t really believe that the Church is supernatural.  They lack the foundational belief that Jesus Christ and the Catholic Faith are truly necessary for salvation.  They believe that people can be saved without the Catholic faith and in false religions.  It’s sad to say, but their rejection of that dogma on salvation destroys their faith.  That’s why they can believe that heretics are still part of the Church.  It’s why they can believe all these contradictions about the Church. 

 

We’ve pointed out that the foundation of the true faith is believing that Jesus Christ and the Catholic Faith are really necessary, and believing that heresy really is evil and expels people from the Church.  If one doesn’t believe that, then he has no real faith.

 

Defending V-2

 

hello,


you say that the council of Florence God (by inspiration to the council)
said that all who are not catholic are rejected by the church. This is not the same issue as that touched by another
council when it said  that they may not be rejected by God. rejected by church is not necessarily rejected by God.

I must say that they were careful to say rejected by the church, rightly careful !

I am writing this just in case you are of good faith and did not notice the difference.

regards.

 

MHFM: For sake of clarity, allow us to translate (if you will) this e-mail: this person is referring to our article on Vatican II:  The Heresies in Vatican II [PDF File].  The first heresy covered in that article is what we consider to be the most specific heresy in all of Vatican II.  The heresy is that Vatican II teaches the opposite of the Council of Florence on Jews.  This e-mailer tries to defend Vatican II’s heresy by saying that the Council of Florence teaches that the Church rejects Jews, while Vatican II says that Jews are not rejected by God.  This person thus attempts to insert a dichotomy between those rejected by the Church and those rejected by God.  In our original article on “the most specific heresy in Vatican II,” we addressed and refuted this objection:

 

Some totally desperate defender of the Vatican II religion may attempt to answer by stating: “Vatican II only said that they are not rejected by God; the Council of Florence defined that the Church rejects them.”

 

This, of course, is a ridiculous attempt to defend the indefensible.  This response denies that dogmas (such as Florence’s dogmatic definition) constitute the truth of God. 

 

Pope St. Pius X, Lamentabile, The Errors of the Modernists, July 3, 1907, #22:

The dogmas which the Church professes as revealed are not truths fallen from heaven, but they are a kind of interpretation of religious facts, which the human mind by a laborious effort prepared for itself.”- Condemned

 

Since the dogmatic definitions of the Church are infallible, it necessarily follows that whoever the Church infallibly rejects God also rejects.  Hence, the above objection is false and denies the true nature of dogmas.  It contradicts the fact that dogmas set forth the truth of God and are infallibly binding in Heaven.  Thus, there is no way around this heresy in Vatican II. 

 

Info Astounding

 

Hello
 
I have a young daughter and am very concerned about how to raise her spiritually.  I am a Roman Catholic living in England but I have very much lost faith in the direction the Church is going.  Recently I came across 2 of your DVDs - the Amazing Heresies of Paul VI and the Amazing Heresies of Benedict XVI.  I found the information astounding.  I have visited your website in search of the truth about the disgraceful state of the Church.  Unfortunately I am not in a position to make use of your free downloads.  I would very much like as much information as possible in every format (DVD, Audio and Book form).  As a hard-working father with a wife and child to support, I am financially holding my head above water - but only just.
 
Please would you be able to help me?
 
All best wishes,
Russell

 

MHFM: Russell, we’re glad to hear about your interest.  We hope you continue to investigate the information and come to the realization that you cannot attend the New (English) Mass, if you are.  As you continue to look at the material, you will see that you need to come to a firm belief in all the traditional dogmas of the Faith, and reject the Vatican II sect which poses as Catholic but isn’t.  We offer our own DVDs for essentially nothing: you can get a whole package of critical DVDs and books for only $10.00 (no shipping in U.S. but shipping to foreign countries).  That’s what we’d encourage you to get, as well as to pray the Rosary each day and have your daughter do so as well.  You should instruct her in the traditional catechism, and people should do spiritual reading. 

 

SSPX and New Rite

 

Brothers,

 

I still had trouble linking to the section of your website titled "steps to convert". The link still comes up "convert", but changing it to "Convert", allowed me to access the materials. I also have a question: if the sspx veiws the novus ordo rite of consecration as invalid, how can they recognize Ratzinger as pope if that was the rite he was consecrated under?  Bless you and your work,

 

Michael

 

MHFM: Thanks for the e-mail.  The link is working, so it seems to be a problem with your connection there.  The Society of St. Pius X defends the New Rite of Episcopal Consecration.  The point you raise is important, however; for if they did hold it to be invalid then they would logically have to hold Ratzinger to be a false pope.  And that just speaks again to their contradictory positions.  For they have conditionally reordained certain men who were ordained in the New Rite of Ordination, but they have discouraged others who were ordained in the New Rite of Ordination from being conditionally reordained.  They thus seem to question, on some level, the trustworthiness of the New Rite of Ordination, but they vigorously defend the New Rite of Episcopal Consecration.  It seems that they vigorously defend the latter because it would logically require them to reject Ratzinger as an antipope.  For all of their false positions, see: The File on the Positions of the Society of St. Pius X [PDF file].

 

Justification Audio

 

… And I listened to your (Justification by faith alone refuted...)audio, and it was very good and alot of good scriptures(I wrote them all down on paper for further study)and I won't be going back to being Protestant because of this( and I'll propably stop listening and paying attention to anything Protestant altogether because if they can overlook,skip,ignore and miss all these references in scripture of something this important and all those other scriptures they are twisting around, it really makes me question if they can really be trusted with anything! especially the scriptures)…

 

Natalie

 

Masonic and False V-2 Church

 

Dear MHFM

 

I just read a news item about Charlton Heston's funeral.  It mentioned that a memorial service for him  was held in an Episcopal church that had a crescent shaped seating area or something of that nature. 

 

St. Therese's Church in New Cumberland, PA and many others, of course:  St. Mary's in Pensacola, FL, is another, are churches in the round where pews are situated on a hill of pews (you could  easily roll down them to receive "communion")   in a half circle with the Masonic throne, two chairs and a table. 

 

St. Therese's in  New Cumberland was built by pastor, Msgr. Roy C. Keffer who was a marvelous speaker and taught my eighth grade CCD class.  In 1968, when my third child, Roy III,  was born n),  I called my mother who told me that Msgr. Keffer had told her in the confessional that it would be all right for me to use contraceptives.  I think I yelled at her.  It's so obvious.  You just don't say no to God, particularly in his intended creations.  I tried to explain this to her but she wouldn't budge. I love my mother and she taught me many good things about my faith, but I honor no one who suggests I disobey God.  But it seems that mom and the rest of my family did.  After all, Msgr.. Keffer was much more knowledgeable than I am and, besides, he's a priest.   

 

Mom would also tell us she believed abortion was between a woman and her doctor.  These are the things you learn in the confessional from Vatican II priests.  I have a long list of heresies I' was taught just in the confessional.  St. Therese's was completed in the early 70's and I would not be surprised if the holy pre-Vatican II ordained  Msgr. Keffer was a Freemason. 

 

    I am shocked at the responses I've received from family members I was raised with.  I'm the oldest of five children of great parents who came from two good and large Catholic families.  I will never understand what happened to these people or why.  It's as if I never new them till these questions arose.  It's as if an evil spirit has overtaken their minds.  Mom used to tell me, "If you can't feel love for God then at least fear him and obey him. She loved Our Lady.  She taught us our prayers and virtues.  Then Vatican II happened and the people I knew in this church seemed to become different people. You can't be a true Catholic and stay in the V2 church.  Eventually it will peel off of you like so much rotten wood.  Others seem to absorb it.  Yes, I know.  Bad will. 

 

Vatican II and its clergy have done a great deal of harm, probably more than we will ever even begin to know.  It's horrifying to think how many souls have been lost.  Hell is ETERNAL.  How serious is that?  How frightening. How terribly sad. How insane not to accept the truth.   

 

Contra Immodest Art

 

MHFM: This is somewhat interesting:

 

     “According to the statement of Vasari, hitherto accepted by all students, the austere [Pope] Paul IV was the first who gave orders that the offensive nudities in the Last Judgment [painted by Michelangelo] should be painted over.  Evidence for this, however, has not yet been adduced.  As a matter of fact, a very considerable space of time elapsed before the stage of painting-over was reached.  It was not until the reign of Pius IV that the demands of the strict reform party were put into execution. 

     “On the 6th of September, 1561, Scipione Saurolo transmitted to Charles Borromeo, Archbishop of Milan, a memorial intended for the Pope, inveighing against the Last Judgment [painting].  The fresco, so ran this document, must be an object of holy hatred, since it offends the Divine Majesty, for the nudities in it so predominate that even many admirers deplore this feature.  Where on earth, asks Saurolo, in color or in stone, has anyone seen such representations of the Lord God?...

     “There is no doubt that representations of this kind influenced the strong regulations which the Council of Trent, in the twenty-fifth and final session of the 3rd of December 1563, passed concerning pictures unfitted for exhibition in churches.  The work of Michael Angelo was now spared only a little time longer from the brush of the improver.  The master, who died on the 18th of February 1564, was probably not aware of the decision of the Congregation of the Council on January the 21st, that the objectionable naked figures in the pictures of the Sixtine [Sistine] Chapel should be painted over, and in other churches unseemly or evidently false representations destroyed.” (Dr. Ludwig Pastor, History of the Popes, Vol. 12, pp. 617-618.)

 

Tattoos

 

Dear Brother Michael or Peter:

As far as you know, does the Church have any official teaching on tattoos?  I've been thinking about getting one for a long time now but what's been keeping me is I'm unsure if it is morally unacceptable.  I would get one of an image of Our Lord or Lady but someone told me it might be considered "defiling our bodies".  Any advice you have I appreciate.

Yours in Christ,
Randy

 

MHFM:  Thanks for the question.  You definitely should not get a tattoo.  The Bible is pretty clear on the matter:

 

Leviticus 19:28- “You shall not make any cuttings in your flesh, for the dead, neither shall you make in yourselves any figures or marks: I am the Lord.”

 

Living Authority

 

Could you help me with this nagging question - I look at the history of the Catholic Church and I see the central glue to be the papacy - the LIVING teaching authority.  This same authority has been challenged and ignored throughout history - esp. the Reformation - so when I look at the sayings/actions of the Conciliar "popes" I have to question them - not judge or depose but simply state that they are making pronouncements or are acting counter to past popes, councils, etc.  HOWEVER, I can't get past the nagging feeling and thought that I am being disobedient just like the Protestants when I fail to obey the Pope and to make a judgement of his actions/writings.
 
ALSO, what about the LIVING teaching authority of the POPE?  I know we have bishops, priests and laity who are following the true faith - but why would God allow His Church to not have a visible head/vicar for longer than the usual time between popes - a few days, months or years vs. 40+ years?  We have no living teaching authority in the person of the Vicar of Christ - so are we not just like the Greek Orthodox Church with patriarchs/bishops and priests but no Vicar/Pope?
 
Debbie
Oklahoma

 

MHFM: Thanks for the e-mail.  However, we don’t see how you can really be convinced that heresy separates one from the Church when you express such doubts.  The post-Vatican II “popes” are clearly heretics; there is no doubt about that.  So if you are totally convinced that a heretic is outside the Church and loses his office, then you would have to be convinced that these post-Vatican II “popes” are outside the Church and have lost their offices/never had them.  But you are obviously not yet convinced.  Therefore, either you are not convinced that they are heretics or you are not convinced that the Church is a supernatural institution which doesn’t admit of heretics. 

 

Regarding Protestants and Protestantism, the Vatican II antipopes have agreed with the Protestants on Justification [PDF File], and have praised the worst Protestant heretics of all time.  So you should feel totally anti-Protestant by rejecting and denouncing them.  Here’s a short section from our book The Truth about What Really Happened to the Catholic Church after Vatican II:

 

John Paul II praised Luther, Calvin, Zwingli and Hus

 

John Paul II also praised the greatest enemies that the Catholic Church has ever known, including the Protestant revolutionaries Luther and Calvin.  In Oct. 1983, John Paul II, speaking of Martin Luther, stated: “Our world even today experiences his great impact on history.”[2]  And on June 14, 1984, John Paul II praised Calvin as one who was trying to “make the Church more faithful to the will of the Lord.”[3]  To patronize, support and defend heretics is to be a heretic.  To praise the worst heretics in Church history, such as Luther and Calvin, is beyond heresy.

 

Pope Gregory XVI, Encyclical, May 8, 1844:

“But later even more care was required when the Lutherans and Calvinists dared to oppose the changeless doctrine of the faith with an almost incredible variety of errors.  They left no means untried to deceive the faithful with perverse explanations of the sacred books...”[4]

 

John Paul II also praised the notorious heretics Zwingli and Hus.  He even went so far as to say that John Hus, who was condemned as a heretic by the Council of Constance, was a man of “infallible personal integrity”![5]]

 

Regarding a living teaching authority, look at it this way:  If the Vatican II “popes” hold that authority, then you must accept Vatican II, as we prove here:

 

Was Vatican II infallible?

(This article is for those who already recognize that there were heresies and false doctrines in Vatican II, but hold that the Vatican II “popes” who promulgated them still hold true authority in the Catholic Church.)

 

Obviously, therefore, they cannot represent the living teaching authority.  The truth is that the office of the Papacy was set up to provide a living authority who could rule and govern the flock after Christ left the Earth.  However, that office can be vacant, as it has been.  Even during a vacancy of the papal chair the past authoritative teachings of the popes provide us with the rule we are to follow.  So then it gets back to the question of “how long” can the office be vacant.  And there is no teaching of the Church which contradicts an extended interregnum.  Frankly, we don’t see why one would be so troubled by this question to the point that it would cause him or her to consider the apostate Vatican II antipopes to be true popes.

 

Birth Control

 

Are you nuts????  Birth control is a mortal sin and you will go straight to hell for using it???  Where in the world do you come up with that idea.  The Bible states that all sins are equal accept for blasphemy of the Holy Spirit.  You better be careful is easy to lie, a little white lie is just as big as a straight untruth and I am sure you are guilty of it.  What was the purpose of Jesus’ death on the cross, either he forgave our sins or he didn’t there is no middle ground.  The more I read your web-site the more I see that you are no different than these wacky back-woods fundamentalists.

 

Ian

 

MHFM: Where did we get that idea?  Let’s see: the Bible, the early Church, the teaching of the Catholic Magisterium… you need to wake up and read this article: Why Natural Family Planning is Sinful Birth Control [PDF File].

 

Abomination at V-2 Mission Center

 

I was visiting the Scarborough Missions here in Toronto last week. I've been looking for a spiritual director and I thought that someone there might point me in the right direction.

What immediately caught my eye in the reception area was a stack of flyers on a table amongst the Catholic pamphlets, etc. A Buddhist monk was coming to the Missions to teach Buddhist meditation techniques. All were invited and encouraged to come. Hmmm.

I introduced myself to the receptionist and told her that I'd like to see a priest. She located a priest on the phone, and said he would arrive shortly. She then took me on a tour of the artifacts that were on display in the hallway that led to a chapel. Apparently, they were brought back by missionary priests from all parts the world.  The one that caught my attention was a wood carving that came from Africa. It made me physically ill to my stomach. "This one is my favorite" she said enthusiastically. "It was carved from part of a tree trunk. We found it hidden in a dark corner somewhere... the older priests weren't very fond of it. Now that they are gone, the younger priests didn't have any problem with putting on display. Isn't it beautiful?"

The carving was of an African hut with a family inside. Rising out of the top of the hut was the head and shoulders of a naked female. Crawling up the the front of her was a naked child, his butt protruding out. Below this abomination was an eagle, his wings forming the walls of the hut. Serpents were discreetly carved in relief on his wings.

"What is this?" I asked.  "Oh, that's the Trinity!" she exclaimed. "The Africans believe that God is a female. The eagle is the Holy Spirit." I finally met the priest, had a brief conversation and politely excused myself. Once I arrived home, I spend an hour or two in prayer cleansing myself spiritually. Prayers to St. Michael, the Rosary, Litany of the Blessed Virgin, Holy water.

I truly believe that, aside from being an abomination to God, this carving was cursed. I felt the effects the next day. I felt off balance all day.  Stray cats showed up in our front yard meowing loudly while I was doing evening prayers with my children. Three black dogs were prowling around the back yard which is fenced in. I live in a suburban neighborhood and nothing like this has ever happened. I immediately blessed the house and reconsecrated the house and family to the Blessed Mother.

I have looked over the Scarborough Missions website, much of which has been dedicated to Interfaith Dialog which is a large part of their Mission. I emailed a brief question to the head of the Interfaith Dialog department. I received a lengthy response to which I am about to respond…


J.K.

 

MHFM: Thanks for the e-mail.  We hope you continue to look at the information.  Obviously one shouldn’t be searching for a spiritual director among Vatican II or Novus Ordo priests.

 

John Paul II

 

Good day Brothers!!!


I've watch and read the videos and information about your site on how to defend the Catholic Church i'm really happy that you were there who is really dedicated and ready to defend the real Catholic Church.I was really scared and amazed of what i have saw about the popes, the New Mass, the Vatican 2 and the false apparation in DIvine Mercy and etc.  I've open your site accidentally and I really like what i saw and i want to spread it. I'm from Philippines, and i e-mail you bec. i was confuse about what really happen to the Catholic faith. Me and my family were devoted Catholics. And i want to clarify some questions in my mind: 1. How could be Pope John Paul 2 be antichrist if he always tell the people to pray the Rosary and he also added the Light Mystery? 2.If the New Mass were invalid, then what should i'm going to do and who could help us?... I have so many questions still, Bros. but my letter was too long maybe till next letter.  I hope you can give me the ans. i needed and More Power to all of you and May Our Lord Jesus Christ Bless you.

Joy
Phillipines

 

MHFM: John Paul II was definitely a heretic and antichrist because he taught heresy, apostasy and even preached what the Bible describes as the doctrine of antichrist.  We prove that in the files in this section: John Paul II (manifest heretic who claimed to be pope 1978-2005).

 

Also, contrary to what some think, John Paul II basically never told people to pray the Rosary.  The deception and exaggeration with regard to John Paul II and devotion to Our Lady was promoted by the Devil to make people believe that he was “Mary’s pope.”  Of course, no one who taught the heresies he did could have been devoted to the Blessed Virgin.  So even if he had promoted the Rosary a lot while teaching his many heresies, that wouldn’t have made him a Catholic or a good person.  He still would have been evil.  But the fact of the matter is that he basically never promoted the Rosary.  You need to get out of the New Mass; it’s definitely invalid.  You cannot go to it.  If it is all one has then one must stay home on Sundays.

 

Vatican II is serious

 

Hello,

 

I'm a catholic who has been sporadically involved with SSPX over the past three years, so I have been some what aware of Vatican II for a while (I've also been becoming aware of the New World Order over the past couple years and have done quite a bit of research on it). But I had not really realized how serious Vatican II was until I happened upon your video online… 

 

Rob Hull

 

Don’t care enough

 

Dear MHFM

 

 The following statement is from a close relative of mine.  I took it directly out of her e-mail. 

 

 I tried to tell her some things about false apparitions, false church, etc..  She said it depends on who said it.  I told her Jesus said it and I used his words from scripture.

    This relative did State paperwork for some 30 years and has recently retired.  She's not stupid by any means, but I could tell a child the very same things and they would understand.  A retarded young man who could hardly speak understood what I meant and was visibly shocked when his V2 pastor mentioned belief in a false apparition I told him about, yet this is the most typical kind of poor excuse I receive from members of the V2 church:

 

“I just don't understand most of what is being said in these writings. Same with the bible I can't interpret most of it so I rely on the [Vatican II] priest's homily every Sunday. I just know what is in the Apostle's creed and the precepts of the church. I try to follow the commandments and go to Mass every day to give me strength to keep my faith. I'd rather not be confused by a lot of stuff I don't understand.”

 

    I'm reminded here of the Bible story about the invited guests who made excuses not to come to the wedding feast, so the bridegroom? went out and brought in the street people in their stead.  Nobody wants to listen to me, so I'm distributing Miraculous medals in different places during my morning walk.  There are many places to place them:  On the basketball court in the park, next to morning papers, to children waiting at school bus stops. I found some tiny plastic bags at a craft store that holds a leaflet explaining the medal and the medal.  I bought 1,000 rather large aluminum medals for $50. 

 

The V2 false Catholics are self-satisfied with their phony popes and phony spirituality, but the children I've seen at those bus stops are literally starving.  They have no purpose in life; they are bored and upset and stressed out because they have no God.  Maybe, like the story on the tape you sell, she will bring one or two of them to her and to knowledge about what their Creator expects from us.  

 

PM

 

MHFM: Yes, many lose their salvation simply because they don’t care enough; they don’t have enough interest.

 

B.O.D., trad priest on pagans

 

Hello, and Good Afternoon, I have a few questions.  If you would please do your best to explain, thank you.

1) What can I do or can say to a mormon about the Catholic Faith and show him that mormonism is wrong?

2) In the matter of baptism, I talked with a friend of my father and he was a seminarian for 3 years. I also talked with a CMRI priest and they hold the same conclusions.  I asked some questions if they believe that a pagan can be saved, they said yes through invincible ignorance, and other questions as well.  They also mentioned about that Baptism of Water is the ordinary way but Baptism of Desire/Blood can be accepted as well.  What do you have to say to this and if you have said where can I find it?

3) I have talked with a priest from Mexico, he said that I am prideful and almost talked to me like i have no authority to be telling him what the Magisterium has declared.  How do I talk with a priest without disrespecting them?  Because my parents get mad at me for saying that a priest is heretic by saying that he is teaching that Baptism of Desire/blood is a dogma, etc.  How do I tell my parents that, I do not intend to be disrespectful but to show what you guys have shown me?  They say that I am too young, and their right I'm only sixteen, and say that the priest have lived more than me and expirienced more than me…

Thank You and may God bless you for your work.

B.T. from OR

 

MHFM: 1) We would point out to the Mormon that Joseph Smith (the founder) received a “revelation” to reinstitute polygamy.  This contradicts the teaching of Jesus Christ (Mt. 19:4-9).  Thus, Mormons follow the false prophet Joseph Smith and deny the teaching of Christ.  They need to heed Galatians 1:8-9.  It teaches us to reject anyone who would preach a new gospel, which is exactly what Joseph Smith did.  It should also be pointed out that Mormons believe that the Church of Christ was founded by Jesus and then defected shortly after, only to be reconstituted in the latter days.  That contradicts the promises of Christ to His Church (Mt. 16:18-20; Mt. 28:20): that the Church is indefectible and that He would always be with it.  There are other things that could be mentioned about wacky Mormon beliefs, but they can be found without too much trouble by those who want more information. 

                                                        

2) It’s interesting that the CMRI priest confirmed that he indeed holds the heresy that pagans can be saved.  So all of those people out there, who contact us and tell us that these priests don’t believe in salvation outside the Church, even though we have documented it, need to make a note of what the priest told you above.  The priest thus denies the dogmatic teaching of Pope Eugene IV, which is quoted in our material.  He is in heresy.  You can find what the Catholic Church teaches about Baptism and salvation in this book: Outside the Catholic Church There is Absolutely No Salvation [pdf file]. It covers the entire issue and refutes all the objections pertaining to “baptism of desire,” “invincible ignorance,” etc.  You can order a copy here.

 

3) You can talk respectfully to a priest or anyone else by simply presenting the facts.  It’s about the truth of the dogma, not what a priest thinks.  Further, respect must be given first and foremost to God and the truth.

 

Very Interesting New Quote

 

MHFM: Below is a very interesting quote which we recently came across in study.  This quote is particularly interesting because it condemns not just going into a synagogue, but lighting lamps for Jewish feasts (e.g. celebrating Hanukkah)!  If you will recall, in the E-Exchange below we debated with the “Catholic” Jew who was arguing that there is nothing wrong with celebrating Hanukkah.  (Hanukkah is the Jewish festival of lights, for the rededication of the Temple, during which lamps are lit!)  This “Catholic” Jew decided not to order from us because he saw that we condemned V-2 Bishop Jerome Listecki as an apostate for celebrating Hanukkah.  We came across this quote after we responded to the “Catholic” Jew below.  Obviously it serves is another striking vindication of the truth.

 

The Apostolic Canons, Canon LXXI: “If any Christian brings oil into a temple of the heathen or into a synagogue of the Jews at their feast, or lights lamps, let him be excommunicated.”

 

These canons are a collection of canons from the early Church.  They purport to be from the apostles.  However, the common opinion is that they are more likely from the fourth century.  They are not dogmatic.  They have not been promulgated by the Magisterium of the Church.  They are simply ancient and well known texts which do give us insights about what those in the early Church believed.  We can see what they would have thought of those who go into a synagogue or celebrate Hanukkah!  This canon becomes relevant again when we consider this picture:

Bishop Jerome Listecki of La Crosse, WI celebrating Hanukkah in a Jewish Synagogue: article

 

Non-Catholic Wedding?

 

Bro. Diamond,

 

I really need an answer fast. I have begun talking to one of my son's and his soon to be wife about the true Catholic Faith. I thought I had read where you had advised some one on how to be married if there is no church. My first question is/ they are planning to be married by the justice of the peace and would like to all the family to join them going out to dinner afterwards. I explained to them that is not a marriage in God blessing. And that I don't agree with it. Can we still go out to eat with them? I am trying in love show them the right way to God. Second question/ Did you say that someone could be married with God's blessing if having accepted the true Catholic faith, with a few witnesses? Not having to be with a priest(who would be N.O. Priest) and not in a church(N.O church).? The only Latin Mass we have here is the N.O. Priest doing it in a church used for N.O. masses.    

 

Sincerely, Debra A

 

MHFM: No, you definitely cannot go to the ceremony or the dinner afterwards.  You will show them love the right way by explaining to them that you cannot witness or celebrate their marriage when they are not true Catholics. It is possible for two people who are true Catholics to get married without a priest.  This is because a priest is simply the official witness in the Sacrament of Matrimony.  The sacrament is exchanged between the two people getting married.  This is a short article which pertains to your question about going to the weddings of those who are not of the true faith: Can one passively attend non-Catholic funerals, weddings?  No. 

 

Interest in Fiji Islands

 

Dear Brothers Dimond
 
Thank you for all the articles that you sent my brother in a little carton that contained books, dvds, written articles on the true teachings of our holy catholic faith.  
 

I believe with my whole heart that Outside the Catholic Church There is Absolutely No Salvation and thank you for helping me see.
 
We are a group of four families in the whole of the Fiji Islands who are 'traditional' and were once with the SSPX… We are still searching and praying for the true faith and have finally come across your writings which, after reading through, we are convinced is the true catholic faith at last... I look forward to hearing from you.  May the Lord continue to bless you, your brother and all who support and work with you in spreading these divine truths throughout the world in these darkened times.
 
Louisa Nansen  

 

Converting

 

I was raised a Catholic, but became a Protestant. Your web-site is very informative, and I think I will go back to the Catholic church (pre- Vatican II). Can you tell me where in Los Angeles to go?

 

Thank you,

 

Caroline

 

MHFM: We are really glad to hear about your interest.  We can help you with where to go, but first you have to indicate that you are fully convinced of the (traditional) Catholic faith.  That involves believing in all the dogmas of the Church, including the papacy, papal infallibility, etc.  It also involves being fully convinced that Protestantism and other non-Catholic religions are false, and that there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church.  We would also recommend that you pray the Rosary each day.  We have a section on our website about how to do that.  Also, if you haven't heard the talks in this section: Refuting Protestantism and Eastern "Orthodoxy" * Audio Programs, then we would recommend it.   

 

There are basic steps to convert, which are found in a section on our website.  We will copy them into this e-mail for your convenience.  Once you're fully convinced of these points, and reject the Vatican II sect and the New Mass, then we can help you with specific information about where to receive sacraments in your area.  If you haven’t already, we would also strongly recommend that you obtain our DVD special offer which includes 6 DVDs (with 10 different programs), as well as 3 important books (including our 610-page book with 200 color photographs), an audio disc (with 20 hours of programming) and flyers for only $10.00 (no shipping charge in U.S.). Again, it’s great to hear about your interest and God wants you to follow through with coming back to the Catholic faith.

 

March Web Stats

 

MHFM: Below are the web stats for just over one month (34 days).  We received almost six million hits and over 200,000 unique visitors.

Prominent “Catholic” Forum

 

I wrote the other day to tell you that I had been solicited to send money to this group.  I started responding to a debate on Religious Liberty.  I got in trouble pretty fast.  Below is my "warning" and response. 

----

 

We do not allow members… to denigrate other races/religions/belief systems.  I suggest you review the forum rules before you post.

 

Warnings serve as a reminder to you of the forum's rules, which you are expected to understand and follow.

 

This action is visible only to Mods, Admins and you. Regular forum members will not see it.

 

Sincerely,
[A forum moderator]

---- 

I only pointed out that the Jews reject Christ.  If you don't believe me, then ask one.  However if pointing this out is a violation of your rules, then Saint Augustine would have not been welcome on your sight either. Amazing.  You know I got onto this blog out of curiosity because you guys sent me a solicitation asking for money so that you could "carry on the fight".  Well, we'll never win against the wicked secular world if we don't understand the enemy.

 

Bill

 

MHFM: Wow, that’s from a mainstream and popular forum of the Vatican II sect.  It’s from an organization which purports to defend the Catholic Faith.  They ban people for denigrating false religions.  That’s outrageously heretical and quite revealing.  It just shows us again why that organization is horribly heretical.  It defends the Vatican II sect, the invalid New Mass, and rejects the dogma Outside the Church There is No Salvation. 

 

This quote below is relevant to consider in regard to the e-mail you received:

 

Pope Leo XIII, Custodi di Quella Fede (#15), Dec. 8, 1892: “Everyone should avoid familiarity or friendship with anyone suspected of belonging to masonry or to affiliated groups.  Know them by their fruits and avoid them.  Every familiarity should be avoided, not only with those impious libertines who openly promote the character of the sect, but also with those who hide under the mask of universal tolerance, respect for all religions...”

 

Interest in Thailand

 

Dear Brother in Christ,

 

Greetings from Thailand.I stumbled on your web site some two weeks ago and have downloaded a few of your DVDs, weldone for the work you are doing.
Please, I love the music played after the discuss on creation, unfortunately there isn't a list for sacred music. Could you send me a copy(some sared music of
the catholic church) please. 


Your in Christ.
Moses Zaruwa

Chiang Mai University
Thailand.

 

Likes EENS book

 

Dear Brothers,

 

I have read your awesome book on “Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Sallus” [Outside the Church There is No Salvation]….  Thank you so much for your tremendous effort on this work.

 

God bless and Mary keep you in your holy works.

 

Respectfully,

John

 

New Audio on Papacy – Section D of Part 2

 

Nicea, Sardica, Athanasius, Damasus, Emperors - The Early Church recognized the Bishop of Rome as the successor to St. Peter's authority - Section D of Part 2 [new 15 min. audio]

 

This section finishes up the evidence for the primacy of the Roman Pontiff in the third century and moves into the fourth.  It covers the case of Paul of Samosata; the Councils of Nicea and Sardica; Athanasius and Julius; the Emperors Gratian and Theodosius; and Pope Damasus. 

 

This is found permanently in our: Refuting Protestantism and Eastern "Orthodoxy" page.

 

“Gay” not natural

 

Dear Brother,

 

…You seem to be doing good work. Probably you catch a lot of flack but your work seems credible to me.

 

Our son Charley announced to me that he is "gay". This is very painful for me and more so because my wife Joanie believes his condition is "innate".  Their is a group called courage which was started by cardinal cook. It is for same gender attracted people who nevertheless want to live chastely in accord with Catholic teaching. It would seem that courage is hamstrung though since it is still part of the Vatican II sect. Our son will not talk with me about his condition and now he will not even speak to me since I forbid him to bring his "partner" to our place. It is very painful, especially since the rest of the family probably thinks I am an ogre. They are mostly believing the born that way and can't change lie. I have turned the situation over to Mary and I pray a lot. I will make the effort to meditate upon the holy Rosary more often. Please pray for us. I will place you on our prayer list.

                                         

C.

 

MHFM: Thanks for the e-mail.  Any group which attempts to rehabilitate homosexuals, which doesn’t point out that the entire homosexual orientation is a result of sin and is not natural, is false.  The Bible is clear that homosexuality is a result of idolatry.  Other important points in that regard are covered in this file, which is from our book The Truth about What Really Happened to the Catholic Church after Vatican II.

 

The Idolatry of the Vatican II sect is connected with its rampant homosexuality [PDF File]

 

Exorcism?

 

Hello , How are you doing ?

 

My name is John and I have a question, It was stated that anyone who makes a deal or a pact with the devil must receive an exorcism I heard this from a former Jesuit priest. Is this true  and if so how does one go about and receive one.

 

thanks again , John

 

MHFM: It wouldn't necessarily require an exorcism.  If a person renounced the Devil and the pact, converted to the traditional faith, believed in everything the Church teaches, made a good and complete confession to a valid priest, prayed the Rosary every day and lived the life of grace, then he wouldn't necessarily need an exorcism.  One would receive an exorcism by finding a validly ordained priest who would be an option for performing it, but that is much more difficult today. 

 

FSSP

 

Hey.   Unless I just missed it somewhere on your WEB site, I do not see where you condemn the FSSP. I don't see it mentioned
on the list of "Traditional Catholic" priests to avoid.  Are they valid?  Is it ok to attend one of their Masses?

Appreciate all your hard work.   Makes me just want to go hole up somewhere and do nothing but pray for reparation and salvation of souls.

I really hate the thought of not being able to attend daily Mass as me and my sisters were doing.  We're in a quandry because there are NO Traditional Masses here or anywhere within a 4 hour drive.  But, we are trusting in God and Mary and asking them to provide a way for us.  Meanwhile, we will assist Mass by watching a CD of the Low Mass.  I have ordered several of your books and will be doing a lot of reading.  Ya know, besides what you say, the books of prophecy by various authors really slaps ya in the face and when you look at them and you - it's scary.  We are definitely in a whirlwind right now and every minute counts. 

Thank you for your hard work.  Would appreciate a response about the FSSP - God Bless and Keep you.   

 

 Kathy Gibson

 

MHFM: The Fraternity of St. Peter is heretical because it accepts Vatican II.  Regarding validity, almost all of the priests of the FSSP were ordained by bishops who were consecrated in Paul VI’s New Rite of Episcopal Consecration.  As covered in this short section on that issue, the New Rite of Episcopal Consecration cannot be considered valid. 

 

The New Rite of Consecration of Bishops [PDF file]

 

One must not attend the Masses of invalid priests, of course.  That applies to almost every Fraternity of St. Peter priest.  It’s not a sin to stay home on Sunday when there is not an acceptable option.

 

Reader on Article and Talmud

 

Dear Brothers Michael and Peter:

 

I recently read an article posted on your News and Commentary section entitled, “Vatican II sect’s ‘Bishops’ and ‘Cardinals’ wear Yarmulkes”.  One of the most outrageous pictures in this article shows “Cardinal” Walter Kasper and Rabbi Zevulun Charlop holding up the Talmud, Judaism’s “holiest” book.  Although you cover this subject in one of your radio programs (Jan. 27, 2007), I thought I would provide some additional facts about the Talmud and what it actually says about Jesus Christ and His followers.

 

Below are some quotes from the book, “The Talmud: Judaism’s holiest book unmasked” (1892 Imprimatur) by Rev. Pranaitis.  He states:

 

“What Christians have thought of the Talmud is amply proved by the many edicts and decrees issued about it, by which the supreme rulers in Church and State proscribed it many times and condemned this sacred Secondary Law Code of the Jews to the flames.

 

In 553 the Emperor Justinian forbade the spread of the Talmudic books throughout the Roman Empire.  In the 13th century Popes Gregory IX and Innocent IV condemned the books of the Talmud as containing every kind of vileness and blasphemy against Christian truth, and ordered them to be burned because they spread many horrible heresies.

 

Later, they were condemned by many other Roman Pontiffs - Julius III, Paul IV, Pius IV, Pius V, Gregory XIII, Clement VIII, Alexander VII, Benedict XIV, and by others who issued new editions of the Index of Forbidden Books according to the orders of the Fathers of the Council of Trent, and even in our own time.”

 

Concerning what the Talmud teaches about Jesus Christ, the author states:

 

“The Talmud teaches that Jesus Christ was illegitimate and was conceived during menstruation; that he had the soul of Esau; that he was a fool, a conjurer, a seducer; that he was crucified, buried in hell and set up as an idol ever since by his followers.”

 

Concerning what the Talmud teaches about Christians, the author states:

 

“…We saw what the Jews think of the Founder of the Christian religion, and how much they despise his name. This being so, it would not be expected that they would have any better opinion about those who follow Jesus the Nazarene. In fact, nothing more abominable can be imagined than what they have to say about Christians. They say that they are idolaters, the worst kind of people, much worse than the Turks, murderers, fornicators, impure animals, like dirt, unworthy to be called men, beasts in human form, worthy of the name of beasts, cows, asses, pigs, dogs, worse than dogs; that they propagate after the manner of beasts, that they have diabolic origin, that their souls come from the devil and return to the devil in hell after death; and that even the body of a dead Christian is nothing different from that of an animal.”

 

Concerning the precepts of the Talmud as regards to Christians, he states:

 

“From what has been shown thus far, it is clear that, according to the teaching of the Talmud, Christians are idolaters and hateful to Jews.  As a consequence, every Jew who wishes to please God has a duty to observe all the precepts which were given to the Fathers of their race when they lived in the Holy Land concerning the idolatrous gentiles, both those who lived amongst them and those in nearby countries.  A Jew is therefore required to 1: to avoid Christians; 2: to do all he can to exterminate them.”

 

Concerning the last point, the author states:

 

“The followers of "that man," whose name is taken by the Jews to mean "May his name and memory be blotted out," are not otherwise to be regarded than as people whom it would be good to get rid of.  They are called Romans and tyrants who hold captive the children of Israel, and by their destruction the Jews would be freed from this Fourth Captivity.  Every Jew is therefore bound to do all he can to destroy that impious kingdom of the Edomites (Rome) which rules the whole world.  Since, however, it is not always and everywhere possible to effect this extermination of Christians, the Talmud orders that they should be attacked at least indirectly, namely: by injuring them in every possible way, and by thus lessening their power, help towa rds their ultimate destruction.  Wherever it is possible a Jew should kill Christians, and do so without mercy.”

 

Considering these facts, I am not sure how anyone can claim to be a Jew and a member of the Catholic Church (let alone claim to be a member of the Catholic hierarchy and attend Jewish instruction in the Talmud).  As to your recent email exchange with that somewhat arrogant and self-styled “Hebrew Catholic”, I thought your response was accurate and to the point.  However, I would like to point out how absurd his position is considering Judaism’s “holiest” book, which is clearly hateful toward Jesus Christ and His followers.

 

-John.

 

St. Augustine on a Mystery of Iniquity

 

MHFM: Here’s an interesting passage from St. Augustine’s Confessions.  It concerns a mystery of iniquity: people often commit sins simply for the sake of doing that which is forbidden:

 

St. Augustine, Confessions, Book 2, Chap. 4: “For I pilfered that of which I had already sufficient, and much better.  Nor did I desire to enjoy what I pilfered, but the theft and sin itself.  There was a pear-tree close to our vineyard, heavily laden with fruit, which was tempting neither for its color nor its flavor.  To shake and rob this some of us wanton young fellows went, late one night… and carried away great loads, not to eat ourselves, but to fling to the very swine, having only eaten some of them; and to do this pleased us all the more because it was not permitted.  Behold my heart, O my God; behold my heart, which Thou hadst pity upon when in the bottomless pit.  Behold, now, let my heart tell Thee what it was seeking there, that I should be gratuitously wanton, having no inducement to evil but the evil itself.  It was foul, and I loved it.  I loved to perish.  I loved my own error – not that for which I erred, but the error itself.  Base soul, falling from Thy firmament to utter destruction – not seeking aught through the shame but the shame itself.”

 

Exchange on Ordination

 

Hello Brothers Michael and Peter,

 

Thank you so much for mailing me the rosary, brown scapular, Bible and Penny Catechism. I find them all a wonderful blessing.

 

Now concerning the matter of a valid confession… I am presently engaged in an interesting e-mail thread with Fr. Ned Shlesinger of the Diocese of Raleigh. I have included the thread below. But the most telling line of the thread is where Fr. Ned says: "...but [I] still don't see how the altering or[sic] the rite or the lack of  mention (e.g. of confession / sacrifice) used in the rite of ordination have nullified the powers inherent in the sacrament of Holy Orders."

 

I'd love to see you challenge this gentleman on the question of what DOES bestow powers upon the sacrament of Holy Orders?

 

With sincere thanks,

 

Rob

 

Dear Rob,

 

Thank you again for your e-mail.  How can I respond to your doubts about the ability of an ordained priest after Second Vatican Council to absolve sin since the words used in the ordination rite have changed?

 

1.  Once again, I understand that the powers to absolve sin lie in the nature of the sacrament of ordination and not in the words pronounced at the time of ordination.  I understand St. Thomas Aquinas' notion of sacrament as needing form (words) and matter (the laying on of hands), but still don't see how the altering or the rite or the lack of  mention (e.g. of confession / sacrifice) used in the rite of ordination have nullified the powers inherent in the sacrament of Holy Orders.  It may be interesting to see what words were used prior to the Council of Trent and even back to Apostolic times.

 

2.  If my rememberance of history is correct, I understand that ordination in the Anglican Church is invalid since the Queen Elizabeth I authorized the use of the Book of Common Prayer which was illicit, contrary to the unity of the Church, and which was influenced by the theology of the protestant reformation (especially concerning sacraments) that was permeating the Church of England in that period.

 

3.  I have a concern regarding your e-mails which is related to your doubt (or lack of trust) in the Heirarchy (Magisterium) of the Catholic Church to establish rites while not changing truth.  The rites of the Church have changed over the centuries as we continue to understand through the help of the Holy Spirit greater insight into the truths in the Deposit of Faith…

 

I pray that you have a Blessed Easter.

 

In Christ,

 

Fr. Ned

 

MHFM: As pointed out in our article below on ordination, Pope Leo XIII declared that the removal of references to the sacrificing priesthood in the Anglican Rite was the major reason it was invalid.  The same can be said for the New Rite of Ordination.

 

Pope Leo XIII, Apostolicae Curae, Sept. 13, 1896: “For, to put aside other reasons which show this to be insufficient for the purpose in the Anglican rite, let this argument suffice for all: from them has been deliberately removed whatever sets forth the dignity and office of the priesthood in the Catholic rite.  That form consequently cannot be considered apt or sufficient for the sacrament which omits what it ought essentially to signify.”

 

Pope Leo XIII, Apostolicae Curae, Sept. 13, 1896: “So it comes to pass that, as the Sacrament of Orders and the true sacerdotium [sacrificing priesthood] of Christ were utterly eliminated from the Anglican rite, and hence the sacerdotium [priesthood] is in no wise conferred truly and validly in the Episcopal consecration of the same rite, for the like reason, therefore, the Episcopate can in no wise be truly and validly conferred by it; and this the more so because among the first duties of the Episcopate is that of ordaining ministers for the Holy Eucharist and sacrifice.”

 

Why the New Rite of Ordination is Invalid [PDF File]

(This article explains why the New Rite of Ordination – which was instituted by Paul VI on June 18, 1968 after Vatican II – is not valid.)

 

 

More on last e-mail

 

Dear Brothers,

THANK YOU, THANK YOU , THANK YOU!!   I sent the letter below (With a copy of your letter Exchange with the Jewish fellow) to a bunch of my friends.  It is so refreshing to finally see someone take on these haughty ones and set the record straight.  It seems like we are being inundated by Jewish thought more and more each day.....by Evangelicals and Jews
themselves, as they are so prominent in the popular media.   Of course, I don't appreciate Mel's fall into the bottle, but I can certainly appreciate what drove him there.  They think they can even Dictate what the Church teaches about them on Good Friday and in general !  Yes, I know....we need to pray for them, which I will do.

Thanks again,

Carol Delger

 

“Catholic” Jew writes in

 

Hi There,

I was just about to order some things from your apostolate until I saw that you think a Bishop celebrating Hannukah is an apostate.  This comment concerned me because of course, the fact that Jesus, the Jew, celebrated Hannukah would therefore make Him an apostate as well. 

Furthermore, Jewish Catholics like myself still celebrate Hannukah because a) it is in the Bible b) Jesus celebrated it c) it is both a salvation history celebration and a vital cultural celebration that reminds our culture of God's salvation from the pagan persecution of the sinful Greek culture and d) Jews still have the liberty to witness to their culture via keeping covenant laws should we wish (consider St Paul's circumcision of St Timothy even after the Jerusalem Council declared infallibly that certain aspects of the law were not binding on Gentiles- See Acts 15 cf.  Acts 16:1-3).  Jews are still Jews, even when they become Catholics.  This is Biblical.

So, if a Bishop wants to imitate Jesus and the Apostles by keeping the Feast of Dedication I say more power to him- he's reaching more Jews than a thousand blood-splattered movies by the drunken Mel Gibson.  As a Jew, I'm happy to see it and maybe other Jews will become Hebrew Catholics because of the witness that says we don't have to abandon our common culture with Jesus and the Apostles to be Catholics, but rather that we are welcomed as other cultures are and that the Catholic Church is the true Hebraic Church.

I know American ministries like yourself with siege mentality don't like to be "corrected"(especially by a Jew) and rarely take advice, but you really need to get your stuff together on this if you want your message to be heard on the things you've got right.

Have a Blessed Day.

Troy (Levi) Harris

 

MHFM: In charity we must tell you that you have adopted a very false version of the Catholic faith. 

 

Galatians 3:28- "There is neither Jew nor Greek: there is neither bond nor free: there is neither male nor female. For you are all one in Christ Jesus."

 

You don't seem familiar with the dogmatic teaching of the Catholic Church.  The Church teaches infallibly that the Old Law has been done away with and can no longer be observed without mortal sin and the loss of salvation.  Contrary to this, you state: “ Jewish Catholics like myself still celebrate Hannukah because a) it is in the Bible b) Jesus celebrated it c) it is both a salvation history celebration and a vital cultural celebration that reminds our culture of God's salvation from the pagan persecution of the sinful Greek culture and d) Jews still have the liberty to witness to their culture via keeping covenant laws should we wish…” Allow us to quote for you the dogmatic teaching of the Church which you are contradicting.

 

Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, 1441, ex cathedra:

“The Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and teaches that the matter pertaining to the law of the Old Testament, the Mosaic law, which are divided into ceremonies, sacred rites, sacrifices, and sacraments… after our Lord’s coming… ceased, and the sacraments of the New Testament began…  All, therefore, who after that time (the promulgation of the Gospel) observe circumcision and the Sabbath and the other requirements of the law, the holy Roman Church declares alien to the Christian faith and not in the least fit to participate in eternal salvation.”

 

Pope Benedict XIV reiterated this dogma in his encyclical Ex Quo Primum.

 

Pope Benedict XIV, Ex Quo Primum (# 61), March 1, 1756:“The first consideration is that the ceremonies of the Mosaic Law were abrogated by the coming of Christ and that they can no longer be observed without sin after the promulgation of the Gospel.”

 

Pope Pius XII, Mystici Corporis Christi (#’s 29-30), June 29, 1943: “And first of all, by the death of our Redeemer, the New Testament took the place of the Old Law which had been abolished… on the gibbet of His death Jesus made void the Law with its decrees [Eph. 2:15]… establishing the New Testament in His blood shed for the whole human race.  To such an extent, then,’ says St. Leo the Great, speaking of the Cross of our Lord, ‘was there effected a transfer from the Law to the Gospel, from the Synagogue to the Church, from many sacrifices to one Victim, that, as our Lord expired, that mystical veil which shut off the innermost part of the temple and its sacred secret was rent violently from top to bottom.’  On the Cross then the Old Law died, soon to be buried and to be a bearer of death…”

 

Your examples of what Jesus and St. Paul did do not constitute a valid argument.  Prior to His death and resurrection, Jesus fulfilled the Old Law in order to show that He was a faithful adherent of the Old Testament religion.  He was the true Messiah of the Old Testament religion, the one to whom it pointed.  So, prior to His death and resurrection, He demonstrated that He was subject to that which was still in force.  But, as the decrees above show, it's mortally sinful to observe the Old Law now. 

 

Regarding Hanukkah, even though it is not strictly part of the Mosaic law, it is affiliated with it.  It is a ceremony for the rededication of the Jewish Temple.  It is thus wrapped up with the worship and religion which was conducted at the Jewish Temple, which is now obsolete.  So those who celebrate it are professing, by such an action, that Jewish worship at a Hebrew Temple or synagogues is acceptable.  To celebrate Hanukkah is to deny, by deed, that Jesus Christ has come and that the Jewish Temple has been replaced with the Church.  So for you to observe Hanukkah and other Old Testament practices (which are affiliated with the Old Law or the observance of Judaism) is a mortal sin and a denial of the Catholic faith. 

 

Regarding St. Paul having circumcised Timothy, that was in the apostolic period, in which the observance of the Old Law was dead but not yet deadly (more on this from St. Thomas below).  The observance of the Old Law became deadly (mortally sinful) after the destruction of the Temple in 70 A.D., which is considered to have marked "the promulgation of the Gospel." In the following citation from St. Thomas, we see that there are three different periods pertaining to the Old Law.  St. Thomas points out that to practice it now (i.e. since the promulgation of the Gospel) is mortally sinful, and that Paul circumcised Timothy in the period when observing it was not yet deadly. 

 

St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, Pt. I-II, Q. 103, A. 4 Reply to Obj. 1: “… Augustine (Epist. lxxxii) more fittingly distinguished three periods of time. One was the time that preceded the Passion of Christ, during which the legal ceremonies were neither deadly nor dead: another period was after the publication of the Gospel, during which the legal ceremonies are both dead and deadly. The third is a middle period, viz. from the Passion of Christ until the publication of the Gospel, during which the legal ceremonies were dead indeed, because they had neither effect nor binding force; but were not deadly, because it was lawful for the Jewish converts to Christianity to observe them, provided they did not put their trust in them so as to hold them to be necessary unto salvation, as though faith in Christ could not justify without the legal observances. On the other hand, there was no reason why those who were converted from heathendom to Christianity should observe them. Hence Paul circumcised Timothy, who was born of a Jewish mother; but was unwilling to circumcise Titus, who was of heathen nationality.”

 

The fact that the Old Law became deadly after the promulgation of the Gospel was infallibly taught by the Council of Florence, as we saw above.  This council also explained that there was a unique apostolic period, as we saw in St. Thomas.  This unique apostolic period also contained a prohibition against certain foods which were forbidden under the Old Law; but this prohibition is now obsolete.

 

Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, 1442, ex cathedra: “It firmly believes, professes and teaches that every creature of God is good and nothing is to be rejected if it is received with thanksgiving, because according to the word of the Lord not what goes into the mouth defiles a person, and because the difference in the Mosaic law between clean and unclean foods belongs to ceremonial practices, which have passed away and lost their efficacy with the coming of the gospel. It also declares that the apostolic prohibition, to abstain from what has been sacrificed to idols and from blood and from what is strangled, was suited to that time when a single church was rising from Jews and gentiles, who previously lived with different ceremonies and customs. This was so that the gentiles should have some observances in common with Jews, and occasion would be offered of coming together in one worship and faith of God and a cause of dissension might be removed, since by ancient custom blood and strangled things seemed abominable to Jews, and gentiles could be thought to be returning to idolatry if they ate sacrificial food.  But when the Christian religion has been promulgated to such an extent that no carnal Jew is to be met with, but all passing over to the Church, uniformly practising the same rites and ceremonies of the gospel and believing that to the clean all things are clean, since the cause of that apostolic prohibition has ceased, so its effect has ceased. It condemns, then, no kind of food that human society accepts and nobody at all neither man nor woman, should make a distinction between animals, no matter how they died; although for the health of the body, for the practice of virtue or for the sake of regular and ecclesiastical discipline many things that are not proscribed can and should be omitted, as the apostle says all things are lawful, but not all are helpful.”

 

“It firmly believes, professes and preaches that all those who are outside the catholic church, not only pagans but also Jews or heretics and schismatics, cannot share in eternal life and will go into the everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels, unless they are joined to the catholic church before the end of their lives; that the unity of the ecclesiastical body is of such importance that only for those who abide in it do the church's sacraments contribute to salvation and do fasts, almsgiving and other works of piety and practices of the Christian militia produce eternal rewards; and that nobody can be saved, no matter how much he has given away in alms and even if he has shed his blood in the name of Christ, unless he has persevered in the bosom and the unity of the catholic church.”

 

So it’s beyond doubt that it’s mortally sinful and contrary to Catholic teaching to observe the Old Law or Jewish ceremonies such as Hanukkah.  We wonder if you also accept the Catholic dogma that all who die as Jews will go to Hell, which was defined infallibly in the above decree? 

 

In charity, we must also say that you need to get over the fact that you were Jewish.  It's not about your former Jewishness; it's about Jesus and His Church.  The attachment to "Jewishness," which is somewhat common among those who claim to have converted from Judaism, springs from pride and a self-belief in their elitism.  We hope you will consider these points. 

 

In addition, the following quote from St. Thomas also shows that to observe the Jewish practices now is to profess, by deed, that Christ has not yet been born:

 

St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, Pt. I-II, Q. 103, A. 4: I answer that, All ceremonies are professions of faith, in which the interior worship of God consists. Now man can make profession of his inward faith, by deeds as well as by words: and in either profession, if he make a false declaration, he sins mortally. Now, though our faith in Christ is the same as that of the fathers of old; yet, since they came before Christ, whereas we come after Him, the same faith is expressed in different words, by us and by them. For by them was it said: "Behold a virgin shall conceive and bear a son," where the verbs are in the future tense: whereas we express the same by means of verbs in the past tense, and say that she "conceived and bore." In like manner the ceremonies of the Old Law betokened Christ as having yet to be born and to suffer: whereas our sacraments signify Him as already born and having suffered.  Consequently, just as it would be a mortal sin now for anyone, in making a profession of faith, to say that Christ is yet to be born, which the fathers of old said devoutly and truthfully; so too it would be a mortal sin now to observe those ceremonies which the fathers of old fulfilled with devotion and fidelity. Such is the teaching Augustine (Contra Faust. xix, 16), who says: "It is no longer promised that He shall be born, shall suffer and rise again, truths of which their sacraments were a kind of image: but it is declared that He is already born, has suffered and risen again; of which our sacraments, in which Christians share, are the actual representation."

 

Vatican II

 

I am e-mailing because a friend of mine came out of church and found one of your cd's placed on her windshield.  She was skeptical and asked me if I knew anything about mostholyfamilymonastery.com.  I looked up the website and am deeply disturbed by it.  I understand there are people who think the Church was lost after Vatican II, I just wish those people could see that it was lost because PEOPLE took liberties with the Mass and did not follow Vatican II but tried to make the Church their own.  I will explain what I know to my skeptical friend. 

 

Paula Foster

 

MHFM: Thanks for the e-mail.  The problem was not because people took liberties with Vatican II.  Vatican II itself was the problem.  We hope you read this file, which documents the many heresies taught by Vatican II.  The article also covers how Vatican II laid the groundwork for the liturgical revolution.

 

The Heresies in Vatican II [PDF File]

 

The New Mass is not a real Mass, as our material proves.  You need to realize that the post-Vatican II “Church” is not the real Catholic Church.

 

JP2 Jewish?

 

Would Most Holy Family Monastery care to add this interpretation of John Paul II to your site. It suggests that he was the trained, committed and determined antagonist of true religion. But further, when the gruesome memorial to Archbishop Sapieha is connected to the persistent rumour that he was Wojtyla's actual father, the entire JP2 pontificate begins to emerge from media-amplified propaganda myth into most sobering reality.

 

Sincerely

Michael McDonnell

 

http://www.metronews.co.uk/news/s/600346_the_pope_was_jewish_says_historian

 

MHFM: Yes, we have linked to that article in the past.  When considering such a thing, one must combine it with Paul VI’s wearing of the breast-plate of a Jewish High Priest, as we cover here: The Heresies of Paul VI, the man who gave the world the New Mass and the Teachings of Vatican II [PDF file].  Then the full picture of the spiritual conspiracy at work with the Vatican II sect and its antipopes begins to become clear.

 

EENS and handicapped

 

Hello,

 

I have some of your DVD's and find them very thought provoking… Also, as to your "Outside the Church" book and theology, what about the handicapped?  Those with moderate to severe retardation, does the Church teach that they will go to heaven even though they cannot "choose" Christ?  I work with such people myself.  One more question.  How is it possible for infants not baptized to be barred from heaven for eternity?  What about the mercy of God on the most innocent.  Is not God the author of the sacraments and therefore greater than the sacraments and not bound by them? God is sovereign over all creation and for Him to cast babies into "limbo" goes against every attribute of the goodness of God.  The same seems true for aborted babies.  If the devil destroys babies would not the mercy of God save them?  It seems that way to me anyway.

 

Thanks for all you do.  I so much appreciate you valuable work.

 

Steve Adelman   

 

MHFM: If he can understand certain things (e.g. if he can will to be saved), he must 1) be baptized and 2) know and believe at least the essential truths of the Catholic faith (the Trinity and the Incarnation/Apostles’ Creed) to have the Catholic faith and be saved.

 

Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, Sess. 8, Nov. 22, 1439: “Whoever wishes to be saved, needs above all to hold the Catholic faith; unless each one preserves this whole and inviolate, he will without a doubt perish in eternity.– But the Catholic faith is this, that we worship one God in the Trinity, and the Trinity in unity; neither confounding the persons, nor dividing the substance; for there is one person of the Father, another of the Son, another of the Holy Spirit, their glory is equal, their majesty coeternal...and in this Trinity there is nothing first or later, nothing greater or less, but all three persons are coeternal and coequal with one another, so that in every respect, as has already been said above, both unity in Trinity, and Trinity in unity must be worshipped.  Therefore let him who wishes to be saved, think thus concerning the Trinity.  But it is necessary for eternal salvation that he faithfully believe also in the incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ...the Son of God is God and man... This is the Catholic faith; unless each one believes this faithfully and firmly, he cannot be saved.”

 

If he is so handicapped that he cannot even do that, then he would be equivalent to an infant below the age of reason.  In that case, he would simply have to be baptized to be Catholic and saved.  Regarding infants, we must humble ourselves and submit to the wisdom of the all-knowing God.  He knows all men from eternity.  He knows who is worthy and who isn’t.  He knows what these infants who died before baptism would have done if they had lived a full life.  Thus, His teaching that none of them are saved without Baptism is perfectly just.  We must accept it and believe it without hesitation.  As pointed out in section 2 of our book:

 

Those who refuse to believe in the dogma Outside the Church There is No Salvation until they understand how there is justice in it are simply withholding their Faith in Christ’s revelation.  Those with the true Faith in Christ (and His Church) accept His teaching first and understand the truth in it (i.e., why it is true) second.  A Catholic does not withhold his belief in Christ’s revelation until he can understand it.  That is the mentality of a faithless heretic who possesses insufferable pride.  St. Anselm sums up the true Catholic outlook on this point. 

 

St. Anselm, Doctor of the Church, Prosologion, Chap. 1: “For I do not seek to understand that I may believe, but I believe in order to understand.  For this also I believe, that unless I believed, I should not understand.”

 

Romans 11:33-34- “O the depth of the riches of the wisdom and of the knowledge of God!  How incomprehensible are his judgments, and how unsearchable his ways!  For who hath known the mind of the Lord?  Or who hath been his counselor? Or who hath first given to him, and recompense shall be made him?”

 

Isaias 55:8-9- “For my thoughts are not your thoughts: nor your ways my ways, saith the Lord.  For as the heavens are exalted above the earth, so are my ways exalted above your ways, and my thoughts above your thoughts.”

 

Not confusing

 

Hello. I have been confused about my Catholic Church/faith for many years, now. I grew up in the Catholic Church of the '50s, so I felt I had a fairly substantial Catholic background. In recent years, I have become disillusioned and thoroughly confused by what I see and hear. ....In any New Order Catholic Church I attended, I never saw (or thought I saw) the irreverence or disrespect I now know so many New Order churches have experienced. ...I understood the Catholics, who stayed away from the changes, to be the so-called break-away Catholics, while I was certain staying with the church I'd attended for all my life....and under the pope....was the TRUE Church. Now, I'm not so sure. ......In recent years, I've have become so confused I could cry....literally. ........I found EWTN, which I thought to be wonderful in showing the reverence that should come with Mass attendance. Then, I began hearing from Christ The King Abbey in Alabama, which has made me consider that they ("Traditionalists") have held together the True Church. Then, I got literature from The Fatima Crusade, which warns us against the New Order Church, EWTN and this wonderful Monastery (or so I thought) in Alabama. ....Now, I've come across your web-site and become even more confused. You truly need to be a Theologian to understand what's going on and who is right. I am not the smartest person in the world, but I am not stupid, either, and I don't understand half of what's being presented by many of  these different groups.....I've read through some of your writings, and have become yet more confused. ......The Alabama monastery has asked we pray for the pope, while they are not in communion with Rome at this time, and yet you warn this is a place to be avoided. Of all the places I've checked into, they seemed to be the ones I felt were holding to the True Faith. ....Many years ago, I went to a Charismatic Prayer Meeting at my church. I did not want to be a part of it. I was there to observe, only, and sat way in the back. There, I agree, that it was not a Catholic event. Beautiful prayers were recited, followed by swaying back and forth with hands held. People had phony-looking smiles on their faces and their eyes were glassed-over making them look like they were on drugs (to me!). I did not like the idea of spouting out unintelligible phrases, assuming they were "of God." ....I never went again! ........So, all these CATHOLIC teachers have done is to confuse someone (me!) who doesn't know where to turn for the Truth. Where is the True Church and why am I having such a hard time in finding her? .....My soul is at stake here. This is something I do not appreciate being made so very confusing by the very persons who should be making clearer the correct path to heaven. .....One of your articles sites the Priest-Abuse scandals of the New Church. I've seen story after story about the same abuse going way back to before the New Church came into being. Problems were there long before the New Church. Abuse was kept hidden and not spoken of. (NEVER criticize the Church. That, I learned from the nuns in grade school!)............Is there something you can recommend to help me with my struggle. Something I can read? A priest to talk with? Anything that will help me to recognize and FIND the TRUE Catholic Church? I feel more and more lost each day. .............I live in the Denver area of Lancaster Co., PA. Any guidance would be most gratefully appreciated.

 

Thank you.                  Susan McGuire

 

MHFM: We do appreciate the interest, but the facts on our website are not confusing.  They cut through the fog and give people the clear truth.  Once these facts are examined, there is nothing confusing about the situation.  What one should conclude about what has happened becomes very clear to those who savor the truth and are of good will.  At that point a person is relieved and refreshed to know the clear truth.  You have to be fully convinced on these critical points before we can help you with where you might potentially be able to receive the sacraments.

 

Godparent of Novus Ordo

 

Good Morning,

 

I was named the Godmother of my niece who is now about 17years old and lives in Poland.  She was baptized in the N.O ‘church’.  Assuming this baptism is valid, what duties/responsibilities do I have as a Godmother.  I’ve been living here for a while now and have minimal contact with her.  Her parents are currently separated and the father is living an immoral lifestyle here in the U.S. with another woman!  The mother lives in Poland with my Goddaughter and, at best, follows the N.O ‘church’.  What are my responsibilities as a Godmother in this situation?  First, do I have a responsibility to inform my Godchild about the faith?  Second, and/or about the immoral lifestyle of the parent, specifically her father?  Thirdly, has the Catholic Church made any pronouncements about the responsibilities of the Godparents?  For example, does the Church speak about under what circumstances these responsibilities apply (upon the death of the parent(s), or when the parent(s) neglects to raise the child in the faith)?

 

Please help, as I have nobody else who can.

 

Thank you so very much.

 

r…

 

MHFM:  Yes, you absolutely must inform her about the faith.  A Catholic needs to do that with anyone he or she knows well.  Yes, you should inform her that her father is living in a state of mortal sin.  Your responsibility as a godparent is essentially to look after the spiritual well-being of this person, but with a special solicitude.  It’s basically what you would do for anyone you know well, but to an extra degree.  You can only try to give her the information about the traditional Catholic faith and what she must do.  You need to tell her not to go to the New Mass, to pray the Rosary, believe in the traditional dogmas, etc.  If she’s not interested, then you have to move on.   

 

Out of Novus Ordo

 

I was raised in the perfect Vatican II church family. My family members taught ccd, hosted renew groups, are Eucharistic ministers and one member was ordained into the priesthood in 2003. THANK YOU for the info on your site, if not for the info many of us would still be members of that church.

 

Kate

 

Catholics?

 

Hello,

 

I a catholic from India, follower of Syro-Malabar Church ; one of Oriental Eastern Churches, under and obedience to Pope and Rome, happened to read from “An Introduction to False Ecumenism and some comments on Heretical Actions

 

My questions:

 

Are you Catholics under Pope ? If not then which Christian sect / Church ?

If yes how can you explain the above article’s contents?

Do you believe Popes mentioned: Paul VI, Benedict XVI are no true Popes ?

If  yes who is the ‘present’ true pope, if at all there is one?

Are you and your website are approved by Roman Catholic Church?

Admitting their views and so called Ecumenical teachings and programs are contradictory and anti- St. Thomas Aquinas, what should one do?

How to counter this problem of anomalies of Vat II, staying with which platform ?

These are some genuine questions from a Catholic faithful. We don’t believe in infallibility of Popes.

Pls reply in little detail, which may lead many to truth in my area.

 

Regards and prayers,

Sunny Alanoly

 

MHFM: We are Catholics.  We believe in all the dogmas of the Catholic Church, including papal infallibility.  If you don’t believe in papal infallibility, then you are not a true Catholic.  Vatican I defined papal infallibility as a dogma.  It flows logically from the supreme authority which Christ gave to St. Peter.  The roots of it can be seen in Mt. 16 and Lk. 22.  For if whatever a pope binds upon earth is bound in Heaven, as Mt. 16 says, then what the pope binds must be infallible; for Heaven doesn’t bind that which is false.  The unfailing faith that Christ promises St. Peter in Luke 22 also shows infallibility.  You should listen to the talks on the Papacy which are found in this file: Refuting Protestantism and Eastern "Orthodoxy" * Audio Programs.  For if you don’t believe in papal infallibility then you are in heresy right now and need to convert.  You should also read this file and look at the other information on our site more carefully: 

 

The Glossary of Terms and Principles [PDF]

(This glossary contains important definitions of key terms and principles about the Catholic Faith, about the post-Vatican II “Church,” about how the Catholic Church views non-Catholic religions, etc. which people should see.)

 

In examining the information more carefully, you will find the answers to the questions you have.

 

OT saints?

 

Hi, I've been reading some of your info and playing some debates on the subject on your site. I sure it on the web site some where but there's a lot of info. What about the theif on the cross and Moses David and other who neither were baptised or with the excepting of the thief knew or accepted Christ? Thank you for you time.

In Christ
Tony Valente

 

MHFM: This is answered in our book: Outside the Catholic Church There is Absolutely No Salvation [pdf file].  The answer is that the Good Thief, Moses, etc. cannot be used as examples against the necessity of Baptism, etc. because they died under the Old Law, not the New Law.  They died before the Law of Baptism was instituted by Jesus Christ after the Resurrection.

 

Catechism of the Council of Trent, Baptism made obligatory after Christ’s Resurrection, p. 171: “Holy writers are unanimous in saying that after the Resurrection of our Lord, when He gave His Apostles the command to go and teach all nations: baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, the law of Baptism became obligatory on all who were to be saved.”

 

Effort

 

I viewed your site, although rather superficially, and it is obvious you consider yourselves to be the arbiters of truth.  From where do you decide what is truth and what is not?  You make some intertesting statements, many out of context, and then jump to conclusions that you have not defended but only state as truth.  Are you in communion with Rome?  Who is the Pope (the real Pope) as you would see it?  Do we not have one?  How did the Magiseium get it so wrong?  Is not the Magisterium in coordination with the Pope the authority of the Church?  How did you get this authority?  I am confused at your positions.  You seem to contradict yourselves by your very existance.

 

Bob Nolan

 

MHFM: You need to look at the site more carefully.  You are the one who is confused and contradictory.  The Magisterium didn't get it wrong.  The Vatican II sect rejects the teaching of the Catholic Magisterium.  You should read this file:

 

The Glossary of Terms and Principles [PDF]

 

But if the level of effort which you have thus far exerted in understanding the facts we’ve brought forward is typical of what you will put out, then we cannot help you.  People have to put out some effort or else they will remain in their ignorance and spiritual fog.

 

V-2 book

 

I have your recent book What Happened after Vatican II.  That is the best sledgehammer of a presentation that has been done.  I really like all of your other books as well.  They are outstanding.  Thanks for what you are doing.

 

Henry Benton,

NJ

 

Recent audio programs

 

I added your two most recent audio files to the rest of them on my myspace page and someone who listened to them left me a message that said they were awesome and very informative, so I thought I would pass that along to you.

 

Is…

 

Older priest writes in

 

Quite by accident I came across your website this morning… I am an 86 year old Jesuit priest, ordained in 1952, when Pius XII was pope. I later had the privilege of speaking with him personally and receiving his blessing. He is one my heroes. I am writing to you because I am puzzled. You evidently regard the vast majority of those who call themselves Catholics as involved in heresy and schism and not truly members of the Catholic Church. I am one of these. My puzzle concerns where you think we went wrong.

 

I was teaching in Rome as a young professor of theology when Pope Pius XII died. I was in St. Peter’s Square a few weeks later when the election of Angelo Roncalli was announced. He took the name of John XXIII. Do you regard this election as somehow invalid? Was the whole church deceived? Had the Holy Spirit failed to preserve her? What could we have done to discern that this man was actually not the pope? Did anyone at all contest the validity of his election at that time? Would not the promise of Christ that the “gates of hell shall not prevail against it” prevent such a tragic deception?

 

If then Pope John XXIII was truly pope, was his calling an ecumenical council an invalid act? I was in Rome when the council was called. I remember many saying that the council would not last long and would not accomplish much. But when the bishops of the world assembled as the Second Vatican Council, was it not truly an ecumenical council, guided and protected by Holy Spirit from leading the faithful into error? Was there any way of knowing that this was not the case? Did the Holy Spirit desert the Church after the death of Pius XII? I had returned to the United States to teach theology when the council actually met, but I followed the reports on its doings with great attention.

 

There, you have my puzzle. When would you say that the great majority of Catholics actually fell into heresy?  I was struck by the earnestness of what I read on your site, of your evident love of God and of the truth. I think of myself also as one who throughout a long life has tried to love God and to promote the truth. Where do you think that I have failed? How do you think I could have avoided this?

                                       

Sincerely in Our Lord.

[Name withheld]

 

MHFM: Thanks for the e-mail.  You obviously have many questions.  We're really glad to hear about your interest.  The answers to your questions can be found in our material.  We hope that you continue to look at the information.  John XXIII’s “election” was invalid because he was a heretic.  There is also some evidence that he wasn’t elected first, but that another cardinal was.  As our material explains, the promise of Christ to the Church (that the gates of Hell cannot prevail) does not preclude 1) a massive apostasy, 2) antipopes in Rome, 3) a Counter Church arising in Rome which reduces the true Catholic Church to a remnant.  With the exception of #3, we've had this before at different periods of Church history (e.g., the Arian crisis, the Great Western Schism, etc.).  The promises of Christ to the Church simply ensure that the Catholic Church will always exist and that the Church itself and the Magisterium cannot err. 

 

What has occurred with the Vatican II “Church” has been perpetrated by men who are not true popes.  They do not wield the power of the Catholic Magisterium and so their false teachings do not taint it. Vatican II was called and confirmed by manifestly heretical non-Catholic antipopes.  It was not therefore a true ecumenical council.  It was a false council which taught many heresies. 

 

When should people have seen it, you ask.  When Vatican II promoted rapprochement with Protestants and other non-Catholics, they should have seen it.  Any Catholic who is concerned about the faith (and studies it as he should) knows that the Catholic Church rejects all who don’t agree with her teachings.  The only “coming together” which can happen is the conversion of the non-Catholics.  So any program of acceptance of non-Catholics as they are in their non-Catholic beliefs is a betrayal of the Catholic Faith.  For example, the anathemas of the Council of Trent (and other councils), which were launched against all who would contradict Catholic dogmas, are well-known.  So a program of union with, and acceptance of, non-Catholic sects/religions should have alerted any vigilant and educated Catholic that something heretical and revolutionary was afoot.

 

This entire situation has been predicted in Scripture and in Catholic prophecy, as our material explains.  To answer your other question: yes, the great majority of Catholics fell into heresy and lost the faith.  Sadly, these former Catholics are now pseudo-Catholics and on the road to damnation. 

 

When did people lose the faith?  This happened and continues to happen on an individual basis: when a person obstinately embraces one or more of the heresies of the new religion.  At that point a person ceases to be a Catholic and becomes a member of the Vatican II sect.  This certainly has happened and continues to happen to all who accept the Vatican II heresies of ecumenism and a general religious indifferentism.  For example, even if people believe that the Catholic Church is the one true Church, if they accept Protestant sects as okay (even though less true) they have embraced a heretical religion and lost the Catholic faith.  This attitude is probably held by almost all who attend the New Mass today.  (And this is just to examine the situation from the standpoint of heresy.  We must remember that mortal sin alone will send a person to Hell.  The Vatican II preachers generally don’t communicate even the moral truths of the Catholic faith and the spiritual life.  So even if an individual has not yet been excommunicated for heresy, if he has not been taught to pray, do spiritual reading, avoid the occasions of sin, etc., then he will not avoid mortal sin.  He would therefore be on the road to damnation, regardless of whether he rejects a dogma of the Church.

 

Since you asked, you have failed by giving in to the Vatican II heresies and the New Mass.  Ecumenism represents apostasy, as our material proves.  It represents a repudiation of the necessity of Jesus Christ and His one true faith.  It repudiates the dogma Outside the Church There is No Salvation.  The New Mass represents the acceptance of sacrilege and a liturgical revolution. 

 

But we’re really happy to hear about your interest.  God wanted you to see this material because he wants you to return to the traditional Catholic faith, the only true faith.  It’s a matter of your salvation to come a complete rejection of the New Mass, Vatican II and the false Vatican II Church.  It’s also necessary to hold the dogma Outside the Church There is No Salvation without any exceptions.  Coming to these positions is the most important thing in your life, for no one can be saved without holding the Catholic faith whole and undefiled (Athanasian Creed).  Again, we are truly glad to hear about your interest and you will be in our prayers.  We hope that you review the information. 

 

The Truth about What Really Happened to the Catholic Church after Vatican II Audio Program, Part 1, Part 2

Benedict XVI (The Heresies of Benedict XVI File)

John Paul II (manifest heretic who claimed to be pope 1978-2005)

Vatican II - false council

The Invalid New Mass

Outside the Catholic Church There is Absolutely No Salvation [pdf file]

 

There are many other important files.  These are just a few.

 

Thanks

 

Thank you for the order that I received today. It seems that I have my work cut out for me. The breadth of the gift you sent me today cannot be measured; the little bit of money is a poor compensation for the efforts you men have made on behalf of us trying to work out our salvation. I was wondering, perhaps, if you knew someone that is still selling the unabridged version of "Preparation For Death", I lent mine to a friend that was dying of cancer and never saw it again, the friend or the book. Thank you both for the time and encouragement that you have given me. One more favor I ask is that you can remember me in one of your prayers. Once again,

 

Thank you Matthew Rhodes

 

MHFM: We think Tan Books has it.

 

Easter

 

MHFM: What one should take from Easter is power.  The true Catholic faith has power because Jesus Christ has power over all things, including death.

 

Council of Toledo XI, 675: “… He accepted the true death of the body; also on the third day, restored by His own power, He arose from the grave.” (Denz. 286)

 

What must that have been like – only about 200 decades ago – when the apostles (true men who lived just as we are living now in the 21st century) saw Jesus after His Resurrection and were astonished?  They were regular men who had seen Him dead, and now they saw Him alive.  The unimaginable zeal with which this must have filled them can hardly be imagined.  For they had seen – and now knew – the key to all of human existence.  They were actual witnesses of it:

 

Luke 24:46-50- “And he said to them: Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise again from the dead, the third day: And that penance and remission of sins should be preached in his name, unto all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.  And you are witnesses of these things.  And I send the promise of my Father upon you: but stay you in the city till you be endued with power from on high.  And he led them out as far as Bethania: and lifting up his hands, he blessed them.”

 

One can only imagine how much they wanted to share it with everyone.

 

The Feast of the Resurrection reminds us that Jesus Christ is the Truth and that His true faith is reality.  The Resurrection shows us that the true faith has a real supernatural power which we can access at any time.  Jesus’s last days on earth and His Resurrection should truly give us a combination of hope, joy and zeal.  It should make us realize that nothing can stop the true faith.  The Feast of the Resurrection should make us excited to bring the Gospel (the fullness of the Catholic faith) to others. 

 

Interest in Lebanon

 

Hi there,

 

I’m Lebanese Christian Maronite (Catholics of Lebanon), and I’m finding very interesting all the things you are writing in your journal (website).  I agree with you on most of the things, especially when you mention that the power of the people deceiving us is so strong. This is true, because they seem like so much loving people... yes we are in very difficult times where evil is being camouflaged in good theories that people will unconsciously act upon without knowing that these things are bad. Brain washing, sweet-evil propaganda, tougher politics restricting human choice between good or evil, media promoting all kinds of devilish acts, computer banks controlling the world, an atheist new world order being implemented to everyone and everyone should accept it under the image of democracy, and also a swivelling world into chaos of unfinished wars and chaotic persecutions and politically-religious justified human genocides.........

 

It’s a narrow way to heaven.... and it’s a highway to hell... And it’s so difficult for believers of true faith in Jesus Christ to live it 100% because they are being persecuted by body & most specifically by soul... And the only solutions at the end of times, is the Holy Rosary and Devotion to the Immaculate Heart of Mary… let me know of all news and updates… Thanks and best regards,

 

Rock Sfeir

 

Interest in Nigeria

 

Dear Brother Dimond,

 

Compliment of the season! I am writing from Nigeria. I am a young Catholic Priest working in the eastern part of Nigeria. I came across your work and was highly edified. I am working in an area of primary evangelization where people are still trying to grasp the authentic meaning of their Catholic Faith.

 

My purpose of writing you is to know how I can send money to your community so that you can ship some books to me. Mean while I have seen the price of the book in your web site. And that book is: “The Truth about what really happened to the Catholic Church after Vatican II”…

 

Sincerely yours in Jesus and Mary.

 

Rev. Fr. Johnbosco

 

Binding and Loosing

 

When Christ gave St Peter the keys of the kingdom he gave the power to bind or loosen
 
When a Pope makes a binding ruling (infallibility -on matters of faith or morals)  its been suggested to me that you are wrong as you suggest a later Pope is not free to change such a ruling and must be bound by it, in which case the power to Loosen has no meaning. Are you saying this? If so how do I answer this argument. If you are being misinterpreted can you clarify whether a later pope has power to change a ruling on matters of faith or morals?? 

 

b…

 

MHFM: No, Vatican I defined that dogma is unchangeable.  It also made specific mention that even a pope cannot give a new doctrine.  So it is heretical to say that a pope or anyone else can change a dogma:

 

Pope Pius IX, Vatican Council I, 1870, Session 4, Chap. 4: “…the Roman Pontiff, when he speaks ex cathedra [from the Chair of Peter], that is, when carrying out the duty of the pastor and teacher of all Christians in accord with his supreme apostolic authority he explains a doctrine of faith or morals to be held by the universal Church... operates with that infallibility with which the divine Redeemer wished that His Church be instructed in defining doctrine on faith and morals; and so such definitions of the Roman Pontiff from himself, but not from the consensus of the Church, are unalterable.

Pope Pius IX, First Vatican Council, Session 3, Chap. 4, on the true progress of knowledge:
"For, the doctrine of faith which God revealed has not been handed down as a philosophic invention to the human mind to be perfected, but has been entrusted as a divine deposit to the Spouse of Christ, to be faithfully guarded and infallibly interpreted."

Pope Pius IX, First Vatican Council, Session 4, Chap. 4:
"For, the Holy Ghost was not promised to the successors of Peter that by His revelation they might disclose new doctrine, but that by His help they might guard sacredly the revelation transmitted through the apostles and the deposit of faith, and might faithfully set it forth."

Pope Pius IX, First Vatican Council, Session 3, Chap. 4, Canon 3:
"If anyone says that it is possible that at some time, given the advancement of knowledge, a sense may be assigned to the dogmas propounded by the church which is different from that which the Church has understood and understands: let him be anathema."

The idea that dogma can change was also condemned by Pope St. Pius X in Pascendi as the "evolution of dogma."

Pope St. Pius X, Pascendi Dominic Gregis (# 26), Sept. 8, 1907, On the doctrine of the Modernists:
"To the laws of evolution everything is subject - dogma, Church, worship, the Books we revere as sacred, even faith itself, and the penalty of disobedience is death. The enunciation of this principle will not astonish anybody who bears in mind what the Modernists have had to say about each of these subjects."

Transformation

 

I had an amazing transformation after hearing the information that Bro. Michael Dimond gave in an interview on the radio.  I contacted you and received your information.  I read your book on Vatican II [The Truth about What Really Happened to the Catholic Church after Vatican II].  That is a fantastic book.  Thank you.

 

Michael Cotton,

 

Laguna Woods, California

 

Confusion disappeared

 

Dear Brothers Dimond,

 

I am so thankful that God led me to your website. I knew things were terribly wrong with the new mass, I used to think John Paul II was such a good pope but I had to ask God ‘Why doesn’t John Paul II fix this mess’ but things just seemed to get worse horrible music, altar girls, communion in hand etc. when I read your website I new I had found the truth and all my confusion disappeared. In addition, when I read about the imposter Sister Lucie I actually got chills but it made perfect sense. In just a few days the information on your website changed my entire perspective on life. Keep up the good work; I will keep you in my prayers.  Also could you explain Lenten practices prior to Vatican II?

 

Sincerely,

Maria

 

MHFM: Thanks for the e-mail.  In the Traditional Catholic Calendar and Fast Days section of our website we have the traditional rules for Lent and the rest of the year.

 

USA?

 

Dear Brothers,

 

If we claim to be true authentic traditional Catholics, should we then shun being Americans? If you take the fact that this country was founded as a result of rebellion against the Catholic monarchies so as to usher in "personal freedoms and liberties" and at the same time was constructed by the anti-Christian freemasons, you can see why I ask this. I believe that the founders of this country knew they were establishing a new world order right from the get-go and today we see signs all around us that the new world order is alive and thriving and continues to escalate, especially when considering that this country is scheduled to soon merge with Canada and Mexico to become the North American Union.

 

As a traditional Catholic, I'm wondering if I should love and support the country I live in, or rather shun it. Yet there is no other place on earth that holds a true traditional Catholic monarchy is there? So if I'm to not support my country, the USA, and yet continue to live in the USA, then isn't that like "biting the hand that feeds me"? I really would appreciate your thoughts on this.

 

Thanks, and God Bless!

-Josh

 

MHFM: As bad as the spiritual situation in America is, the fact is that it provides a better situation than most countries do for traditional Catholics.  In America, one is (theoretically) able to promote the fullness of the Catholic faith without fear of fines or jail time.  This is not the case in many countries, where offending certain groups can land you in jail.  So this is not to praise America, but rather to acknowledge that it provides a better situation than most countries at this bleak stage of human history. 

 

Pope Leo XIII provided the Catholic outlook on this matter.  In the following encyclical he noted that America affords opportunities that aren’t available in some other countries.  He was quick to point out, however, that the separation of Church and State in America contradicts Catholic teaching:

 

Pope Leo XIII, Longinqua (#6), Jan. 6, 1895: “For the Church amongst you, unopposed by the Constitution and government of your nation, fettered by no hostile legislation, protected against violence by the common laws and the impartiality of the tribunals, is free to live and act without hindrance. Yet, though all this is true, it would be very erroneous to draw the conclusion that in America is to be sought the type of the most desirable status of the Church, or that it would be universally lawful or expedient for State and Church to be, as in America, dissevered and divorced.”

 

New Audio on Papacy – Section C of Part 2

 

Hermas, Victor, Irenaeus and Cyprian - The Early Church recognized the Bishop of Rome as the successor to St. Peter's authority - Section C of Part 2 [new 15 min. audio]

 

This section covers the evidence for the Papacy from the second and third centuries.  It covers Hermas, Anicetus and Victor in the Easter Controversy, Irenaeus, Cyprian and the rebaptism controversy.  It shows how, at this early stage of the primitive Christian Church, the supreme authority of the Bishop of Rome was recognized.  The primitive Christian Church recognized the unique authority and primacy of the Bishop of Rome because he held the universal jurisdiction which was given by Jesus Christ to St. Peter.

 

This is found permanently in our: Refuting Protestantism and Eastern "Orthodoxy" page.

 

Struck

 

Dear Brothers,
  

We have been visiting your website almost daily since we found it, very well done and Thank You. I was baptized in the Catholic Church when I was less than a year old but that was it, I feel fortunate that I am able to learn the true teachings of the church now. When I read the material on your website I feel as though I am receiving food for my soul and the more I read the more content I feel knowing that I am learning the truth, I have to admit I was following all kinds of heretical teachings mainly because of my ignorance to the Catholic dogmas and my lack of proper understanding in various areas of the Bible. Again we thank you and commend you for your perseverance in spreading the truth.

 

Also I have to tell you how I was originally introduced to Catholicism, because I had no religious training growing up, it was through the apparitions at Bayside in New York. Years later after they ended we went searching one day to see if anything had ever come from them, that is when we found your website, and after having visited a few times and putting two and two together everything started to make sense, we have been struck with awe ever since. We always thought something was wrong with those messages but did not have the true knowledge of Catholicism to know they were false.

 

We also bought your dvd’s and some of your books, when I watched the part about Hell that was enough for me that section made me realize how complacent I had become and how I was following heretical teachings, I am ashamed but also thankful to God that we were lead to your website. Thank you, your work is highly appreciated, never stop.

 

Thank you,

 

Gail Bhimasani

 

Masonic Confirmation

 

I would like to ask a question..on something I saw at a Confirmation ceremony at my church recently.  The church was beautifully decorated all over with lots of banners listing the gifts of the Holy spirit.

 

On one of these banners...was a picture which decribed the words meanings... what bothered me was... under one of these words

was a picture of a pyramid with an open eye in the center.  I always thought that was a Mason sign or am I wrong.?  and what would it be doing in a catholic church ?  As I have seen some of your tapes I thought you'd be the one to ask.

                     

Thank you,

Mrs. d. Smith

 

MHFM: Yes, it sounds very much like the all-seeing eye used in Freemasonry.  That’s why you need to get out of the invalid New Mass.  The Novus Ordo “Confirmation” cannot be considered valid either, as our material shows.

 

Comment

 

Brian's letter which you published under the heading "Scales of Deception" is probably the most mind boggling critique of your work that I've ever seen.  What makes it so amazing to me is the fact that Brian seems to have some foundation in Catholic teaching beyond the superficial "kumbaya" Vatican II one, yet he derives such a ridiculous conclusion.  He actually tries to apply the very sound principle, given to us by the Lord himself, that "by their fruits you shall know them". 

 

But what "fruits" does Brian see?  I quote: "I would suggest the constant emphasis on the punishment of evil doers is a bad fruit."  Huh?  That doesn't even make sense.  What you choose to emphasize (and I don't agree that punishment is an "emphasis" of yours) is a feature or a characteristic of your work, not an effect of your work or a "fruit".  But of course we know that evil will be punished on the authority of Christ!  On the other hand, what are the "fruits" of Vatican II??  How about rampant homosexuality, legalized abortion (do you think that legalized abortion could ever fly in this country in a pre-Vatican II world?), probably a hundred fold increases in divorce, cheap and easy annulments, a total dearth of religious vocations, and every foul scandal imaginable. 

 

On second thought, and I'm just old enough to have a sense of this, let me restate:  These kind of things we've seen in the last couple of decades were not even "imaginable" in a pre-Vatican II world.  Rather than you guys being deceived by Satan as Brian suggests, I suggest to Brian that such obstinate blindness as he exhibits can only be supernatural in origin.      

 

Bill Mulligan

 

Scales of deception

 

To members of the Most Holy Family Monastery,

 

I have just finished reading your web site, which has left me truly saddened and very disturbed. It is obvious you are sincere and convinced you are doing the will of God. Your dedication and enthusiasm for what you perceive to be the truth is magnificent, but sadly, it is the will of the devil that is being carried out on this web site. The evil one has cleverly led everyone astray on here.  The devil is very cunning and is a past master of deception. Change is always unsettling and the changes brought about by Vatican II worried many people. Why were people worried? They lacked trust in God and the Church that had been established by Our Lord himself. Lucifer thrives on people's worries. He takes advantage of the concerns of people and uses them for his own evil purposes. The devil also takes advantage of spiritual pride.  And what are those evil purposes? The destruction of the True Church on this earth, the destruction of the Catholic Church. By allowing yourselves to be deceived into thinking that the present Pope and his predecessors were anti-popes, you are doing the devils work and furthering his ambitions of destroying the Church. This site is doing damage to the truth of God, because you are wrong. The present Pope and Pope John Paul II are not anti-popes, and to think they are, is terribly, terribly wrong.

 

A person's work can always be judged by their fruits. What are the fruits of this web site. I would suggest the constant emphasis on the punishment of evil doers is a bad fruit. There is an almost sadistic pleasure in the wording of what will happen to evil doers. This site gives the impression that it's members will not have to worry about the condemnation and punishment that awaits those "outside the Church". This judgmental and self-righteous stance of yours is in fact the same fruits that are produced by the Protestant doctrine of Salvation by Faith Alone. Protestants who hold this misguided belief display self-righteousness and spiritual superiority just as you do. 

 

On this site there is little reference to the Love of God, which is another bad fruit. God does not go round looking for souls to cast into hell. God does not will anyone to hell. It is difficult see any love for humanity that God has for us on this site.  I ardently call on you here, on this site, to turn away from attacking God's True Church on earth and to return to the fold and pledge allegiance and loyalty to Pope Benedict XVI. The Church has enough enemies on the outside, which is where you stand at this moment. I will pray that Christ will lift the scales of deception that the devil has placed on your minds and heart.

 

Yours in Christ,

 

Brian.

 

MHFM: What’s interesting about your e-mail is that it reveals how those who are trapped in a spiritual deception, as you are, have become blind to how they are wrong.  You really think you’re right, yet you couldn’t be more wrong.  If you can read the following files and still assert that Vatican II, John Paul II and Benedict XVI are not heretical but Catholic, then there’s really nothing we can do for you except hope and pray for your conversion.  For you are of despicable bad will and totally dishonest.

 

Benedict XVI (The Heresies of Benedict XVI File)

John Paul II (manifest heretic who claimed to be pope 1978-2005)

Vatican II - false council

 

It’s a fact that Benedict XVI and John Paul II are/were complete heretics.  Those files (from our book) prove beyond any doubt that they endorse false religions, sign agreements which deny the Papacy and the Council of Trent, teach that we shouldn’t convert Protestants, teach salvation outside the Church, etc.  In case you didn’t know, all of those things are heresies.  That means that they have taught a new and false religion.  You are following manifest heretics who preach a new and false gospel.  Wake up, for you are a blind heretic.  Wake up to the fact that there have been antipopes, that it has been predicted that there will be a Great Apostasy which will implant a Counter Church in Rome, which will reduce the still-existing true Church to a remnant.

 

Shocked

 

I came upon your web site… I was shocked that you do not believe the words of Jesus when he said  to Peter "You are the rock and upon this rock I will  build my church AND THE GATES OF HELL SHALL NOT PREVAIL AGAINST IT"  Your website denies the above statement  and makes Jesus words mean nothing!  BE CAREFUL WHEN YOU DENY HIM OR HE WILL DENY YOU! You sound more like a Protestant website except with Latin and incense.

Fernando Gaviria

 

MHFM: We only have a whole talk on the Papacy and Mt. 16: The Bible teaches that Jesus made St. Peter the first pope [51 min. audio].  You should listen to it.  The indefectibility of the Church doesn’t mean what you think it does.  It doesn’t mean that there can never be an antipope in Rome posing as the pope; it has happened.  It doesn’t mean that the Church cannot be reduced to a remnant.  In fact, that’s what’s predicted to happen.  You need to read this file and learn something about Catholic principles: The Glossary of Terms and Principles [PDF].  And then you should look at this file and see how Benedict XVI denies the Papacy:  The Heresies of Benedict XVI [PDF file].  That’s precisely why he’s not the pope.  Benedict XVI and John Paul II have agreed with the Protestants on Justification:  The Vatican II sect's Protestant Revolution: the 1999 Joint Declaration with the Lutherans on Justification [PDF File].  Wake up!

 

Thoughts on Mass attendance

 

March 18, 2008 – Why the position that “all traditional Masses which recognize the antipope are absolutely off limits” renders the New Mass pointless or drastically less significant than Jesus indicates

 

MHFM: There are those out there who say that no priest at all who recognizes Antipope Benedict XVI as the pope can lawfully be approached for Communion or Mass.  In addition to all of the points we’ve made in our file about this issue, here’s a thought which we believe further shows that such a position doesn’t add up.  This is not a strict argument, but more something to consider: If it were mortally sinful or heretical for anyone to approach any priest who is praying in communion with a heretical antipope, why did the Devil push for the implementation of a New Mass at all? 

 

Jesus makes it clear that the “abomination of desolation” in the “holy place” (Mt. 24:15) is a major feature of the end times.  It’s a major part of the spiritual deception which leads many astray.  Many believe that this “abomination of desolation” is the New Mass.  But no one can deny that the New Mass/the Liturgical Revolution has been a major feature of the Devil’s plan – one of the biggest.  So why would the Devil have pushed for a New Mass at all, if all the people were going to be damned anyway at all the traditional Masses for praying in communion with an antipope?  If they were all falling – or would have fallen – into mortal sin, heresy, etc. for staying at a traditional Mass where the antipope is mentioned, then implementing the New Mass would only serve to alert more people to the heresies of Vatican II and the true character of the antipopes.  In that case, a New Mass wouldn’t benefit the Devil at all.  It would only make his heretical sect and heretical antipopes easier to identify as revolutionary.

 

The truth is that the Devil obviously pushed for the implementation of a new and invalid “Mass” because he recognized that it had real effects of depriving souls of salvation.  The Devil didn’t want the traditional Mass, even at the churches where the antipopes were accepted.  He didn’t want it even at the places where the antipope is accepted because he recognized that certain people, who hold the fullness of the faith and are uncompromising about it, could be, have been and still are (in certain cases) led to salvation by the true Eucharist and true Mass at certain places where the antipope is accepted (if they don’t accept his heresies or support them).  The Devil, through Antipope Benedict XVI, has only endeavored to return the traditional Mass in a limited away at this very late stage of the apostasy because he knows that almost all of the “priests” who would be using Antipope Benedict XVI’s allowance are invalid anyway and/or notoriously heretical.  But through the great bulk of the Great Apostasy, he made sure that the traditional Mass was almost nowhere to be found at even those places where his antipope was accepted.

 

Again, we emphasize that this is not to say that one can go to all traditional Masses where the priest accepts Benedict XVI.  Many of them should not be attended, as explained in our file.  It is merely to show how far removed from the world of true wisdom is the position that it’s a mortal sin to go to any traditional Mass where the priest recognizes Antipope Benedict XVI.  This has been added to this file: The Question of whether one may receive Sacraments in these difficult times.

 

Mt. 25, Fatima prayer

 

To Most Holy Family Monastery

I would like to hear your comment on Mt.cap.25 v.31-46.  Also about the Fatima prayer: "My Jesus foregive us our sins, save us from the fires of hell and lead all souls to Heaven, especially those who have the most need of thy mercy." It is the the word ALL I think about.

Yours sincerely

Joergen Belling
Denmark

 

MHFM: Well, the first thing that comes to mind is that Matthew 25:41 (the very area you ask about) is quoted in this dogmatic definition.

 

Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, “Cantate Domino,” 1441, ex cathedra: “The Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that all those who are outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans but also Jews or heretics and schismatics, cannot share in eternal life and will go into the everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels [Matthew 25:41], unless they are joined to the Church before the end of their lives; that the unity of this ecclesiastical body is of such importance that only for those who abide in it do the Church’s sacraments contribute to salvation and do fasts, almsgiving and other works of piety and practices of the Christian militia produce eternal rewards; and that nobody can be saved, no matter how much he has given away in alms and even if he has shed blood in the name of Christ, unless he has persevered in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church.”

 

So any idea that Jesus is saying in that passage that those who are good to their neighbors can be saved without the Catholic faith would be a false and heretical interpretation.  We believe that what it means is that in most cases people are damned for things they do in their everyday dealings with other people.  They demonstrate a lack of charity, honesty and good will in natural dealings, etc.  That – in addition to sins of the flesh - is what keeps the bulk of mankind from getting interested in the Catholic faith or practicing it.

 

Concerning the Fatima prayer question, the correct version of the Fatima prayer is given by William Thomas Walsh in Our Lady of Fatima:

 

“O my Jesus, pardon us and save us from the fire of Hell; draw all souls to Heaven, especially those most in need.” 

 

Some people have a problem with the “all” part, as if it indicates something heretical.  We don’t.  St. Paul makes it clear that prayer can be made for “all” men in the very context in which he says that God wants “all” to be saved. 

 

1 Timothy 2:1-5- “I desire therefore, first of all, that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for all men: For kings, and for all that are in high station: that we may lead a quiet and a peaceable life in all piety and chastity.  For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour, Who will have all men to be saved, and to come to the knowledge of the truth.  For there is one God, and one mediator of God and men, the man Christ Jesus.”

 

So there is nothing at all wrong with that Fatima prayer, contrary to what some have said.  This is true even though not all, but very few, are in fact saved (Mt. 7:13).

 

New entry in file on receiving sacraments from non-sedevacantists

 

MHFM: There is a new entry in the following section of our website. Note: this section of our website deals with finer points and issues which concern those who are more familiar with the traditional faith.  Those who are new to the traditional Catholic faith might not find delving into these questions beneficial at this time; for this file concerns the specific target audience who are concerned with this specific question. These individuals hold that there is nowhere to receive Communion or attend Mass today because essentially all the priests hold heretical positions.  This file is found permanently in the “Where to Attend Mass” section of our website.  It will be updated on occasion, when time permits and additional points come up.

 

The Question of whether one may receive Sacraments in these difficult times

*refuting schismatic views in this area

 

The new entry concerns another quote from St. Thomas Aquinas.  This quote further proves our position that it’s not always against the divine law to attend the Mass of, or receive sacraments from, a priest you recognize to be a heretic.  This quote further demonstrates that our position on Mass attendance is the Catholic one.  It refutes the claims of certain schismatics.

 

Protestants

 

I am a little confused.  You say on your website that there is only salvation through the Catholic church???  The bible states that you are saved “through faith in Jesus Christ” not faith in cathalosism or the Pope?  How can you even make that statement?  I can even understand the fundamentalist Protestant position that Catholics can’t be saved because they pray to saints and Mary and the issue of idolatry.  I do not really agree with this but that makes more sense than the idea that a protestant cannot be saved because they do not go to a catholic church.  Let me know you stance on this!!!!!!!!!

 

Ian

 

MHFM: Protestants cannot be saved.  They are not true bible-believing Christians, as we prove in this file: Refuting Protestantism and Eastern "Orthodoxy" Audio Programs.  They reject the one Church which Christ established.  The Catholic Church infallibly teaches that all who die as heretics go to Hell.

 

Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, “Cantate Domino,” 1441, ex cathedra: “The Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that all those who are outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans but also Jews or heretics and schismatics, cannot share in eternal life and will go into the everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels, unless they are joined to the Church before the end of their lives; that the unity of this ecclesiastical body is of such importance that only for those who abide in it do the Church’s sacraments contribute to salvation and do fasts, almsgiving and other works of piety and practices of the Christian militia produce eternal rewards; and that nobody can be saved, no matter how much he has given away in alms and even if he has shed blood in the name of Christ, unless he has persevered in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church.”

 

We hope you review the information in that file on Protestantism.  It always puzzles us why so many who claim to believe in Jesus aren’t immediately inclined to accept the Catholic faith, but fight it or are inclined to some other denomination.  Come on, besides all of the other biblical truths which Protestants reject (i.e. the Papacy, the Eucharist, etc.) – which are so clear in Scripture (Mt. 16, Jn. 6, etc.) – a person should immediately connect with the fact that the Catholic Church was the only original and visible Church from the time of Christ.  Protestantism didn’t come along until the 16th century.  That alone should cause a person to immediately see that the Catholic Church is the true one and that the other “Churches” are false.  If it doesn’t, then there is a problem with bad will.

 

Baptism again?

 

Greetings,

 

I have been brought up a Roman Catholic, however I have been concerned about the Vatican 2 and its teachings. after reading a lot of the topics on this site, I want to convert to the traditional Vatican 1. I read the section about baptism. I was already baptized in 1977 when I was born. This was after Vatican 2 was instated. I have mortal and venial sins on my soul and my question is if I am baptized again in the Catholic Traditional faith, will both my mortal and venial sins be absolved? If you could get back to me as soon as possible this would greatly be appreciated. The other question I have is that there are no Catholic churches around me that follow Vatican 1. I live in Westchester IL. If you know of any in the Chicago land area please let me know also. Thank you for your time.

 

Sincerely,

E.

 

MHFM:  Thanks for the e-mail.  Baptism does remit all venial and mortal sins, but you cannot be baptized again if you've been validly baptized.  When there is a doubt if one has been baptized, then a conditional baptism can be done.  The form of conditional baptism is on our website.  Since you have already been baptized, you would have to be forgiven in a confession.  You would need to make a general confession of all your mortal sins that have not been confessed to valid priests, once you are totally convinced of all points relating to the traditional Catholic faith. 

 

South Africa

 

Dear Brethren

 

Would you possibly know of a validly ordained priest in my area – Thohoyandou, Limpopo province, South Africa. I have not attended a new mass in 20 years, as those priests I am aware of, all celebrate Pope John Paul ii as a saint – I am constantly told to heed other religions as benevolent and to express tolerance and comradelyness  towards such. All these religious practises deny the first commandment.

 

Thank you kindly.

Charlene M.choate.

 

MHFM: We don’t have specific information on any in that area.  So we would recommend applying the guidelines we have in the “Where to Go to Mass” section of our website.  Perhaps you can find a priest who has been validly ordained in the Eastern Rite (Uniate not “Orthodox) who is not a notorious or imposing heretic.  If not, then you would just have to stay home.  But at least you could go to confession, if you could find an old priest who was ordained before 1968 (and thus in the traditional rite of ordination).  As long as he says “I absolve you from your sins in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost,” it would be valid.

 

Better not to

 

Hello,

 

I was hoping you could give me some advice.  I've been really upset about the Vatican I, Vatican II issue.  I was born in 1965 when Vatican II first came into play and was brought up that way.  Not knowing any differently, I went along with it.  For the past few years, however,  it's been haunting me that I'm going down the wrong road.  That I should practice my faith the way Vatican I did.  The church we attend is Vatican II, i.e., female alter girls, other people giving out Holy Communion, not kneeling when we receive Holy Communion, etc, etc.  I read somewhere on the internet that it is better NOT to attend these masses that are worshipping this way.  Is that true?  Sometimes I feel Something is better than Nothing, however, it  really bothers me to see what is going on and that I'm attending it.  Any help you could give me would be greatly appreciated.  Thank you so much.

 

Karen  

 

MHFM: Thanks for the e-mail.  The New Mass is invalid, as we prove here: The Liturgical Revolution: A New Mass  [PDF File].  That means that Jesus Christ is not present there.  The Catholic Church teaches that it’s a mortal sin to approach doubtful or invalid sacraments.  In addition, even if the New Mass were valid (which it isn’t), one still couldn’t go.  This is because it’s essentially a Protestant and sacrilegious service.  So it’s without question better not to attend it.  One must not attend it if one wants to be saved.  There is no obligation to attend Mass if the Church doesn’t provide you with an acceptable option in your area.  Once you’re convinced of all of these points, we can help you with options for places where you might be able to receive sacraments.

 

Some Recent Testimonials

 

Thank you for all your efforts.  We have learned much of great value.

 

Mr. and Mrs. Timura

Necedah, WI

----

Thanks for the insights, remarkable work.

 

Allen Metzger

-----

I can now say I’ve found what I’ve been looking for since the 1960’s.  Thank you for the endless hours spent trying to save one soul at a time.  God bless you.

 

Thomas Miles,

Pinehurst, NC

-----

Thank you very much for your website.  I finally found a website where I can learn about the New Mass and the traditional Mass.

 

J. Vergara,

Montrose, CA

 

Likes Justification audio

 

Dear Most Holy Family Monastery:

 

Thank you for the work you do in His name.  I received Brother Peter Dimond’s tape on Justification.  To say my family merely enjoyed his presentation would be an understatement.  I used the tape to augment our study of Catholic dogma for my family during Lent.  My son who is eighteen and has attended Catholic religious instructions at the local Catholic church that we formerly attended made the comment that he learned more about Catholic beliefs from this presentation than in his entire time in any Catholic instruction group.  I have passed on the tape to help enlighten others.  I first pray that I can reach more people with the truth… I have appreciated all of your presentations and found them enlightening.  God bless you and may the Lord Jesus continue to inspire your work.

 

Sincerely,

Mary Marceau-Hawthorne,

Macedon, NY

 

Today’s mail

 

MHFM: This is a picture of some of the outgoing orders that were shipped on Friday.  64 orders were shipped.

We post this picture to show that, despite the darkness of our world, there are many people who are still coming to, interested in and practicing the traditional Catholic faith.  New people are finding out about the traditional Catholic faith every day.

 

Baptism of Desire

 

Dear Brothers Dimond,

your otherwise commendable website is seriously marred by your misunderstanding of baptism of desire.

Consider this: Is baptism of desire the same thing as desire of baptism?

I look forward to your reply.

 

MHFM: No, you don’t understand.  The Catholic Church teaches that there is only one baptism of water. 

 

Pope Clement V, Council of Vienne, 1311-1312, ex cathedra:  “Besides, one baptism which regenerates all who are baptized in Christ must be faithfully confessed by all just as ‘one God and one faith’ [Eph. 4:5], which celebrated in water in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit we believe to be commonly the perfect remedy for salvation for adults as for children.”

 

The Catholic Church also teaches that the Sacrament of Baptism is necessary for salvation.  It teaches that the words of Christ in John 3:5 are to be understood literally, as they are written.  Baptism of desire is not a teaching of the Catholic Church. 

 

As far as providing you with a definition of the false theory of “baptism of desire”, that would depend of course on which baptism of desire advocate you ask.  That’s a good question for baptism of desire advocates:  Can you please tell me exactly what baptism of desire means (a definition), what its limits are, and in what text this definition for it is found?  If “baptism of desire” is a teaching of the Church which Catholics must believe, then surely providing a definition for what this binding “teaching” says shouldn’t be a problem.   

 

But since the so-called “baptism of desire” has never been taught or defined by the Magisterium, there is no definition of it.  If you ask 10 different people, you would get 10 (at least slightly) different responses.  9 out of 10, however, would give a definition which would allow for salvation of individuals who don’t even know of Jesus Christ or desire baptism. 

 

You need to read our book on this issue: Outside the Catholic Church There is Absolutely No Salvation [pdf file].  It answers all the objections, and it presents the facts which refute baptism of desire:

 

For instance: in Section 33 of the aforementioned book, we summarize the following arguments which baptism of desire advocates cannot refute.  These arguments disprove baptism of desire.  Keep in mind that the book answers and refutes every single major argument they bring up, while baptism of desire advocates don’t ever address these arguments from the infallible teaching of the Church.  They don’t address them because they cannot refute them:

 

The following twelve arguments from the infallible teaching of the Chair of St. Peter (besides others) have been presented in this document.  Every single one of the following points is a divinely revealed truth of Faith (a dogma), not a fallible opinion of some theologian.  These points refute the idea of baptism of desire.  The baptism of desire advocates do not and cannot answer these arguments from the infallible teaching of the Church:

 

1) The Catholic Church teaches that the Sacrament of Baptism is necessary for salvation (de fide, Trent, Sess. 7, Can. 5). [Everyone admits that baptism of desire is not a sacrament.]

2) Unless we are born again of water and the Spirit, we cannot enter heaven (de fide, Florence, Exultate Deo).

3) The Church understands John 3:5 literally every time, as it is written (de fide, Trent Sess. 6, Chap. 4), and with no exceptions (de fide, Florence: Denz 696; and Trent: Denz. 791, 858, 861).

4) The Spirit of Sanctification, the Water of Baptism and the Blood of Redemption are inseparable (de fide, Pope St. Leo the Great, Council of Chalcedon).

5) All Catholics must profess only one baptism of water (de fide, Clement V, Council of Vienne).

6) There is absolutely no salvation outside the one Church of the faithful (de fide, Innocent III, Fourth Lateran Council), which only includes the water baptized.

7) Every human creature must be subject to the Roman Pontiff to be saved (de fide, Boniface VIII, Unam Sanctam), and it is impossible to be subject to the Roman Pontiff without the Sacrament of Baptism (de fide, Trent, Sess. 14, Chap. 2).

8) One must belong to the Body of the Church to be saved (de fide, Eugene IV and Pius XI), and only the water baptized belong to the Body of the Church.

9) Pope Benedict XII solemnly defined that all martyrs, virgins, confessors, faithful, etc. in Heaven have been baptized (Benedictus Deus, 1336, ex cathedra).

10) The Church is defined as a union of sacraments (de fide, Eugene IV, Cantate Domino; Boniface VIII, Unam Sanctam), which means that only those who have received the Sacrament of Baptism can be inside the unity of the Church.

11) All true Justification meets up with the Sacraments (Council of Trent, Sess. 7, Foreword to the Decree on the Sacraments).

12) The Sacraments as such are necessary for salvation though all are not necessary for each individual (de fide, Profession of Faith at Trent and Vatican I; and the Profession of Faith for converts), which means that one must at least receive one sacrament (Baptism) to be saved, but one doesn’t need to receive them all.

 

There is no doubt what the true position is.  However, we say this for those out there who might be struggling with this issue.

 

In light of all this evidence, why would anyone fight for salvation without baptism?  Why would you fight for a “theory” which – at the very least, you must admit – cannot be proven from the infallible teaching of the Church?  Why would you fight for it when all of these things from the dogmatic teaching of the Church militate against the idea of anyone being saved without the Sacrament of Baptism?  Why would you fight for salvation outside of baptism, when there are so many facts (see above) which – at the very least in your mind – you cannot explain how they are compatible with a “baptism of desire”?  (Again, Baptism of desire means salvation outside the sacraments and we have all of these statements from the infallible teaching of the Church on the necessity of being within the sacraments). 

 

In light of all the evidence against baptism of desire from the infallible teaching of the Church, one can see why we say that to fight for it in the face of these facts is simply to demonstrate bad will.  That’s why we say that those who have seen all of this evidence and still say that there is baptism of desire (i.e. that there is salvation without baptism and thus without subjection to the Roman Pontiff, being incorporated into the “faithful,” etc.) are of bad will.  And in almost 100% of cases, they fight for it simply because they believe it applies to pagans, Buddhists, Jews, Muslims, etc.

 

Also, there are many heretics out there who consistently misquote Sess. 6, Chap. 4 of the Council of Trent.  They obstinately use the “except through” false translation instead of “without” (sine).  If they have been made aware of this point, as many of them have by our material, then they commit mortal sin every time they use this false translation.  They also ignore, of course, the fact that the same passage teaches that John 3:5 is to be understood “as it is written,” as our book explains.  This shows that our understanding of this passage is correct.

 

Not sins anymore

 

I just received a free copy of the March, 2008 Homiletic and Pastoral Review, one of the better V2 “Catholic” magazines I once subscribed to.  Unfortunately they also seem to have embraced the V2 theology where the idea of sin and its consequences has been virtually eliminated. The purpose of the Catholic church is salvation of the soul. The purpose of the V2 church is social justice and making better lives for ourselves. This can be done very well in any Protestant church. They are clearly two different churches and this is just one more bit of proof of that fact.

 

The article is titled: A Catholic physician talks to engaged couples by William G. White: “As a physician, I don‘t call them [use of various contraceptives to avoid children] sins; I call them unhealthful practices. I might even justifiably call them poisons. Whether or not they lead to hell in eternity, they can certainly lead to hell on earth. By driving a wedge between husband and wife…. “When he [God] says “Thou shalt not,” he is not trying to take all the fun out of life. He is trying to save us from actions that will harm us, that will distort our natures, that will inevitably make us profoundly unhappy.”

 

pm

 

MHFM: That’s very interesting.

 

Reader against Boxing

 

[To MHFM]

 

That was an excellent response to the gentleman who defended professional boxing.  I just thought I would add something in here.  I was in the Marines from 1996 to 2000.  One of the first things in our training is combat hitting skills (which is essentially boxing).  About a month after I finished Recruit Training on Parris Island, I heard of a recruit who was killed in combat hitting skills.  All the protective gear is used for that training event, namely, gloves, headgear, mouth guard (to keep teeth from being knocked out), groin guard (against low blows), etc.  Even with all of that, a recruit was still killed!  The Marine Corps cancelled combat hitting skills immediately afterward.  That should be a convincer that boxing is a potentially deadly sport.  Take care, and God bless.

 

In the Suffering Christ,

Michael McBee

 

Reader defends Boxing

 

I’m inclined to disagree with your take on boxing.  Catholics were never called to be pacifists, and the occasional necessity of a justifiable use of force has been acknowledged.  That being the case, it would also seem acceptable for men to be practiced in such skills, which might also include marksmanship, fencing, and wrestling.  Competition is a practical, sometimes the only way, of developing such skills.  Organized boxing is designed to minimize the threat of injury to the participants.  Participants must wear padded gloves, mouth pieces, are matched by weight, and a referee is charged with protecting anyone in serious trouble.  Although I understand this is off point, as a practical matter, I think there are actually more football related fatalities and serious injuries (although probably due to the vastly greater number of participants) than result from boxing.   A good boxer must have courage, discipline, and fortitude.  I therefore don’t see that it is intrinsically evil, though of course anything can be abused.  The goal after all is not to truly harm the opponent, though he maybe temporarily incapacitated (as in a way is a long distance runner at the end of say a marathon). Firearms are actually meant to kill people.  Does this make pistol shooting competitions (at targets of course) also wrong?   How about fencing?      

 

William

 

MHFM:  Having played all kinds of competitive sports, anyone who knows us knows that we’re all in favor of the toughness which sports can help provide.  In fact, one of the major problems today with almost all clerics is they lack the toughness to stand up to evildoers; to fight against heresy; to take on and attack and denounce (when necessary) those who would deny the faith; to completely disregard what people will say about them or do to them when they stand for the cause of God.  Since so many priests and alleged teachers of Catholicism today demonstrate such a cowardly attitude in standing up for the truth, one must say that perhaps if they had played sports they might be tougher in standing for the truth and more willing to offend and alienate people when it becomes necessary.  No, Catholics are not pacifists.  However, as much as one might like the aspects of courage and toughness that Boxing might demonstrate, it cannot be defended as an acceptable sport.  A “sport” where the basic concept is to beat the other person up is immoral. 

 

All three of the examples you provide miss the point.  You bring up “the occasional use of justifiable force.”  Obviously that has nothing to do with Pro Boxing.  Pro Boxing as a sport is not an “occasional use of justifiable force,” as in war or self-defense.  It’s engaging in combat – trying to harm another – for sport, gain and fame.  That’s immoral. 

 

The other example you bring up is practicing such skills for the occasional use of justifiable force.  This also has nothing to do with Pro Boxing.  Last time we checked there weren’t any pro boxers being shipped to a foreign country to use their right hooks to attack hostile enemies.  Pro Boxing as a sport has nothing to do with preparation for military conflict or practicing such skills for a justifiable use of force.  

 

If people in military training are sparring in a controlled environment, in actual preparation for war or hand to hand combat they might encounter in the next military conflict, that’s an entirely different matter from Pro Boxing as a sport.  That kind of sparring as training would be acceptable, since it would be in preparation for a presumably just cause.  Moreover, it would certainly be accompanied by all the precautions to make such necessary training as safe as possible.  But in Pro Boxing they don’t even have headgear.  Most importantly, as stated above, it’s simply trying to harm another for sport, gain or fame, which is immoral.

 

Your final example, which involves shooting pistols at competitions, also fails.  Shooting firearms into targets doesn’t injure anyone, nor is it intended to do so.  Thus, it’s not comparable to Pro Boxing at all.

 

Nearly convinced

 

Hi,

 

I wanted you to know I am nearly convinced and very sad about the whole new mass.  I have put the John Paul books in the garbage and also Sister Faustina's book.  Everything you said was right there in print.  I have ordered the DVD.  What about the body and blood of Christ?  Is'nt that what Jesus said we must do, recieve it, I mean. Thanks for answering my E-mail.

 

Betty

 

MHFM: We’re glad you’re nearly convinced and that you saw the facts about Sister Faustina’s book.  John Paul II’s books are worth about as much as garbage, except to expose his heresies.  Before finding a place to receive sacraments, if there is one for you, you have to be totally convinced on all the issues.  That includes being committed to never attend the New Mass again.

 

Pro Boxing

 

First Question  (Is Pro Boxing/MMA immoral) I would like to know if the Catholic Church considers pro boxing or Mixed Martial Arts immmoral (UFC/Pride/K-1). Would it constitute a mortal sin to participate in or watch pro boxing/MMA? If it is immoral why didn't the Pre Vatican 2 Church condemn pro boxing especially since many catholics have participated in it and watched it? If a Catholic made money off pro boxing/MMA from participating in it or promoting it would he be obliged to give the money
to charity?


                                                                   -Serge

 

MHFM: As opposed to other acceptable sports (e.g. Football, Basketball, Baseball), we believe that Pro Boxing is not an acceptable sport.  Pro Boxing is immoral because the goal of the sport is to harm and/or incapacitate the opponent.  In Boxing a person is awarded victory if he knocks his opponent unconscious.  This is immoral. 

 

Pope Leo XIII, Pastoralis Officii (#1), Sept. 12, 1891: “Clearly, divine law, both that which is known by the light of reason and that which is revealed in Sacred Scripture, strictly forbids anyone, outside of public cause, to kill or wound a man unless compelled to do so in self-defense.”

 

Whereas in Football – a physical sport which will rarely result in someone being knocked out – the goal is to bring the opponent to the ground and get the ball into the end zone.  In Football one is not awarded victory or points for knocking the opponent out.  That’s why it’s not immoral, but Pro Boxing is.  Thus, a person should not watch Pro Boxing.  Ultimate Fighting is simply evil.  We don’t know much about Professional Mixed Martial Arts.  If it’s similar to the others, then it would likewise be immoral.  A person shouldn’t watch any of these immoral sports (Boxing, Ultimate Fighting, etc.).  If a person made money in Pro Boxing he should (after taking care of his personal needs) confess his involvement in it and use the money for the glory of God and the salvation of souls.  This would be done in these days by supporting only that which is 100% Catholic, not by supporting any heretical groups.

 

It should also be noted that the quote above is from Pope Leo XIII’s 1891 encyclical Pastoralis Officii.  This is an encyclical which condemns the practice of dueling as mortally sinful.  (Dueling was obviously more common in those days.)  While the analogy wouldn’t be exact, we believe that an analogy can be drawn between the immorality of dueling and the immorality of Pro Boxing. 

 

2 or 3 in the midst of them

 

When Christ says whoever is gathered together in my name there am I in the midst of you, are you saying he only means True catholics?

 

b…

 

MHFM: Yes, He does.  That’s why it says the following in Matthew 18:17, which is just three verses before the one you reference (Matthew 18:20):

 

Matthew 18:17- “And if he will not hear them: tell the church. And if he will not hear the church, let him be to thee as the heathen and publican.”

 

The Church which one must hear is the only Church He founded: the Catholic Church.  Therefore, one cannot truly gather “in His name” unless one has the Catholic faith.

 

False traditionalist heretics on Benedict XVI and Luther

 

MHFM: False traditionalists and defenders of the Vatican II sect have scoffed at the recent report that Benedict XVI is planning on rehabilitating Martin Luther.  It’s interesting that almost none of them even linked to the story until after they thought they had a response to it.  Their response simply dismisses the veracity of the report and proves nothing.  They essentially call it ridiculous.  However, when they assert that the notion that Benedict XVI will rehabilitate Luther is ridiculous, they only further display their ridiculous blindness.  Benedict XVI and John Paul II have both already agreed that Luther’s main heresy (Justification by faith alone) is no longer a heresy at all, as we prove in this file:

 

The Vatican II sect's Protestant Revolution: the 1999 Joint Declaration with the Lutherans on Justification [PDF File]

 

Benedict XVI himself has also stated that Protestantism is not even heresy.

 

Benedict XVI, The Meaning of Christian Brotherhood, pp. 87-88: “The difficulty in the way of giving an answer is a profound one.  Ultimately it is due to the fact that there is no appropriate category in Catholic thought for the phenomenon of Protestantism today (one could say the same of the relationship to the separated churches of the East).  It is obvious that the old category of ‘heresy’ is no longer of any value.  Heresy, for Scripture and the early Church, includes the idea of a personal decision against the unity of the Church, and heresy’s characteristic is pertinacia, the obstinacy of him who persists in his own private way.  This, however, cannot be regarded as an appropriate description of the spiritual situation of the Protestant Christian.  In the course of a now centuries-old history, Protestantism has made an important contribution to the realization of Christian faith, fulfilling a positive function in the development of the Christian message and, above all, often giving rise to a sincere and profound faith in the individual non-Catholic Christian, whose separation from the Catholic affirmation has nothing to do with the pertinacia characteristic of heresy.  Perhaps we may here invert a saying of St. Augustine’s: that an old schism becomes a heresy.  The very passage of time alters the character of a division, so that an old division is something essentially different from a new one.  Something that was once rightly condemned as heresy cannot later simply become true, but it can gradually develop its own positive ecclesial nature, with which the individual is presented as his church and in which he lives as a believer, not as a heretic.  This organization of one group, however, ultimately has an effect on the whole.  The conclusion is inescapable, then: Protestantism today is something different from heresy in the traditional sense, a phenomenon whose true theological place has not yet been determined.”[6]

 

Further, as we prove in our file The Heresies of Benedict XVI [PDF file]: At Vatican II, Benedict XVI even complained that the document Gaudium et Spes relied too much on Teilhard de Chardin and not enough on Martin Luther.[7]  Benedict XVI is also credited with saving the 1999 Joint Declaration with the Lutherans on Justification, which declared that Luther’s heresy of Justification by faith alone (and many others) are somehow no longer condemned by the Council of Trent. 

                                                      

Benedict XVI, Principles of Catholic Theology (1982), p. 263: “That which in Luther makes all else bearable because of the greatness of his spiritual fervor…”

 

Yes, it’s so ridiculous to think that Benedict XVI would rehabilitate Luther, isn’t it?  No, it’s the logical culmination of all of the above.  What’s ridiculous and outrageous is that these compromising false traditionalist heretics actually think that they’re Catholic, while they eat up the weekly plate of apostasy which Antipope Benedict XVI offers them.  They eat up his weekly apostasy because it’s mixed in with the spice of occasionally conservative comments.  The one consolation which those who thirst for justice can have is that compromising heretics such as this, who defend Antipope Benedict XVI and belittle or ignore all the consequences of his undeniable and well-documented heresies, won’t get away with their bad will before the Judgment Seat of Christ.

 

Flashback: Baptism of Desire advocates totally refuted

 

MHFM: About a year back we posted this important article.  It obliterates many of the most popular arguments made by baptism of desire advocates and it vindicates the position we have enunciated on the issue.  We direct people to it again, with some additional comments, because the obstinate heretics who defend baptism of desire/salvation for non-Catholics have generally ignored the fact that the most popular claims they like to make about baptism of desire have been totally refuted by the facts in this article.

 

Examining the Theological Status of Geocentrism and Heliocentrism and the Devastating Problems this creates for Baptism of Desire Arguments [PDF] *very important article which demolishes popular baptism of desire arguments, contains a new quote from a pope on geocentrism and much more

 

For instance, among the many false claims made by baptism of desire advocates, the one that baptism of desire advocates like perhaps more than any other is this: baptism of desire must be the teaching of the Church because St. Alphonsus, Doctor of the Church, said it was de fide.  J.L. put it this way:

 

J.L. “It is one thing to say that a Doctor might have erred (and who would wish to make such a claim???) - it is another thing entirely to say that all theologians for hundreds of years erred without correction, and that a Doctor of the Church labeled that error as de fide!!!  The former is merely absurd - or at least, usually so; the latter is an assault on the Church herself…”

 

The article above shows that J.L. doesn’t have the first clue what he’s talking about.  The article proves that St. Robert Bellarmine, Doctor of the Church, held that the geocentric view of the universe is de fide and that St. Robert’s position was later contradicted by Pope Benedict XV.  Since the baptism of desire advocates have been completely refuted by this article – yet have ignored the fact that they have been refuted and have continued to promote the same lies – we post this summary of points from the article.  We post it here to put them to shame once again.  It demonstrates, for anyone who might question it, that our position on the baptism of desire issue and related issues is totally consistent and that the primary claims of baptism of desire advocates are false.

 

IMPORTANT CONCLUDING SUMMARY OF POINTS

 

In favor that geocentrism is binding         Against that it’s binding

1616- eleven theologians of the Holy Office condemn heliocentrism with tacit approval of Pope Paul V

 

-St. Robert Bellarmine transmits this decision to Galileo and considers it binding; he considers geocentrism to be de fide

 

- The Cong. of the Index published a Decree forbidding all works favoring heliocentrism

 

1633- The Holy Office considers Galileo suspect of heresy for favoring heliocentrism; he is required to make an abjuration which indicates that heliocentrism is heretical and that geocentrism is de fide; this is done with approval from Pope Urban VIII

 

1664-1665- Pope Alexander VII promulgates an Index on his own authority forbidding all works which contradict geocentrism

 

1757- Pope Benedict XIV suspends Decrees of the Congregation of the Index against Heliocentric works

 

1822- With approval of Pope Pius VII, the Holy Office decides that books on movement of Earth could be printed at Rome

 

1921- Pope Benedict XV explicitly states that the Earth might not be the center of the universe in In Praeclara Summorum

 

-All popes from 1757 to 1958 at least tacitly agree that heliocentrism or a non-geocentric view of the universe may be held

 

 

 

 

 

 

I believe I have shown that the acts against the denial of geocentrism are not infallible.  In conclusion I would like to emphasize that this case sheds much light on the parameters of Church infallibility.  In fact, it has ramifications for so many issues that it would be very difficult to include them all in this article.  The facts on this issue obliterate popular arguments in favor of baptism of desire.  In addition, these facts have major significance in refuting arguments in favor of Natural Family Planning, that Mary is the Co-Redeemer, that saints couldn’t be mistaken in good faith about the dogmatic status of truths without being heretics or schismatics, etc.  Allow me to summarize:

 

The argument that baptism of desire must be true because St. Alphonsus (Doctor of the Church) thought that baptism of desire is de fide has been totally refuted.  St. Robert Bellarmine thought that geocentrism is de fide and he was contradicted by numerous popes.

 

The argument that to deny baptism of desire is contrary to the teaching of the Catholic Church because Fr. Feeney was denounced in a 1949 letter of two members of the Holy Office, has been obliterated.  It has been shown that in 1616 eleven theologians of the Holy Office denounced heliocentrism and in a 1633 abjuration composed by the Holy Office geocentrism was declared to be de fide and the denial of it heretical.  Both of these acts were contradicted by later popes.

 

The similar but different argument that the absolute necessity of water baptism could not have been solemnly defined by Pope St. Leo the Great or the Councils of Florence and Trent because then St. Alphonsus would have been a heretic has also been refuted.  I will quote baptism of desire advocate J.D. who unwittingly proves the point:  “… if heliocentrism has been infallibly condemned by the Holy See, there has never been any point in the history of the Church when this has been universally recognised to be the case and nearly four centuries have now passed during which hardly any Catholic has correctly realised the true theological status of heliocentrism.”  What he didn’t add is that if heliocentrism has not been infallibly condemned by the Holy See, then numerous popes (e.g., Paul V and Urban VIII) and a Doctor of the Church (St. Robert Bellarmine) acted like it had been and thus were unaware of the true theological status of this issue.  If they could have been completely wrong about the true theological status of this controversial point, then certainly St. Alphonsus and others could have been as well concerning the dogmatic status of the absolute necessity of water baptism.  Thus, either way our point is proven.

 

The argument that baptism of desire or salvation for “the invincibly ignorant” couldn’t be heretical because numerous popes (especially starting in the late 1800’s) allowed these ideas to be circulated and spread in fallible sources (catechisms, theology manuals, etc.) without condemning them has been totally refuted.  As the table above shows, numerous popes disallowed the circulation of heliocentrism for reasons of faith, and then just as many allowed it.  Thus, the fact that popes such as Pius IX, Leo XIII, and Pius X reigned when clear heresies against the salvation dogma were taught in many catechisms, theology manuals, etc. proves absolutely nothing.

 

The argument brought forward by Bishop Pivarunas of the CMRI, the vigorous defender of “natural” birth control, that Natural Family Planning or the rhythm method must be acceptable because it was taught in speeches by Pope Pius XII, and even by members of the Holy Office in response to queries as far back as the 1880’s, has been totally refuted.  Just as the numerous decisions made by members of the Holy Office in the Galileo affair did not settle that case and were completely contradicted by Pope Benedict XV, the decisions and statements from members of the Holy Office and Pius XII on NFP were not infallible and contradict the more solemn teaching of Pope Pius XI in Casti Connubii.  Further, Benedict XV’s statement that the Earth might not be the center of the universe in an encyclical is more formal than the speeches in which Pius XII taught NFP and baptism of desire.  Yet, the position enunciated by Pope Benedict XV in his 1921 encyclical was not held by Pope Paul V and Pope Urban VIII, who gave their approval to the opposite position.

 

The argument that it cannot be contrary to dogma to say that Mary is our Co-Redemptrix because Pope Leo XIII and one or two other popes called her such in non-infallible statements has been refuted.  The above facts show that numerous popes held that geocentrism was a settled issue of faith, while numerous other popes did not.  Thus, our position that one should not call Our Lady “Co-Redemptrix” because the Councils of Trent (Denz. 984-987) and Florence (Denz. 711) specifically declare that Jesus Christ alone is our Redeemer is perfectly theologically sound from the standpoint of papal evidence and the fact that popes can, in their fallible capacities, fail to recognize this.

 

These facts provide a striking vindication to the approach to these issues which we have enunciated at Most Holy Family Monastery.  This approach sticks uncompromisingly to the infallible definitions of the Catholic Church and their definitions “as once declared” (Vatican I, Denz. 1800), even if numerous statements from esteemed fallible authorities or popes in fallible capacities contradict them.  This information not only vindicates our position, but illustrates in a powerful way that the pernicious heretics [many of them named in the article] who have misled many people based on their pseudo-intellectual appearance of fidelity to the Church by arguments from theologians, from St. Alphonsus, from the condemnation of Fr. Feeney, and their disregard for arguments from dogmatic definitions, have been completely refuted and proven wrong.

 

Audio thoughts and Benedict XVI and Luther

 

Martin Luther's outrageous attacks on the Catholic faith, in light of Antipope Benedict XVI's plans to rehabilitate the heretic [5 min. audio] Martin Luther, the notorious Protestant heretic, said that the Papacy was “founded by the Devil.”  Hear more outrageous statements (which you probably haven’t heard before) from the man whom Antipope Benedict XVI wants to rehabilitate.

 

This will be found permanently in our: Traditional Catholic Audio Programs file.

 

Atheist is a fan of John Paul II

 

You people are what's wrong with the world.I'm an Atheist and a Pansexual and I have friends of all religions including those you deem "heretical" and we all coexist peacefuly with respect,although I am Atheist I respect Pope John Paul II not because he was a religious leader but because he was a good man who respected all life and all faiths you people have no right to call him a "heretic".And abortion is a womans right and is entirely a womans choice some women can't afford to take care of a child and would rather get an abortion then make a child suffer starvation and poverty.Gays aren't evil or possesed nor are they gay because of a psychological problem they are some of the nicest people on this planet.You people don't belong in the modern world with your outdated mindset.Now please go back to the dark ages and help the inquisitors torture innocent non-catholics i'm sure you would enjoy it

Dee

 

MHFM: When people like you are fans of John Paul II, it proves our whole point about the apostate antipope.  His message was one of acceptance of falsehood, sin and evil.  He provided an empty message which rejects the Catholic faith, leads people to Hell and confirms non-Catholics like yourself on their false paths.

 

Narrow/loose interpretation of EENS

 

Just exactly what is a narrow interpretation?  And since when is extra ecclesiam nulla salus "a notion"?

 

“Just one year previous, during the course of one of his regular Thursday evening lectures, Fr. Feeney gave a talk on the notion that "outside the Church there is no salvation." A young Protestant woman in attendance was so shocked by what she heard she contacted another Jesuit, who then notified the Jesuit Provincial, Fr. John J. McEleney, S.J., who registered "serious concern" about Fr. Feeney and his narrow interpretation of <extra ecclesiam nulla salus>. --Michael J. Mazza, Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus: Father Feeney Makes a Comeback, Fidelity Magazine

 

MHFM: There is no strict or loose interpretation.  There is what the Church has once declared.  And that is that all who die without the Catholic faith are lost. 

 

Pope Pius IX, First Vatican Council, Sess. 3, Chap. 2 on Revelation, 1870, ex cathedra: “Hence, also, that understanding of its sacred dogmas must be perpetually retained, which Holy Mother Church has once declared; and there must never be a recession from that meaning under the specious name of a deeper understanding.”

 

Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, “Cantate Domino,” 1441, ex cathedra: “The Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that all those who are outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans but also Jews or heretics and schismatics, cannot share in eternal life and will go into the everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels, unless they are joined to the Church before the end of their lives; that the unity of this ecclesiastical body is of such importance that only for those who abide in it do the Church’s sacraments contribute to salvation and do fasts, almsgiving and other works of piety and practices of the Christian militia produce eternal rewards; and that nobody can be saved, no matter how much he has given away in alms and even if he has shed blood in the name of Christ, unless he has persevered in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church.”

 

Heretics who believe in salvation outside the Church like to call adherence to what the Church has once declared a “narrow” or a “strict” interpretation of the dogma.  They do this specifically because that creates the false impression that their rejection of what the dogma actually says is somehow a legitimate or true interpretation of it.  It’s a total lie.  They simply reject the dogma as it has been declared.  Thus, they lie when they say they hold it in the “proper interpretation.”  That’s just a ploy to cover up their denial of the dogma.  They know that the dogma has been declared by the Church, so they know they must come up with a way to make their rejection of it appear as somehow in conformity with the idea they reject.  And that’s how they do it.

 

What about this Mass?

 

Pax et Bonum...

I was enlightened by your website and i already found it that there was something wrong in the Catholic Church now after Vatican II... i was so sad  about the novus ordo... like the way Novus Ordo Mass is celebrated... im also a devotee of Saint Philomena, i am also sad that her Name was strike from the calendar of Saints after Vatican II... im from the City of Iligan here in the Philippines where majority of our city's population are Catholics... Tabernacles here are transfered from the center to right side of the Churches here instead of the Eucharist must be the center.

i have a question, because your site discourages attending Novus Ordo Mass... I have attended Latin Mass (Gregorian) not Tridentine before here, concelebrated by the Holy Spirit Priests(Spiritans), but  sad to say, they don't celebrated it anymore... is it ok for me to attend the kind of Mass??? it seems that it is much more solemn than the Mass spoken in Vernacular...

how can i practice Traditional Catholic Mass (Tridentine Mass) if no one is celebrating it here...??? can you help me with my problem.... thanks..

More power...


rhyan c. gomez

 

MHFM: Thanks for the e-mail.  We would point out that the problem is not in the Catholic Church, but in the Vatican II sect which is not the Catholic Church but purports to be. 

 

To your question, if you are referring to an Indult Mass (i.e. one where they also have the New Mass in the same church), then you should not go.  Also, most of those priests you are referring to were ordained in the New Rite of Ordination.  The New Rite of Ordination is invalid: Why the New Rite of Ordination is Invalid [PDF File].  So that would be another reason why one couldn’t go.  There are guidelines on our website about receiving sacraments in these times.  You should look at that section on our website.  You must not go to the New Mass.  There is no obligation to attend Mass if the Church doesn’t provide you with a fully Catholic one in your area, so you might have to stay home on Sundays.  But make sure you pray the Rosary each day, 15 decades if possible.  And there is probably a place for you to go to confession, at least.

 

New Mass different in Singapore?

 

Hi
 
if you do stop by Singapore, please visit the local Catholic Churches. Compared to what your site says, how Novus Ordo is practiced is extreme to what we do here. Our adaptation o novus ordo is very different. Much of your descriptions do not apply to us.
 
Yes, perhaps there are issues that are contentious such as apparitions. Beyond that, I want to point something out. Here in Asia, things are different. Come to anywhere in Southeast Asia, and you will find near 100% Mass attendance. Our mass rituals do not differ much from the traditional Latin Rite either (this is in particular reference to your site).
 
The point I want to make across is that do not over generalise base on what you observe. Perhaps the West have many wrong perceptions of the faith, but that does not conclude anything about the faith itself. I believe there is no conflict with novus ordo and earlier treaties. Adaptations can be awry, but that is the result of individual decision. Faith must not be confused with decision.
 
Anyway, this is no attack letter. I'm just emailig out of concern as a brother of Christ. Perhaps there is some misunderstanding as result of generalisation.
 
Regards
Joseph
 
P.S. Do not use the media as looking glass to the Churches in Asia. The Western media tends to only report extemist practices that make up a very tiny minority. Also, I would really appreciate that you can send an acknowledgment reply that you have read my email. Thanks

 

MHFM: First, we think you are exaggerating the state of affairs in Singapore.  There are no altar girls, Eucharistic ministers, “Communion” in the hand?  We doubt it.   Regardless, it doesn’t make any difference.  Even if you go to the most “reverent” Novus Ordo “Mass” possible – one which doesn’t have any of the outrageous sacrileges so common in this country – it’s still an invalid non-Catholic service.  Jesus isn’t there, as we prove here: The Liturgical Revolution: A New Mass  [PDF File].  The words of consecration have been changed!  Almost all of the priests are invalid because they were ordained in the New Rite of Ordination.  Further, it’s a Protestant service.  70% of the prayers have been gutted and the whole service has been restructured to fit a Protestant and man-centered mold, as we document in that file.  So get over it if your particular “parish” offers a less sacrilegious version of the false service; it’s still a non-Catholic service which you must avoid under pain of grave sin.  We must tell you that, if you continue to go there, you will lose your soul. 

 

The pictures of the outrageous sacrileges at the New Mass, which we expose in our file/video/book, are very revealing about the demonic fruits flowing from the whole Novus Ordo system.  They expose the wicked fruits that came from the implementation of the New Mass.  They serve to reveal the total breakdown of – and departure from – Catholic Tradition and holiness which the New Mass represents.  However, they are not necessary in proving that one cannot go to the New Mass.  They are, rather, valuable in exposing the evil spirit behind the Liturgical Revolution.

 

Sunday work-eat?

 

I found the following question and answer in my daughters catechism:

 

What work is permitted on Sunday? Answer: 4th. The buying and selling of victuals, clothing, shoes, etc., in public stores.  But shop-keepers should keep their places closed in order to distinguish Sunday from the other days of the week.

 

I was under the impression that we were not permitted to go shopping on Sundays.  Any comments?

 

What sin do those commit who make others work on Sunday? Answer: They sin just as much as if they were to work themselves, and, besides, they are responsible for the sin of those who work at their bidding.

 

Am I committing a sin if I stop at a restaurant to have lunch after Mass if the Mass location I am attending is a long distance from my home?

 

K

 

MHFM: Thanks for the question.  People should not go shopping on Sundays.  They should also not go out to eat.  The only exception to this would be if people are travelling very long distances because they have to do so.   If they are only travelling one or two hours each way, then they should just eat when they get home. 

 

Since many people who are reading this have not been taught these concepts by the Vatican II “Church,” we must point out a few other things in this regard: servile works are forbidden on Sundays; people should not do laundry on Sundays; people should not do yard work (such as mowing the lawn, etc.) on Sundays.  Exceptions to this would be work that absolutely must be done.  For example, if you must shovel out your driveway after a heavy snowfall, so that you can get to work, then you could do so on a Sunday.  People should also try to arrange with their employers that they don’t have to work on Sundays.  However, if working on Sundays is an integral part of the job you have, then you must do it.  Or if even requesting to not work on Sundays might cost you your job then you don’t have to do that.  Likewise, other work that must be done on Sundays, due to one’s occupation or state, can be done. 

 

Clement and Ignatius - New Audio on the Papacy, Section B of Part 2

 

The Early Church recognized the Bishop of Rome as the successor to St. Peter's authority - Section B of Part 2 [new 14 min. audio]

 

This section moves into the evidence that the Bishop of Rome/the Church of Rome was recognized as supreme in the primitive Christian Church (precisely because it inherited the authority of St. Peter).  This section covers the famous epistle of Clement of Rome to the Corinthians (A.D. 90-100) and the famous epistle of Ignatius of Antioch to the Romans (circa A.D. 110).  Learn what you probably didn’t know about these most famous documents of early Christianity.  These documents are some of the most important in the history of Christianity and they are regarded with great respect by essentially all students and scholars of the early Church, regardless of denomination.  Learn how they demonstrate Catholic teaching on the Papacy.  Hear the very interesting admissions about these documents from an Eastern “Orthodox” scholar, and how such admissions serve to refute the Protestant and Eastern “Orthodox” position.  (Section C of Part 2 will be posted in the future.) This is found permanently in our: Refuting Protestantism and Eastern "Orthodoxy" page.

 

Fr. Feeney

 

Dear Brothers,

Congratulations for your website, there are many valuable articles and interesting comments. However, I'm somewhat confused. You seem to support Fr. Feeney's teaching on Baptism, but I though Fr. Feeney had been condemed by Pope Pius XII. If so, isn't your position rather dangerous?

Roger Mitchinson

 

MHFM: First we need to point out that Fr. Feeney’s teaching (that no man can be saved without baptism) was not his teaching.  It’s the infallible teaching of the Catholic Church.

 

Pope Paul III, The Council of Trent, Sess. 7, Can. 5 on the Sacrament of Baptism: “If anyone says that baptism [the Sacrament] is optional, that is, not necessary for salvation (cf. Jn. 3:5): let him be anathema.”

 

Pope Paul III, The Council of Trent, Can. 2 on the Sacrament of Baptism, Sess. 7, 1547:  If anyone shall say that real and natural water is not necessary for baptism, and on that account those words of Our Lord Jesus Christ: ‘Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Spirit’ [John 3:5], are distorted into some sort of metaphor: let him be anathema.”

 

Pope Eugene IV, The Council of Florence, “Exultate Deo,” Nov. 22, 1439:  “Holy baptism, which is the gateway to the spiritual life, holds the first place among all the sacraments; through it we are made members of Christ and of the body of the Church.  And since death entered the universe through the first man, ‘unless we are born again of water and the Spirit, we cannot,’ as the Truth says, ‘enter into the kingdom of heaven’ [John 3:5].  The matter of this sacrament is real and natural water.”

 

So those who happen to agree with him on that point (that no one can be saved without the Sacrament of Baptism), as we do, are agreeing with the infallible teaching of the Catholic Church.  Regarding your question about his position being condemned, this is addressed in our book: Outside the Catholic Church There is Absolutely No Salvation [PDF FILE].  We would strongly encourage you to look carefully at those sections which deal with Fr. Feeney and Protocol 122/49.  The true position, which Fr. Feeney espoused, was condemned by a non-infallible document written by a cardinal of the Holy Office during the reign of Pope Pius XII.  As we point out in the book, the heresy of salvation outside the Church, which was expressed at Vatican II and subsequently adopted by the Vatican II sect in brazen fashion, began to be held by priests in the decades prior to Vatican II.  The decay of faith, which led to this situation of the Great Apostasy we’re in, began with much of the clergy in the years before Vatican II.  So the fact that a non-infallible document during the reign of Pius XII condemned the true position simply further reveals that this Great Apostasy began before Vatican II.  Such fallible documents must be dismissed and completely rejected when they contradict the infallible dogmatic teaching, as the document against Feeney did.

 

Spiritual over physical

 

MHFM: Here’s an interesting quote which illustrates how the Catholic Church, always faithful to the teaching of Jesus Christ (Mt. 10:28), places the health of the soul over the health of the body.

 

“The priests of the Society [the Jesuits] observed with sorrow that many of those whom they visited on sick-beds departed life without the Church’s means of grace; [St.] Ignatius thereupon remembered the ordinance of Innocent III, ratified by the twelfth General Council, the tenor of which was that the aid of the physician of the soul should be invoked before that of the physician of the body.  He [St. Ignatius] earnestly recommended the observance of these enactments with this alleviation, that on the first and second day of illness a doctor should be allowed to attend the patient, but not again on the third and fourth day, unless latter [the patient] had in the interval made his confession.  All the theologians and canonists of the Penitentiaria signified their approval in writing.  The Pope [Paul III] was much please with the proposal; about Epiphany in the year 1544 it began to be put into execution.” (Dr. Ludwig Pastor, History of the Popes, Vol. 12, p. 44.)

 

V-2 monastery teaches Hinduism

 

Dear Sirs,

Am learning about Christianity. Went through your site with great interest.  There is a Benedictine monastry in South India in a village called Thannirpalli, which is near Trichy. There they were teaching the Hindu idea, namely, 'I am God, and you are God.' What do you say about this?  Secondly, what is the truth about the shroud of Turin?

Please write to me.

Ajeet Goel.

 

MHFM: Thanks for the e-mail.  To your first question, the idea that man is God is not Catholic doctrine.  It’s Antichrist doctrine.  It’s condemned heresy.  There is only one God, the Most Holy Trinity (Father, Son and Holy Ghost).  The idea that man is God is the lie that Satan told Eve in the Garden (Genesis 3:5).  So that “monastery” is not a Catholic one; it’s part of the heretical Vatican II sect which our website exposes.  Hinduism is a false religion. 

 

To your question about the Shroud of Turin, we respond that it’s definitely the authentic burial cloth of Jesus Christ.  The image is miraculous.  Please watch our video Creation and Miracles, Past and Present here for the facts on it.  We also sell another DVD called Jesus and the Shroud of Turin, the best film on the miraculous shroud.  The Shroud of Turin is another proof of the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus Christ.  We’re truly glad to hear about your interest and we pray that you follow through with it.  It’s critical for you to continue your investigation, come to accept Jesus Christ, and enter His one true Church.  This is the most important thing in your entire life because it’s necessary for salvation. 

 

Since you asked about Hinduism and the teaching that man is God, there is another point worth mentioning.  Sometime back we posted the following to show how the satanic lie that man is God rests deep in the heart of Hinduism’s “holy books”.  Further, it shows how these most ancient texts of Hinduism essentially represent the Devil’s version of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.

---

Sacred Scripture is clear that the gods of these false religions are devils (Ps. 95:5; 1 Cor. 10:20).  Since we’re talking about Hinduism and the area around India, there is an interesting story which confirms the truth of Sacred Scripture about the satanic nature of Hinduism.  Fr. Roberto de Nobili was a Jesuit missionary to India in the 1600’s.  In attempting to bring Christianity into the interior of India, he came face to face with the wicked Caste System.  It was difficult for Nobili to even communicate with the members of the “higher” castes until he adapted his ways to make himself appear not to belong to a lower caste; for the high caste members wouldn’t respect him and would shun him.  The Brahmins were the spiritual leaders of the false Hindu religion.  They actually maintained (or purported to maintain) a monastic-style of existence.  They were among the high caste members of Hindu society, and only they knew the language in which the Hindu “holy books,” the Vedas, were written.  This knowledge gave them much influence over the people.  The Vedas constituted the most ancient collection of Hindu scriptures.  The esoteric language in which they were written is called Sanskrit. 

 

Through a series of actions, including things which were considered by some to be unacceptable compromises, Nobili gained the confidence of one higher-caste Hindu and became the first European to learn the esoteric language, Sanskrit.  This enabled him to read their “holy books,” the Vedas.  In reading these Nobili discovered that the central truth of the “holy books” – and thus the deepest “truth” hidden at the heart of Hinduism, resting beneath its innumerable idolatries and ridiculous myths – is that each man is God.  We will quote a passage from the biography of Nobili to demonstrate the point.  The passage introduces, and then quotes, a teaching-story from the Vedas about a father addressing his son, who is named Svetaketu:

 

“The religion of the Vedas had been developed… into a system called the Vedanta… The central doctrine of the higher truth is summed up in the formula ‘That art Thou,’ explained as follows in the Chandogya Upanisad…[It reads]: … ‘Bring hither a fig from there.’  ‘Here it is, sir.’  ‘Divide it.’  ‘It is divided, sir.’  ‘What do you see there?’ ‘These rather fine seeds, sir.’ ‘Of these, please, divide one.’  ‘It is divided, sir.’  ‘What do you see there?’ ‘Nothing at all, sir.’  ‘Then he said to him, ‘Truly, my dear, that finest essence which you do not perceive – truly, my dear, from that finest essence this great sacred fig tree thus arises.  Believe me, my dear,’ said he, ‘ that which is the finest essence – this whole world has that as its self.  That is Reality.  That is Atman.  That art thou, Svetaketu.’… Then he said to him: ‘That salt you placed in the water last evening – please bring it hither.’  ‘Then he grasped for it, but did not find it, as it was completely dissolved. ‘Please take a sip of it from this end,’ said he.  ‘How is it?’  ‘Salt.’ ‘Take a sip of it from the middle,’ said he. ‘How is it?’ ‘Salt.’ ‘Set it aside.  Then come unto me’… Then he said to him: ‘Truly, indeed, you do not perceive Being here.  Truly, indeed, it is here.  That which is the finest essence – this whole world has that as its self.  That is Reality.  That is Atman.  That art thou, Svetaketu.’  In other words, Thou, the individual soul, art God, contained within Him in absolute absorption.” (Vincent Cronin, A Pearl to India: The Life of Roberto de Nobili, E.P. Dutton & Co., 1959, pp. 92-93) 

 

So, at the core of Hinduism’s most ancient texts – some of the most ancient expressions of religious thought known to man – is the satanic lie that man is God.  It’s also very interesting that the story above contains a prominent reference to the “sacred fig tree.”  Some Biblical scholars believe that the original tree of the knowledge of good and evil, which God forbade Adam and Eve to eat from, was a fig tree.  Satan promised Eve that they would become “as Gods” if they ate from it (Gen. 3:5).  It’s almost as if this ancient Hindu text, in inculcating the satanic lie at the heart of its religion (that man is God), took it directly from the serpent in the Garden who lied about the tree!  That’s why Hinduism is idolatrous; that’s why the cultures which are infested with it are evil and dominated by something as heinous as the Caste System.  It’s because Satan is ultimately behind it all.  This simply demonstrates once again that the gods of the heathens (Ps. 95:5; 1Cor. 10:20) are truly lying devils, and they’ve been lying to man from the beginning.  Keep in mind that Hinduism is a religion praised by the Vatican II sect.

 

Vatican II document, Nostra aetate # 2: “Thus in Hinduism the divine mystery is explored and propounded with an inexhaustible wealth of myths and penetrating philosophical investigations, and liberation is sought from the distresses of our state either through various forms of ascetical life or deep meditation or taking refuge in God with loving confidence.”

 

Likes info in Nigeria

 

Hello people of God,

 

I greet you all in the name of our lord Jesus Christ. My name is Anthony Ogbonmwan, I am the president of the Altar Servers association… Edo State Nigeria.  I must say that I am really and very happy and impress with what I have seen in the most holy family monastery web site I started visiting this web site this month and I have been able to see things I mean things, informations I have never known of. I have been looking for how I can get life of saints, Catholic calendar and the history of the Catholic Church but I have not been able to get it but when I visited the site I was able to see the Calendar and many other informations...

 

I pray that almighty God continue to strengthen, guild and protect you, may he give you the zeal to work for him. And as you continue to do the good work you have started may he reward you in a hundred folds and may his mercy shine upon you and may he continue to bless you till the end. Through Christ Our Lord. Amen… Keep on the good work you have started and may almighty God continue to bless you through Christ Our Lord. Amen.

 

No donations/wills to heretics - interesting quote

 

MHFM: In our material we have frequently pointed out that Catholics should neither will things nor give gifts/donations to those who are heretics or non-Catholics.  This would include those who profess to be traditional Catholics, but don’t hold the correct positions.  Well, here are some interesting canons we’ve recently come across in study.  They come from the regional councils in Africa around the year 419 A.D.  They inculcate the same ancient Christian concept:

 

Canons of the African Code, 419 A.D., Canon 22: “And that to those who are not Catholic Christians, even if they be blood relations, neither bishops nor clergymen shall give anything at all by way of donation of their possessions.”

 

Canons of the African Code, 419 A.D., Canon 81: “It was ordained that if any bishop should prefer to his Church strangers to blood relationship with him, or his heretical relatives, or pagans as his heirs, he shall be anathematized even after his death…”

 

Freemason

 

Dear sir,

I did watch some videos.  It’s a pity that there is a lot of propaganda for segregation.  You know what that means; apartheid and war.  We as Freemasons are building bridges, and looking for the things people have in common.  Not any dogma that will separate human beings from each other.  I can not understand why this fundamentalist Christianity is supporting, and creating, fear.   We must work together to make harmony in this world, not segregation/ war, as you are suggesting.  Wake up, globalize and live in peace with all dogmas there are  and don’t try to be right.  Therefore you will make things wrong.

Be in harmony. The world shall be as one.  Have a nice day, and nice dreams,

Theo
the Netherlands

 

MHFM: We post this as an interesting confirmation of the fact that Freemasons accept the wicked idea that all dogmas are true.

 

Found site, converted

 

Dear Brothers,

 

I wanted to tell your website visitors… how the Lord led me out of a complete spiritual fog back to reality. The summary is as follows.  I was confirmed in the Vatican I Church in the early 1960s on Long Island, New York. At that time the Catholic Church was very clear in its teaching about Who God is, Who Jesus Christ is, that God is Holy and that we are not. And that Jesus Christ died a death of atonement for us, a death that put an end to the animal sacrifices that mankind had been making to atone for sin. It was clear that all people needed to repent of their sins against God and be baptized in the one Catholic Church and submit to Church teaching in order to have their sins forgiven and get right and stay right with God.  By the late 1960s everything was changing rapidly. Things that used to seem clear were becoming cloudy. Even the Church's teaching was becoming clouded by the Vatican II implementation at the parish level and many of us were leaving the Church for this reason and for many other reasons… I claim no innocence here at all. I was getting caught up in the entire drift of the age, the drift from absolute truth to relativism. And it was tearing up our society and the world. It's only getting worse today.

 

In 1972 I experienced a personal revival of my faith in God, but I did not know where to go to find others with what seemed to be genuine faith. By that time I was convinced that there was something missing in the Catholic Church but I didn't know what it was. The folk masses seemed contrived to me. I ended up within the Protestant Evangelical stream but knew right away that I did not belong there either. So I was adrift from about 1972 until recently, exploring this, that and the other thing, and never really understanding where God's true Church is. I simply put up with the ambiguity.  Until recently.

 

During the past few years I noted that something terribly wrong was happening in America and all around the world. This whole "new world order" movement and globalization were beginning to stink. First it was the government's dogmatic explanation for the 9/11 incident within only three hours of its occurrence. I'm sorry, you do not investigate and solve a mystery of that magnitude in three hours. Something was fishy right there.  Then it was the weapons of mass destruction and the whole hysteria created by the mainstream media that led the American people into a totally unjustified assault on a nation that represented about as much of a threat as Cuba, Venezuela, or even Israel. The weapons of mass destruction turned out to be weapons of mass deception.

 

Then it was all the cover-ups for 9/11 and the Iraq debacle. And the torture. And the demolition of the United States Constitution and the Bill of Rights to protect us from terrorists that nobody could even see. And the constant spying on every communication of every citizen, looking for "the terrorists." But more than this I was disappointed by the Roman Catholic Church's response to all this.  They were silent.  How could this be? I asked. Was there no statement on torture? No recitation of just war theory? On government lying to its own people. No statement on the emerging New World Order under Lucifer? What was going on! Perhaps it was the pedophile scandal that had shut the clergy up; perhaps the clergy were saying "We won't bother you if you won't bother us." But, finally, I could take it no longer.

 

I began to pray earnestly, "Lord, where is your Church? Where are the real Catholics?"  Within days I woke up with "mostholyfamilymonastery.com" on my mind. I had heard [of the website]… but now it was time to have a good long look at the website and see if there might be some clues as to whatever happened to the Roman Catholic Church that I grew up in during the 50s and early 60s.  Well you know the rest. You Brothers have done a splendid job investigating what happened to the Church. The true Church is still alive, but is not assembling within the Catholic infrastructure like it used to, because almost that entire infrastructure has been hijacked by this blasphemous Vatican II sect and its adherents. You have documented numerous incidents of in-your-face papal heresy and Vatican II teachings that also qualify as heresy. The Vatican II "Church" is simply not the Roman Catholic Church of tradition. It is no doubt a radical departure from the Gospel of Our Lord Jesus Christ. And it is deceiving many, many people into following a Gospel of Man in the Church of Man. This is Antichrist. This new "church" is quite possibly a precursor to a coming new World Religion as part of the New World Order that many global leaders talk about. And now it has become clear to me that the divide in America and the whole world today is not Liberal vs. Conservative, or Civilization vs. Terror, as our mainstream media would have us believe. It is authentic Catholic Church vs. Everything Else. It's not Left vs. Right, it's Inside-the-true-Catholic-Church vs. Outside-the-true-Catholic-Church. But Lucifer has most people too busy fighting each other so that they don't realize that they should be taking up the Cross of Christ and fighting Lucifer. "...upon this rock I will build My church; and the gates of Hades shall not overpower it," said Our Lord. Let us put on the whole armor of God and demolish Lucifer's strongholds and invoke the coming of Our Lord with great power and glory!

Blessings in Our Lord,

 

Rob

 

Novus Ordo seminarian

 

Hello, my name is Anane Joseph, am a seminarian at Pope John Paul II Major Seminary, in Lomé, TOGO, am in my third year philosophy and a Ghanian. I was much grateful when i saw the informations on the internat, defending the Catholic faith, from all forms of heresies. May God richly bless you and the Virgin Mother continues to interceed on your behalf. I would like to use this opprtunity to ask for a favor from you, that is, some documents that can help me in my priesthood formation. Counting on your cooperation.

 

 Anane Joseph.

 

MHFM: Thanks for the interest, Anane.  The documents on our website are all very important, but you must get out of the Novus Ordo seminary.  At that seminary you will be trained to accept heretics (such as John Paul II).  You will also be trained to offer an invalid New Mass and accept the heretical Second Vatican Council. You must get out of that seminary.  It’s not Catholic.  These files (among others) show why:

 

John Paul II (manifest heretic who claimed to be pope 1978-2005)

Vatican II - false council

The Invalid New Mass

The New Rite of Ordination

 

A True Relationship

 

Sub. A True Relationship

 

I happened to come across your website on the new catholic church.  It all seemed like so much information and overwhelming.  But I know Christ talks about the false churches in the end days.  I know you say you have to be true catholic to go to heaven but I don't understand if I really love the Lord, why would I be sent to hell. Honestly, I have fallen away from the Lord.  I lost my baby son over a year ago and have had a really hard time excepting this.   I know there is more to God than just spitting out prayers and wishes but I cannot find His presence anymore.  It has been very lonely without Him.  I have seeked guidance from other churches to have no response or council whatsoever.  I am lost.  If you could send me some more information on how to start a real relationship with God, I would be eternally grateful.

 

Very respectfully,

Mrs. Frederick

 

MHFM: Thanks for the e-mail.  You cannot really love the Lord unless you accept His one true faith (Heb. 11:6).  So those who don’t accept His one true Catholic faith, yet think they love the Lord, will be sent to Hell.  God allowed your child to die; you must resign yourself to what He has allowed.  All the guidance you need is found in the traditional Catholic faith.  In addition to the other material on our website, the books we offer on lives of the saints are extremely important.  In the history of the Church and in the lives of the saints one will find all the keys and facets to a true relationship with God.  In reading them, one will find in great depth and richness the profound holiness which exists only in the traditional Catholic Church. 

 

V-2 homosexual evil


I found your radio program interesting concerning the N.O. seminaries and the homosexual activities that are promoted within.  Though not new or surprising to me, I would think the liberal N.O. mess goers would realize something evil is occurring within the VII church, when nothing is done to these N.O. priests after being convicted of pedophilia…


God Bless you all,
T.M.

 

MHFM: Yes, one would think that the scandals which are rampant in the Vatican II sect would cause people to immediately connect with the truth of material such as ours, which exposes the Vatican II sect.  Unfortunately it doesn’t always work that way, since so many people are of bad will.

 

25 hours reading

 

Since I “accidently” discovered your website I have spent at least 25 hours reading. I was born and raised Catholic. Went to Catholic schools. Later in life I was very disappointed that I learned next to nothing about Jesus Christ our Savior. I came back to… a Bible study with men who are Baptists.  I very much enjoy my Bible study group and our discussions about scripture. Over the years I have lost my respect for the Catholic Church. I usually go to the Baptist service after Bible study. I have never been comfortable in a Baptist Church or Church of Christ but for a while it seemed as though I couldn’t do better. I miss the Roman Catholic Church but if it’s all Vat2 what can I do?

 

Matthew Macheca

St. Louis, MO

 

MHFM: We’re really glad to hear about your interest.  You ask what you can do.  Well, you’ve probably discovered that the Vatican II sect is not the Catholic Church.  So you need to convert to the true (traditional) Catholic faith.  That’s the one and only faith of Jesus Christ and it’s necessary for salvation.  First, you need to stop going to the Baptist church.  Like the other Protestant sects, it’s not truly Christian.  Second, we would recommend listening to the talks in this file: Refuting Protestantism and Eastern "Orthodoxy" * Audio Programs, as well as watching our videos: WATCH OUR DVDS ONLINE FOR FREE and obtaining our DVD special.  They further demonstrate that the Protestant sects, such as the Baptist sect, reject the true teaching of the Bible.  We also strongly encourage you to obtain a rosary and begin to pray it.  We have a How to Pray the Rosary file on our website.  We also offer a Penny Catechism; it explains the basics of the Catholic faith.  We also have a section on our mainpage – which is in red about ¾ of the way down the list of links – which explains the steps one must take to convert to the Catholic faith.  Anyone can follow them and everyone should.

 

Insane?

 

How sad.    You deny the authority of the magisterium and its teachings on the infallibility of the Bishop of Rome (also called the Pope or Holy Father), as proclaimed

by Vatican Council I.  Yet you claim yourselves to be infallible and appoint yourselves as judge of God's Church and His appointed successor who does indeed sit on the throne of Peter.  You show very little understanding of the true theology of the Second Vatican Council's teachings, and deny all the good that has come from it, even in the midst of the confusion that followed the changes after 400 years without a council.   You talk about the beginning of the Church and speak of "having Jesus and Paul".  It is no wonder that you do not even mention Peter, whom Jesus Himself appointed as The Rock upon which His Church is built. Instead, you would rip the keys that Jesus assigned to Peter and His successor in Rome, and take them into your own hands, lock the doors of Truth and substitue your own prideful teachings.  As I said, you believe that you alone are infallible and you assume that not from God's appointment of you as chief teacher and judge, but by your own attempts to take that authority unto yourself.  You set you self in opposition to Jesus Christ Himself and His Will.   How sad.

 

Elizabeth

 

MHFM: Are you insane?  We quote popes all the time.  Further, we prove the points we make against the Vatican II sect by quoting dogmas which have been defined by popes.  We also have entire talks proving the office of the Papacy from Scripture, in order to refute Protestants and the “Orthodox.”  Yet you say that we “do not even mention Peter, whom Jesus appointed as the rock.”  So you attack our website with completely false and ignorant nonsense.  Your false and ignorant statements show that you lack almost all knowledge of the contents of the website you are attacking.  Your e-mail therefore serves as another good example of the horrible quality of argument which is typically made by defenders of the Vatican II sect.  You need to wake up and take a deep and honest look at the facts.  The facts we present prove what we’re saying from the teachings of the Catholic Church.  Vatican II and Benedict XVI trash the Papacy; that's why they praise the "Orthodox" schismatics all the time.

 

UFOs are Demons

 

MHFM: In the future we will have an article which will show that UFOs are demons.

 

Asia?

 

HI, I'm a Filipino, and you probably know by now that Filipinos are totally devout Catholics. My question is, has the influence Novus Ordo Mass reach Philippines,or any part of Asia?

 

m…

MHFM: Yes, the Novus Ordo has been implemented all over the world, including in Asia.  "… all nations have drunk of the wine of the wrath of her fornication; and the kings of the earth have committed fornication with her” (Apocalypse 18:3).

You need the New Catechism

 

I am a devoted catholic and I find your web site offensive.  You have taken the truth and twisted it with half lies.  May God have mercy on you for this and I will pray for your forgiveness.  You need to read the Catechism of the Catholic Church to know what the Catholic Church really teaches.  You should not present yourself as a monestary with teaching like you are displaying.  This is heretical.  You need to look at the divinity of the church that was established by Jesus Christ himself.  Put aside your human biases and begin to search out the truth.  May God guide you.

Fred Janofski
Devoted to Jesus Christ.

MHFM: It’s precisely because we are familiar with the New Catechism that we know what we’re saying about the Vatican II “Church” is true.  Among other heresies, the New Catechism teaches that Holy Communion, etc. may lawfully be given to non-Catholics.  That is totally heretical.

John Paul II, Catechism of the Catholic Church (#  1401): “… Catholic ministers may give the sacraments of Eucharist, Penance, and Anointing of the Sick to other Christians not in full communion with the Catholic Church…”

You need to look at yourself closely and come to the realization that you don’t know what’s going on, that you don’t understand the Catholic faith, and that you are not looking at this honestly.

Avoid?

 

Dear Brothers,
 
Thank you for your web site, materials and all of your advice. I do have one more question - I trust in your answers and I believe this is a matter that can effect my salvation. I grew up in a very emotionally abusive home, is it a sin to distance myself from my sister who is "addicted" to conflict and causes me to sin the sin of anger. She constantly creates chaos with her attitude and her verbal and written attacks. She attacked me so viciously today I told her never to call or contact me again. Is that a sin? As hard as I might try - she will attack me again, I just want to live in peace. Is that a sin?
 
I was very mad at her today, now I am not. I will pray for her but I no longer want contact. Thank you for your help.
 
May GOD Bless you
Gene

 

MHFM: Certainly there is no sin in cutting off contact with her, especially if she’s heretical in some area.  Considering her activity, we assume that she’s not a true Catholic.  But rather than saying that you never want to talk to her again, you might want to word it in a slightly different manner.  You might want to say: “do not call me anymore, until you change your ways and convert to the traditional Catholic faith” (assuming that she’s not a traditional Catholic).  But based on what you have said, we agree that you should cut off contact with her.

 

New audio on Papacy, Part 2

 

The Early Church recognized the Bishop of Rome as the successor to St. Peter's authority - Section A of Part 2 [new 14 min. audio]

 

Was Peter ever in Rome?  If so, how come the Bible doesn’t say so?  Even if Jesus gave great authority to Peter, what does that have to do with Rome?  Didn’t St. Paul rebuke St. Peter in Galatians 2:11?  Where does the term Catholic Church come from anyway?”  These are just some of the questions that are frequently brought forward by non-Catholics who object to Catholic teaching on the Papacy.  In this audio you will learn the answers to these questions and these objections.  This audio is section A of Part 2 of a larger audio presentation proving the Catholic doctrine on the Papacy from the Bible and the early Church.   Part 1 (51 min. audio) proved from the New Testament that Jesus made St. Peter the first pope.  This section shows that the offices of the original bishops and the office of St. Peter (the Papacy) were instituted to continue with successors.  They were founded by Jesus to continue through the history of the Church after the original apostles and Peter had died.  This section demonstrates that St. Peter was in Rome and was its first bishop; it demonstrates that apostolic and papal succession come from the teaching of the Bible; it discusses the origin of the term “Catholic Church,” Gal. 2:11 and more.   The next section (Section B of Part 2), which will be posted in the near future, will give examples of how the early Church recognized the Bishop of Rome to have the authority of St. Peter. 

 

This is found permanently in our: Refuting Protestantism and Eastern "Orthodoxy" page.

 

Repulsed then interested

 

Dear Brother Michael Dimond,

 

I recently purchased the set of DVD’s; Creation and Miracles, Why John Paul II Cannot be the Pope and Communists and Freemasonic Infiltration of the Catholic Church.

After viewing each DVD, I have so many questions. I can guess that it is likely that you have prepared answers to the most commonly asked questions for those who have viewed your DVD’s.

 

I am feeling so many different emotions after viewing the DVD’s. I recall that my first reaction on visiting your website, (to purchase the Padre Pio booklets), was repulsion at the information on your home page as I had great respect and love for Pope John Paul II, as well as my Church. After all, the Catholic Church is my Church in whom I place my faith, my hope, my trust and my love. But, despite my repulsion to the things on your homepage, something led me to order the DVD’s. Now that I have viewed them, I do not know what to do, as it appears that you have done much in depth study and obviously feel obligated to inform all Catholics what you believe you have discovered. I am not discounting any of the information contained in the DVD’s, I am just so confused. My instincts tell me that turning to Jesus’ own words in the scriptures, and to the early Church Fathers is the most logical place to turn for the answers, which seems to be exactly what you have done. I am not an educated person, and am not confident in my abilities to fully understand and comprehend the scriptures and the doctrines as set forth by the early Church. I do know that Satan is the great deceiver, and right now I am torn between wanting to trust and believe in the Church and the Pope, and fearful that you are absolutely correct.

 

If I place my trust, my eternal salvation in what you say, that you are correct, then what should I and my husband and family be doing? Is there something/anything we can do to help prove/remove a false Pope? What should we be praying for? If our Church has the ‘new mass,’ should we even be attending and receiving the Eucharist? If no, where do we go if there is not a Church that does consecrate the Eucharist and teach/preach in the correct way? Should we only be receiving the Eucharist from a pre-Vatican II Priest, and on the tongue? What if the Priest was ordained after Vatican II? Are the sacraments he has administered invalid? Even confessions are invalid and I need to re-confess them? What about new Catholics just coming into the Church? I teach RCIC at our Parish, and my husband just went through RCIA.

 

My husband has said that we should go and talk to our Parish Priest about all of this, but I am afraid that if the Priest is deluded, that his advice may not be the correct advice. I am so frightened for the salvation of souls, especially those who are dearest to me. I am so confused and frightened, please help, and please pray for me and my family.

 

I await your reply.

 

Your Sister in Christ,

Karen, a woman crying in the desert

 

MHFM: We often get the questions: how does one know whom to follow or what to believe?  How do we know that what you are saying is true?  The answer to both questions is that you must judge everything by the standard of the Magisterium.  That’s why it’s important to look at this file and to understand the terms in it: The Glossary of Terms and Principles [PDF].  The Magisterium is the teaching authority of the Catholic Church.  The teaching of the Magisterium is infallible.  The teaching of the Magisterium is found in the dogmatic pronouncements and the infallible teachings of the past popes.  Thus, you know that what we’re saying is true because it’s based on the past infallible teachings of the Catholic Church.  So those who reject what we say on these matters are not rejecting us, but the infallible teachings of the Church upon which our positions are based.

 

Second, you must stop going to the New Mass.  It’s not valid.  You must get out of there under pain of mortal sin.  When you’re convinced of that and of all the other positions, then we can help you with options for receiving the sacraments.  But first one must be totally convinced of the traditional Catholic faith.  Also, it’s pointless to meet with the priest of the Novus Ordo church.  You should recommend the website and material to him, but he will almost certainly reject what you have to say.  In a personal meeting with him you might be confused by his false arguments.  One who really believes in the Church should see the truth of the material we have presented, as well as the falsity of the Vatican II sect. 

 

In Depth

 

Just finished perusing the web-site for about four hours.  It is one of the most in-depth informational sites I've seen covering the controversial vaticanII abortion. It's impossible to argue with the truth if you are honest with oneself.  I was born in 1947 and blessed with 12 years of true Catholic education (taught by IHM's). I remember when one went to a quiet church and knelt and prayed humbly before a "just,merciful,and loving GOD". I remember when there were kneelers,and railings to the altar, and priests and altar boys;when you received the HOLY EUCHARIST kneeling and on your tongue. I remember that once receiving JESUS you returned to the pew and knelt and prayed to HIM for forgiveness. I remember the reverence that one had upon just entering the church.  After vaticanII abortion we were told that things have to change with the HOLY SACRIFICE OF THE MASS. They, in their infinite wisdom, would change the name to ;get this "the celebration of the mass". Anyone who knows the real MASS and reveres this most holy of traditions knows that it is not a celebration. If I want to attend a celebration I'll go to a party or a wedding reception or a parade,etc.  JESUS instituted the MASS so that we can be in union with HIM and it is no laughing and pleasurable matter. It is a very serious and joyful memory of what JESUS accomplishes during HIS life on earth.  Ever since the 70's I have been wondering, discussing and arguing with people about how inhumane the church changed everything about the mass. …Especially when it got soooooooo bad it appeared as though they were trying to tell us that we were god and we were to embrace each other during mass and hold hands,etc.  I kinda laughed when one woman asked if I was a catholic because I would not hold her hand during the "Our Father". I asked her if she thought her "Our Father" was more acceptable to GOD than my "OUR FATHER" because she was holding hands.She just rolled her eyes in disgust. But this is just one example of the hypocrisy that the church is teaching.  I could go on and on but I had better stop here before you get bored. I am sure this isn't the first you've heard from guys like me.  Anyway, please keep up the fantastic work (Truth), cause I will be visiting the web-site again;  May GOD BLESS YOU and YOUR LOVED ONES.  

 

Thanks,

David Barker

 

Heresy is Bad

 

In studying the What Happened book, it is really beginning to sink in my brain just how bad heresy is.  Sorry, I mean, I know it's bad and that's why the popes have always condemned it as they have, but what I wasn't getting before was how attached to it some people are.  How they choose heresy because it serves their own selfish desires even though they know it's absolutely forbidden. (Like any sin, I suppose).  But to know the truth and reject it, and promote heresy . . . it just is not conceivable for me.  It truly seems hateful.  Almost like there's nothing more hateful than heresy. Because it drags so many down who are weak.  Brother, this scares me to be so close to people who really might know better, but who are willingly promoting lies in order to serve some other purpose.  I see now why you say some of the things you say and how quick you are to see through people by applying the test of truth.  Thanks be to God for His saving grace on such a poor sinner.  How I came to be so loved by Him is something He alone knows the answer to.  May Our Lady keep us under her continual protection on our journey back to Heaven, our true home.  Please commend me to the Most Holy Family, Brothers.

 

S…

 

Great quote

 

Council of Laodicea, 343-381, Canon 34:  No Christian shall forsake the martyrs of Christ, and turn to false martyrs, that is, to those of the heretics, or those who formerly were heretics; for they are aliens from God.  Let those, therefore, who go after them, be anathema.”

 

MHFM: This is a great quote.  Even though the Council of Laodicea is a regional (not dogmatic) council – and thus this canon might lack the precision of an infallible dogmatic canon – this shows what the early Church would have thought of John Paul II, Paul VI and the Vatican II sect.  The early Church would have rejected as utterly heretical all those who promote the “non-Catholic saints and martyrs” heresy.

 

John Paul II, Ut Unum Sint (# 1), May 25, 1995: “The courageous witness of so many martyrs of our century, including members of Churches and Ecclesial Communities not in full communion with the Catholic Church, gives new vigor to the Council’s call and reminds us of our duty to listen to and put into practice its exhortation.”

 

John Paul II, Ut Unum Sint (# 83), May 25, 1995: “All Christian Communities know that, thanks to the power given by the Spirit, obeying that will and overcoming those obstacles are not beyond their reach.  All of them in fact have martyrs for the Christian faith.”

 

John Paul II, Ut Unum Sint (# 84), May 25, 1995, Speaking of non-Catholic “Churches”: “Albeit in an invisible way, the communion between our Communities, even if still incomplete, is truly and solidly grounded in the full communion of the saints - those who, at end of a life faithful to grace, are in communion with Christ in glory.  These saints come from all the Churches and Ecclesial Communities WHICH GAVE THEM ENTRANCE INTO THE COMMUNION OF SALVATION.”

 

John Paul II, Tertio Millennio Adveniente (# 37), Nov. 10, 1994: “The witness to Christ borne even to the shedding of blood has become a common inheritance of Catholics, Orthodox, Anglicans and Protestants, as Pope Paul VI pointed out in his Homily for the Canonization of the Ugandan Martyrs.”

 

For many other statements from John Paul II in which he taught this heresy, consult: The Heresies of John Paul II - a comprehensive presentation [PDF].  This file is from our 658-page book, The Truth about What Really Happened to the Catholic Church after Vatican II.

 

John Paul II and the Rosary

 

Dear Brother Diamond,

 

Hello from Québec.  My name is Pat and I'm 40 a single mother of 2 adolescents.

I am a frequent visitor of your web site and once I start reading I just can't like put the book down.  Thank you so much for all the information. 

 

I can see how so many souls you are helping getting on their road to salvation.  This is truly what a disciple of Christ should be doing, fulfiling the promises we took on our confirmation.  This takes alot of courage and wisdom  through the help of God's grace.  Keep it up.  All my life I have known only the Vatican 2 church. I always went to church on Sunday with my family, most of the times with my father.  I have always been drawn to Jesus and the Church most of my life. 

 

I want to get to the point of my writing to you, It has been since October 2005,  that I discovered the truth of why the changes in the Church.  I remember when I was little my father (passed on) asking why all of the sudden communion in the hand. ( My first communion I won't forget it was on my tongue.)  Of course we didn't understand it but went along with it anyways.  I discovered that the Pope I adored and loved was a fake and deceived us all.  You guessed it...John Paul 2 strikes again.  I felt so sad and so full of agony I cried and cried..... Something confuses me about John Paul 2.    What about his devotion Mary and  the Rosary and that event at his shooting when he declared that the Virgin of Fatima saved his life.   Can you try to clear this for me.  I never could find an explanation.

 

I believe all the truths of the True Church - the Catholic Church.  I don't attend the Novus Ordo mess anymore. I tried to tell the truth to my mother and she refuted me several times....we quarelled...she is a semi-traditional catholic. Not in communion with all the truths.  Whether she is stubborn, or the truth is too hard to accept.  I also tried to to warn an adventist I was dating for a few years filled with lots of heartache and division.  I get frustrated because no one seems to listen !!  It's been really difficult and heartbreaking.  You end up feeling lonely and depressed.  Please can you give me some words of encouragement.  Of course I offer it up to Jesus as a sacrifice and my heart feels better.  I have told my 2 adolescents all the truth thank God at least one of them has more faith than the other.  

 

I have been reading about some people seeing visions that might come from hell.   I have encountered people talking to me on buses in the street like they know me.

I always thought angels were talking to me.  Maybe they were not from heaven at all.  I ponder on this now because this happened before I found the truth of the counterfeit catholic church and stopped going to the novus ordo and so on... It's incredible these days we have to be so careful, because when the Devil sees souls called by God, he tries everything to destroy their path which will lead them to Him.  It's really scary.   Hell must be getting too full  !

 

My faith is stronger than before. Lastly, I thought I could share this experience I had with a bad willed priest who refused me communion on the tongue.  He said to me to open my hands and take communion in my hands.  I refused and returned to my seat quietly.  After communion was over, he faced the people and said that communion on the tongue won't be tolerated anymore because of diseases that may be contracted.  I was so angry that I got up and left the church immediately without saying a word..Everyone looked at me.  What a disgrace.!   I hope it woke up some people to stop going to the false mass once and for all.  Since that day I never came back.  I don't have the luck of having a true priest or true mass to attend to but I do pray the mass, pray my rosary, study the dogmas of the faith and morals, the Baltimore Catechism, meditate on the mass at home, and I fast on days of obligation as much as I can.  I feel free and so much better knowing all the truths.

 

Hope to hear from you, whether on your site or in my e-mail inbox and thank you.  

 

God bless,

 

Pat  

        

MHFM: Thanks for the e-mail and the interest.  Regarding John Paul II, it’s a misconception that he frequently promoted the Rosary.  We are extremely familiar with his writings.  Based on research of all of his encyclicals and every published speech he gave since his election as antipope in 1978, we can say that he basically never told people to pray the Rosary.  There is one picture of him walking with a Rosary, which is promoted again and again.  The promotion of this picture, over and over, was a deception of the Devil.  He basically never encouraged people to pray the Rosary.  Also, the entire thing about how “Our Lady” saved him on May 13, 1981 was a huge part of the spiritual deception.  We are warned in 2 Thess. 2 and Matthew 24 about a major spiritual deception in the last days which includes false signs.  That entire incident was a major part of the spiritual deception that built up the Counter Church and Antichrist in the Vatican, which he represented.  So while the Devil had people believe that Our Lady saved him on the very anniversary of Fatima, the Devil had the very same heretic burying Fatima.  For it was none other than John Paul II who released the phony version of the Third Secret and defrauded the world of the true one.  He took the Vatican II sect to new levels of apostasy and fully developed its worship of man in the place of God.  It very well might be the case that the entire event of his shooting on May 13, 1981 has to do with Apocalypse 13:3.  John Paul II had no devotion to Mary.  We prove that he knowingly preached the Doctrine of the Antichrist in the second article in this file: John Paul II (manifest heretic who claimed to be pope 1978-2005).

 

It’s important for people to understand the significance of what John Paul II preached.  Then they can begin to realize that John Paul II was not only extremely evil, but that he knew he was extremely evil.  However, he did do a few things – and the Devil made sure that he did – to make himself appealing to “conservatives” who really didn’t know what he was doing or what the Church teaches. 

 

Also, it should be noted that the Baltimore Catechism contains heresy against the dogma Outside the Church There is No Salvation, as our book on that topic shows.

 

Big Help

 

Hello Brothers

 

I actively visit your web site to nourish my soul and to try and keep informed. I've ordered your videos in the past as well.

 

I live in a hamlet called Oregon House…I do say my rosary daily and other than your web site I have no support group. You are a big help but not to fear, I will keep the Faith.

 

Sincerly

John Garcia

 

---

You have enlightened me to the ways of God. If there were only some way you could reach the starving village children in some godless country and educate them about the loving ways of the Lord, the world would be a much better place. And all the homosexuals running rampant, and the Muslims, if there were only some way you could spread your message far and wide, God would illuminate all those souls who dare follow any other path than that of the Catholic religion. Thank you, you have illuminated my soul, never again will I ever doubt in the Lord.

Bl…

 

Petros/Petra

 

…I believe that we should look at all scripture and realize that Christ spoke of petros and petra (Greek form of male and neuter gender). Peter was complimented for being solid as a rock but if we look at the Greek writings the neuter gender is implied meaning Peter, solid as a rock and on a "foundation" solid as a rock the "My Church will be built". It does not say in any text that Peter was elevated above the other Disciples or imply any other meaning….

 

MHFM: What you have stated couldn’t be more false.  You need to listen to this: The Bible teaches that Jesus made St. Peter the first pope [51 min. audio].  It covers all these points and completely refutes what you’ve said.

 

John Paul II, man of false peace

 

Hi Bro Michael and Bro Peter,

I stumbled on your site by chance and I must confess that you have a well researched site. It was very interesting and I appreciate it. I will save it as a favourite and visit from time to time to get more information. But I totally disagree with you 2 over calling Pope John Paul II an antipope. He may have made some mistakes in his approach to other religions and beliefs by being subtle and compromising but what would he have done if he was to preach peace. the world is filled with so many false prophets and viloence is everywhere. Should the Pope of the Holy Catholic Church be seen as fuelling crisis in the world?  He must set example by extending a peaceful hand to them and by so doing, many religions who have not heard of Christ finally heard the goodnews. If he had done otherwise, maybe he would not have been accepted and the good news would not be shared with these people of
other beliefs.

As our Lord Jesus Christ did, he mingled with the prostitutes, tax collectors and sinners and he was greatly condemned by the pharasees and scribes but it was for these that Christ came. The importance that these other religion give to the church may convert some people there or at least make them to want to understand the nature of the pope and
Christianity in general. I want you guys to pray to the good Lord to strengthen his church. I will also pray too. God has said he would be with his church to the end of time and I firmly believe. Let us pray for there is great darkness and wickedness upon the land and only God know those who would be saved.

Regards,

Nosa

 

MHFM: It’s the job of every Catholic, and especially a pope, not to inculcate false ideas of peace that are palatable to the world, but to preach and defend the Catholic faith.  The Catholic faith is exactly what John Paul II denied by his endorsement of false religions and his promotion of heresies, as proven here: The Heresies of John Paul II - a comprehensive presentation [PDF file].  So for you to imply that he was excused for not promoting the true Catholic faith because he was trying to promote some kind of peace is to reject the Gospel and the Catholic faith.  Jesus said He came not to bring peace (Mt. 10) – meaning that His truths will divide people.  John Paul II was definitely an antipope.  We have proven that.  He was not a Catholic, but a total heretic.

 

Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, Sess. 8, Nov. 22, 1439, ex cathedra: “Whoever wishes to be saved, needs above all to hold the Catholic faith; unless each one preserves this whole and inviolate, he will without a doubt perish in eternity.”

Jamaica

 

Hi, I have been a Catholic for my life, I had joined the St.Benedicts monastery here in Jamaica and later left due to sexual misconduct on the part of our superior and others. Whilst there, i loved the order. Since then i am trying to get back a full taste for serving God through this way of life. I am now married with three wonderful children, but whole heartly want to serve my God through vocation life as a Catholic priest.  Thank you for a reply and God bless you

 

MHFM: Thanks for the interest.  Since you have chosen to get married, you may not become a priest.  You should focus on learning, practicing and spreading the traditional Catholic faith in your present vocation.  What people need to know to do this is presented on our website.

 

Down the heretics

 

Dear brothers and sisters

 

I was happy to visit your web site, now my eyes are open , I was losing my faith until I read your articles,

 

Vive la Catholicish, down the heretics.

praise the Lord,

Bour del Eau

2nd edition of Why the New Mass and New Rite of Ordination are Invalid

 

MHFM: There is a second edition of our video Why the New Mass and New Rite of Ordination are Invalid, which you can watch online here: Watch the 2nd Edition.  The second edition has new pictures and a classical music soundtrack.  It is found permanently on the: WATCH OUR DVDS ONLINE FOR FREE page.

 

Judas in Hell?

 

Dear Brothers,

 

The principal of our 'Catholic' school told the students yesterday that we cannot condemn anyone to Hell and that the Church doesn't even say that Judas is in Hell.

The children had sacrificed some of their own toys which they thought were displeasing to God and used them for a Lenten display depicting Heaven, Purgatory and Hell.  She removed the toys from the Hell section before announcing to the students that some people like 'Harry Potter' and 'Darth Vader' and 'Pokemon' et al.  These toys have 'names' so therefore we can't condemn them to Hell.  The children were very hurt and confused by this action of hers.

 

Do you have any quotes that prove her wrong on her assumption that Judas is not considered as condemned to Hell by the Church?

I know Our Lord said it would be better for him (Judas) if he had never been born.

 

 

A concerned teacher

 

MHFM: Thanks for the question.  What the principal said is Modernism.  Catholics recognize that all those who die as non-Catholics go to Hell.  The great St. Francis Xavier shows how a Catholic must affirm that all those who die outside the Church are definitely lost, as he does in regard to a pagan privateer who died on a ship on which he was traveling.

 

St. Francis Xavier, Nov. 5, 1549: “The corsair who commanded our vessel died here at Cagoxima.  He did his work for us, on the whole, as we wished… He himself chose to die in his own superstitions; he did not even leave us the power of rewarding him by that kindness which we can after death do to other friends who die in the profession of the Christian faith, in commending their souls to God, since the poor fellow by his own hand cast his soul into hell, where there is no redemption.” (as quoted in our book Outside the Catholic Church There is Absolutely No Salvation, section 17)

 

In regard to Judas, one can demonstrate that he is in Hell from these points below and the quote from St. Alphonsus.  They are also found in our book The Truth about What Really Happened to the Catholic Church after Vatican II, in the section on Benedict XVI.  They were brought up to refute one of Benedict XVI’s heresies in this regard.

 

If Judas is not in Hell, then Our Lord’s words in Matthew 26:24 (quoted below) would be false.

 

"Woe to that man by whom the Son of man shall be betrayed: it were better for him, if that man had not been born" (Matthew 26:24).

 

If Judas didn’t go to Hell, then he went to Purgatory or Heaven.  In that case, Our Lord (the all knowing God) could not have said that it is better for Judas not to have been born.  That’s very clear and very simple.  Our Lord also says that Judas is “lost” and calls him the “son of perdition,” which means “the son of damnation.”  Judas also ended his life with the mortal sin of suicide.

 

John 17:12- "None of them is lost, but the son of perdition, that the scripture may be fulfilled.”

 

The Catholic Church has always held that Judas went to Hell, based on the clear words of Our Lord. 

 

St. Alphonsus, Preparation For Death, p. 127: “Poor Judas! Above seventeen hundred years have elapsed since he has been in Hell, and his Hell is still only beginning.[8]

 

New entry in file on receiving sacraments from non-sedevacantists

 

MHFM: There is a new entry in the following section of our website:

 

The Question of whether one may receive Sacraments in these difficult times

*refuting schismatic views in this area

 

The new entry concerns this issue: Some argue that the divine law forbids Catholics from ever attending the Mass of one they know to be a heretic – completely wrong and refuted by St. Thomas and the Fourth Lateran Council.  We have discussed the quotation from St. Thomas Aquinas on this point before, but this new entry shows how the Fourth Lateran Council confirms the true position we have enunciated and refutes schismatic errors.

 

Note: this section of our website deals with finer points and issues which concern those who are more familiar with the traditional faith.  Those who are new to the traditional Catholic faith might not find delving into these questions beneficial at this time; for this file concerns the specific target audience who are concerned with this specific question.

This file is found permanently in the “Where to Attend Mass” section of our website.  It will be updated on occasion, when time permits and additional points come up.

 

Sri Lanka

 

Dear Brother Michael Dimond,

 

My name is Randika Peiris.. I am 23 years old and I live in Sri Lanka I viewed your web site. I t was very interesting. Actually we as Christians gained a lot of trust and faith in Roman Catholic and got an idea about the present situation of Roman Catholicism. To be specific we were informed about the effects of the change of Latin mass from your web site..  There are many people in Sri Lanka who like to watch the DVDs which are published in your web site but unfortunately they are unable to afford these due to financial difficulties.  However the youth in Sri Lanka are willing to know more about the present situation of Roman Chotholic.There fore would I would appreciate if you could send original DVD copies free of charge so I will be able to distribute among the Roman Chatholics in Sri Lanka as the DVDs which are available on the web site is not very clear.   Further I am trying to publicise your DVDs in the national television in Sri Lanka..(Specially the DVD – Miracles and creations)  Your cooperation with regard this is greatly appreciated.

 

Thank You

May God Bless You!

 

Scapular and burial

 

Dear Brother Michael and Brother Peter

In circumstances where the Faithful cannot find a validly ordained priest to bless the Brown Scapular and enrol them for the privileges of this sacramental, should it nonetheless be worn without being blessed and would the wearer still obtain the promises made by Our Lady if worn with devotion?

I would also be very grateful for your advice on what Catholics should do concerning arrangements for the sacrament of Extreme Unction and especially a Catholic funeral where there are no validly ordained priests available or where the priests cannot be approached due to their being notorious and imposing in their heresies (eg the SSPX on salvation outside the Catholic Church). Should the deceased be buried without ceremony and a presiding priest if none can be found, and with only private prayers being said by the bereaved? This is a situation which sadly might confront many Faithful in these times of apostasy and I would appreciate any advice you have to give on what a Catholic should do in these circumstances.

I fully support your defense of the Catholic Faith in an uncompromising and consistent way. Please continue this vital work to save souls and be a witness for the truth.

Best wishes

Gerard

 

MHFM: To your first question, yes; you should wear the scapular even if it cannot be blessed.  The answer to your second question is yes as well. 

 

Baptism of Desire

 

Hello Brothers.

 

I have your book, "Outside the Church There is No Salvation" and it is VERY GOOD!   I have one question, though.  I was told that an earlier Pope issued a statement on the Baptism of Desire, which led many to believe that he was confirming its truth.  I understand that there was some misunderstanding with this, and I would really like to know exactly what it was that the Pope said and why it did not mean that the Baptism of Desire is a truth to be believed by the Church.  I tried to find it in the book, but I'm not seeing this.  Can you help?

 

Thank you and God bless your holy work!

 

Carol Walker

 

MHFM: The things that you are looking for are addressed in section 17 of: Outside the Catholic Church There is Absolutely No Salvation [PDF FILE].  Baptism of desire advocates like to quote a letter which is alleged to be from Pope Innocent II, but the date of the letter is unknown and the author is unknown.  Even if it was Innocent II, it doesn’t meet the requirements to be infallible; but it’s not even clear who wrote it.  The letter also speaks about a “priest” who was unbaptized, which is a contradiction; for no one can be a priest without baptism.  Certainly it’s not infallible, and whether a pope even wrote it is doubtful. 

 

The other statement is a letter from Pope Innocent III.  That letter also doesn’t meet the requirements for an infallible pronouncement.  In fact, it’s on the same level as another letter which Pope Innocent III wrote which is entitled Ex parte tua.  In Ex parte tua, the same Innocent III taught that original sin was remitted by the mystery of circumcision, which was contradicted by the Council of Trent.  But all those points are covered in the book, in section 17.  The point here is that nothing infallible teaches baptism of desire.

 

EWTN heresies

 

Dear Brothers,

 

I'm not sure if you caught this or not --- but EWTN has a weekly show by a Maronite Jesuit in Mitch Pacwa. During his show… there were numerous heresies being thrown around by Pacwa; e.g. that God uses other churches as sources for salvation, praising Protestant preaching, how the Orthodox sects are "true Churches," that Protestants have the gift of faith, etc. all mainly based on the documents of Vatican II. It was sickening. How anyone can support this network financially and be called Catholic is beyond me.


God Bless,

Fergus

 

MHFM: Thanks for the update.  We also have a file on EWTN: EWTN and the Charismatic Movement [PDF File.]

 

Guadalupe?

 

DEAR BROTHERS,


WHAT IS YOUR TAKE ON OUR LADY OF GUADULUPE ?

 

YENC

 

MHFM: It’s a series of authentic appearances of Our Lady to Juan Diego in 1531, which resulted in the conversion of millions to the Catholic faith.  The image of Our Lady of Guadalupe’s appearance, with all of its miraculous features, can still be seen in Mexico today.  The appearance of Our Lady of Guadalupe is one of the greatest things in history.  It’s also discussed in our video Creation and Miracles, Past and Present: WATCH OUR DVDS ONLINE FOR FREE.

 

Justified by faith alone?

 

If Jesus died for the sins of the whole world, and someone accepts Christ as their righteousness, and thus are justified by faith and at peace, why would it be true that only Catholics can be saved? 

 

TC…

 

MHFM: Not everyone who thinks or holds Christ to be their righteousness is justified, as shown here: Justification by Faith Alone refuted and the Catholic teaching on Justification proved by the Protestant Bible [1 hr. 30 min. audio].  You must believe in everything He teaches, which includes accepting His Catholic Church founded upon Peter (Mt. 16:18; Mt. 18:17) and the rest of the Catholic dogmas.

 

The Stripping of the Altars

 

MHFM: We’ve pointed out that the post-Vatican II liturgical revolution parallels what happened to the Mass in 16th century Protestant England.  Here’s a quote from one Roger Edgeworth, who lived during the time, which might be of interest to those who are new to these facts.  It comes from around 1550.  This quote and the one below it show how closely the post-Vatican II liturgical revolution, with its replacement of altars with tables, follows what happened in Protestant England:

 

[NOTE: THIS QUOTE IS IN OLD ENGLISH]: “… no man should see what the priest did, nor here what he said.  Then this way pleased not and the aulters [i.e. altars] were pulled dowyne and the tables set up and all the observaunce saide in Englyshe and that openly that all men mighte here and see…” (quoted in Eamon Duffy, The Stripping of the Altars, Yale University Press, 1992, p. 471.)

 

Here’s another quote:

 

“Hooper’s Interrogatories and Injunctions for Gloucester and Worcester, drawn up in 1551, were even more extreme, requiring the ripping out of any steps or partitions where altars had been, the celebration of communion anywhere except where Mass had been sung, forbidding the ‘decking or appareling’ of tables ‘behind or before’ as if they were altars, and any variation of tone or pitch or voice or posture of body, by ministers or people, which might be reminiscent of the Mass.” (Ibid., p. 472.)

                                                                                                                                            

Desperate search

 

Subject: Lost

 

As I surf through your web site and read some of your articles as there are so many of them, I find myself agreeing with your beliefs.  I am not the devout catholic that I should be.  I do attend mass on a regular basis, but most of the time I leave church with an emptiness and feeling worse than when I walked in as I find myself being critical of what our churches have become, a mockery.  I am in desperate search of truth, knowledge and above all, a true place where I can worship Jesus.  I must confess that I have been very skeptic of our Popes… I live in McAllen, Texas. Is there a true church of God in my area that you know of?

 

Led to Site


You guys are really good and brilliant at what you are doing, figuring all of this stuff out and publishing these articles and videos.  I am a convert to the Catholic faith from a Protestant denomination, all of my life from the time I was little I always had a desire to be a Catholic,a desire which would not leave me it was just always there(a part of me),and unlike alot of Protestants I never had a problem whatsoever with Blessed Mother Mary, matter of fact I always felt drawn to her and thought she is very beautiful(in her statues and images)even though I did not know her like Catholics do,and I was always thinking to myself(while growing up going to this Protestant church)why don't we have Mary?and I could never understand (and I still don't)why so many people always have a problem with Mary,how can you not love,accept,respect and embrace a Lady like her?(I'll never understand)

       So I went through this whole RCIA thing and joined the Church (on Mar,26,05 I was confirmed), or atl east I thought I had joined the Catholic Church until after my own negative experiences that I started getting since joining and being led to your website (after repeatedly bringing my complaints about everything to the Lord in prayers, I asked Him what in the world is going on in the Church?) because I wanted to be a sincere and devout Catholic but it seems there is just nothing but trouble and frustration waiting for people like this in the church(what I now know is Vatican II church/religion through you)now I don't know what to do or think anymore!  Now I don't even know if I am really a Catholic since you write everything is invalid (I was Confirmed in the Vatican II church and Baptised as a baby in the Protestant denomination by a clergyman,and I know what you say about Protestants based on the Catholic teaching) so am I a Catholic or not?(that was my sincere intention,to join the real true Catholic Church and Faith)and then what are we to do these days with all of this mess going on and we want to join the real true faith?

   Here are my negative accounts:(ever since becoming Catholic or so I thought,I have nothing but problems with the Priests and I have to admit I don't like the Priests,they are not good and not holy, they behave more like everyday men then like Priests,I think they are brute and not like a godly gentlemen that I expected ) I was told by a Priest not to even think about the Devil or worry about him,after going to talk to him about my concerns that I was being afflicted in my life,as if not thinking about the Devil/Demons is going to make him /them go away.(I remember thinking the Devil must already have him) another time and another Priest he told me"don't worry about hellfire"during a confession. Another Priest right before confession when I was trying to ask and get a answer to a religious question basically started to verbally assault me(attack!) in the confessional,I was so upset I started crying right in there in front of him and all the way home and I had to walk quite a way home that day and I almost could've got ran over by cars at the traffic light because of being so besides myself and all the tears…

 

I thought we are supposed to admonish the sinner but in the VaticanII church/religion they don't hold to that anymore, it doesn't work, all you will hear is"don't judge me""your judging me""are you Judging me?""who are you to Judge""  … Well I eventually found your website somehow. Let me tell you I never attended that Mass at that church again because I did not want to see that Priest no more!(spreading falsehood) And you are right a lot of those people on EWTN are heretics, on EWTN you here about this Universal Salvation stuff alot on their shows (especially that Fr.Groeschel)… I haven't read very many of your articles yet but eventually will get around to reading them all a few times over I hope. Yesterday I read the one on Bernardine and I have to say the changes to that cathedral are absolutely disgusting! What is supposed to be the crucifix to me looks like a man in a grave buried without a coffin(it's as if you have just opened up someones grave and your standing there looking down into it and onto the exposed corpse of a man buried in that position without a coffin, that is what it looked like to me right away and not like a crucifix at all!) Also no nails,nail marks,wounds,and no feet over each other.matter of fact also no cross to hold him behind him,this is not a crucifix and it's also no resurection,it's a man in a grave because the framing looks like earth,the earth around a grave.(chilling)and the tabernacle thing(gruesome) and the Demon faces in the marble slabs (horrifying and horrendous!,and I really wonder how they got those faces in those marble slabs,I wonder if getting those faces in there involved using some kind of supernatural means/power and not just human........makes you think!) and people that go to that cathedral or belonged to it when those renovations were done weren't noticing and wondering about that stuff?, it's really yuck! Maybe those Marble slabs have real Demons trapped in them somehow(put in there by sorcery)and that's why and how those faces got in there like that,and only if and when they break those Demons that are trapped in them will be released and come out!(sounds crazy,but you never know........) maybe they will fall down from those cathedral walls one day! 

     Anyways let me bring this e-mail to an end, it's a long e-mail I know and I really hope you will be able to read it alright, I just had a lot to say! And please pray for me and keep me in your prayers at the monastery please... Thank You, take care,and God Bless You!

 Sincerely,

           Jan                                                                                                

 

Infiltration

 

Subject: With reference to your item on the infiltration of the Church.

 

Last year I read an article stating that "in the mid 1980's, 1850 homosexual men were recruited by a wing of the communist party to enter the seminaries of the Church." Have you heard of this?

 

Robert Lockwood.

 

MHFM: We haven’t heard of that particular example.  The Novus Ordo seminaries certainly provide the atmosphere of effeminacy and indifferentism that homosexuals are looking for, which is why they flock there, as shown here: The Seminaries of the Vatican II sect are unspeakable cesspools of homosexuality and heresy [PDF File].

 

Now practicing

 

My friend was a non-practicing Catholic and now is a practicing Catholic after watching your DVDs.

 

Julie Austin,

Adelaide, South Australia

 

Unbaptized Saints?

 

The more we listen to your site the more we want your book.

 

We heard a sermon by Bishop Dolan, not the one you critique on your site, where he mentions “canonized saints” (New Testament) not baptized with water.  Saints Rogation and Donation or something?... If there were a non-water-baptized saint canonized after water baptism was instituted by a valid and legal pope that would seal the case for BOD for me.

 

John Gregory

Front Royal VA

 

MHFM: No, there’s no proof that any saint wasn’t baptized.  Our book (which you can get with another book and DVDs for only $10.00) answers the objections and covers the facts on this point.  There is no proof that St. Rogatian wasn’t baptized.  That’s the editorialization of Fr. Butler (of Butler’s Lives of the Saints) and nothing more.  Even in the story he gives, there are many scenarios where Rogatian could have been baptized.  But the key point about this issue is this: the first infallible definition stating that the elect see the Beatific Vision immediately after death was from Pope Benedict XII in Benedictus Deus in 1336.  It is interesting to examine what he infallibly declared about the saints and martyrs who went to Heaven.

 

Pope Benedict XII, Benedictus Deus, 1336, ex cathedra, on the souls of the just receiving the Beatific Vision: “By this edict which will prevail forever, with apostolic authority we declare… the holy apostles, the martyrs, the confessors, virgins, and the other faithful who died after the holy baptism of Christ had been received by them, in whom there was nothing to be purged… and the souls of children departing before the use of free will, reborn and baptized in the same baptism of Christ, when all have been baptized… have been, are, and will be in heaven…” (Denzinger 530)

 

In defining that the elect (including the martyrs) in whom nothing is to be purged are in Heaven, Pope Benedict XII mentions three times that they have been baptized.  Obviously, no apostle, martyr, confessor or virgin could receive the Beatific Vision without having received Baptism, according to this infallible dogmatic definition.  If there were martyrs in Heaven who had not been baptized, they would have been mentioned in this infallible dogmatic definition.  But not only are they not mentioned, it’s expressly mentioned that all “apostles, martyrs, virgins,” etc. in Heaven have been baptized. 

 

Likes Papacy Audio

 

I just wanted to tell you that I finally listened to your audio on "The Bible teaches that Jesus made St. Peter the first pope".  I kept putting it off, because I thought it was something I already knew.  Although I truly believed Jesus made Peter the first pope, I actually never knew why I believed it. 
 
I was able to listen to it when my kids were sleeping, and it was the most wonderful lesson on how the Bible teaches that Jesus made St. Peter the first pope.  No, it wasn't just wonderful, it was beautiful.  I told my sisters to listen to it right away....because it was worth every minute.
 
So, thank you for putting together an outstanding audio.  I am still contemplating all of the beautiful imagery.  I cannot even imagine all of the time and studying you put into that.  May God reward you for a job well done.
 
Teri Thurman

 

The Bible teaches that Jesus made St. Peter the first pope [51 min. audio]

 

New perspective

 

After having received your DVD videos, tapes, and books just over a week ago, it is my purpose in writing to thank you for the large volume of information you have forwarded me.  I commend you for your obvious deep research on the subjects included.  This information has changed my entire perspective of my Christian beliefs... It is with my best wishes that I write and do include you in my prayers.

 

Owen Evers

St. Paul, MN.

 

In India

 

May God bless you abundantly.  I appreciate your service in India as well as over the globe.  We are all praying for your good health...

 

V. Yedukondalu

Kuppanapudi, Akividu, India

 

Life worth living?

 

In one of your videos, you decry Buddhism for believing that life isn't worth living.  By your estimation, what does or would make life worth living?  Many Protestants believe that Christ means to save all who profess His name and accept His offer for salvation.  But Catholics don't believe Christ came to save even all these.  So, if one seeks to be saved by Christ, but, for whatever reason, may not be, what would make that individual's life worth living?

 

Spencer Jeffrey Harper

 

MHFM: Catholics believe that Christ came to save all men (1 Tim. 2:4), but not all will be saved (Mt. 7:13).  Life is worth living precisely because only through living a good and Catholic life can one have salvation.  It profits man nothing if he gains the whole world and loses his eternal soul (Mt. 16:26).  If a person will go to Heaven or Hell based on what he does in life, of course it’s worth it for him to live and do what he should to have salvation!  It’s not like he will do what’s right and lose salvation “for whatever reason.”  No, a person will lose salvation if he is outside the true Church or if he dies in the state of mortal sin.

 

Studying scriptures

 

I asked Jesus to teach me how to live as He would have it.  I have since come to know and understand several things in my heart.  I know that I need to seek Him in His Word in addition to praying the Rosary, going to Confession and attending the Tridentine Mass.  I have never studied His Word before in any diligent way and seek some guidance on how to study the bible.  Could you recommend a book or instructional course for learning how to study the scriptures?

 

Also, how would one find / choose a spiritual director?

 

James

Memphis, TN

 

MHFM: It’s important to have a Catholic Bible.  But it’s equally important to understand the Bible’s actual teaching.  That requires an understanding of the teaching of the Church.  That’s covered in our material, and in a source book for traditional dogmatic teachings such as Denzinger.  This is a good book to have.

 

Grateful

 

Dear Sirs:

 

For the past several days I have been totally fascinated by reading your position(s) regarding Catholicism.  As a result I am very much in agreement with your findings and wish to find out how it would be possible for me to find an acceptable Roman Catholic church located close enough to me for me to attend weekly mass. I have already ordered several of your pieces from the monastery store for my further edification, and am grateful to have learned of your monastery and it's mission on the internet.

 

Yours truly,

 

Richard B.

 

Converting?

 

I was married in a protestant church. I was a catholic but ever since vatican2 i have been confused still no reason for me to leave. Can i still go to confession.

 

Thomas

 

MHFM: You would need to convert (return) to the traditional Catholic faith first.  You would need to accept the traditional Catholic faith with all of its dogmas, and then make the profession for converts from the Council of Trent (which is on our website).  See the section, “The Steps to convert to the traditional Catholic faith (and for those people leaving the New Mass),” on our list of links.  It’s in red about ¾ of the way down the list of links.  After one converts and accepts the fullness of the Catholic faith, then he or she can go to confession.  You should start to pray the Rosary each day as well. 

 

Refreshing

 

Dear Brothers,

 

I ran across your web site… How utterly refreshing it is to see the truth being promulgated…  I CANNOT attend a vatican 2 dog and pony show any longer and will not.  I attended the seminary from 1987 to 1990.  The stories are absolutely true about the rampant homosexuality it is one of the reason I left, and I am glad that I did.  There is much work to be done in the salvation of souls!…

 

Robert Iacomacci

Donalds South Carolina

 

New section on Receiving sacraments from non-sedevacantists

 

MHFM: Below is a new section of our website which refutes a certain schismatic position.  These are just some new points and thoughts which shed light on this issue. This schismatic position asserts that it’s mortally sinful or heretical in every case to receive sacraments from priests who hold to heretical positions or are non-sedevacantists, even if one doesn’t support that priest.  This section of our website will be updated on occasion, when time permits and additional points come up.

 

The Question of whether one may receive Sacraments in these difficult times

*refuting schismatic views in this area

 

Note: this section of our website deals with finer points and issues which concern those who are more familiar with the traditional faith.  Those who are new to the traditional Catholic faith might not find delving into these questions beneficial at this time; for this file concerns the specific target audience who are concerned with this specific question.  Also, for those who are interested in this issue, don’t miss the second entry of this section concerning the quote from the book: The Rise and Growth of the Anglican Schism.  It contains a quote which is important in refuting the schismatic view described above.

 

Pro-abortion Alumnus

 

Dear Dimond Brothers:

 

I read the most recent article featured in your News and Commentary section entitled, “Catholic University Extols Pro-Abortion Alumnus Nancy Pelosi”.  It is interesting to note that Pelosi publicly identifies herself as a Catholic.  However, if you look at her public voting record and family history, it becomes apparent that she is not what she claims to be.

 

Pelosi is 100% behind protecting the Jewish abortion industry, restricting gun ownership, and is an advocate for immigration.  Her children married Jewish spouses.  Pelosi’s husband, also a Jew, is a New York investment banker turned San Francisco real estate developer.  Pelosi’s father, former mayor of Baltimore, came from a family of Argentine Jews.  She is 100% behind Israel, and stated, “The creation of the State of Israel is one of the miracles of the twentieth century”.

 

Pelosi is most likely a crypto-Jew posing as a devout Catholic.  The fact that she claims to be Catholic and supports abortion is perfectly in line (as you pointed out in your article on John Kerry – also Jewish) with the teaching of the novus ordo “church”.  How anyone can remain in the novus ordo “church” and be in communion with these beasts-who-claim-to-be-Christians is beyond me.

 

-John.

 

Testimonials

 

Bro. Michael Dimond,

 

Tonight I was searching through my computer and happened to come across your very well and professionally documented articles...  Thank you and God bless from me and my family in Ireland.

 

Brian Mc Aviaue

 -------

Thanks for the in depth wealth of information.

 

Allen Metzger

Cedar Springs, MI.

 ----------

We have been Traditionalists since 1975.  We thank you for this commitment to tradition.  No where else can we find this kind of education for our time.  We use your DVDs to educate our 11 children and grandchildren in the Catholic faith.  God bless you.

 

Charles Blake

Olathe, KS.

 -----

Dear Brothers,

 

You said that that you have taken a lot of flack over your chapter about the conversion of Russia.  I was prompted to look up in the dictionary the words "destruction" and "annihilation".  I must say it changed my opinion.  I do now believe that you are correct.  My friend insisted that "the annihilation of nations" means the complete destruction like in Sodom and Gemorrah.  So checking that story in the Bible the word destroy and not annihilate was used over and over.  Destroy - to demolish - bring to ruin while annihilate - to destroy the identity of.  So destroy is the correct word for Sodom and Gommorah.  The word annihilate would correctly identify what you describe as to the Baltic states...  I can't thank you enough for helping me in your publications through the maze of so called Traditional groups etc - to know the truth so as to avoid the snares.  You have so armed me that now I can read through their materials and immediately see their errors.  Of course my eyes would be blinded even to your info if it was not for Our Blessed Mother Mary and Her Most Holy Rosary.

 

Kris Peterson

California

 

MHFM: Thanks.  This reader is referring to a section about the actual meaning of Our Lady of Fatima’s words that “various nations will be annihilated,” which is found in this article: The Whole Truth about the Consecration and Conversion of Russia and the Impostor Sr. Lucy.

 

Our Beliefs

 

Hello
 
You certainly have some interesting perspectives on your website! I mainly read some material on the sexual scandal and apostasy. Whilst I am not familiar with the detail, a lot of what was said seem to probably ring true, albeit quite unbelievable that it actually happened. A personal experience certainly lent credibility to your information: - about two years ago I was totally 'gobsmacked' to hear a Catholic Priest (a family friend) say that "God was bigger than that". This was in relation to my question to him regarding the level of distress that he felt about someone close to him becoming a buddhist nun and also being a lesbian. In light of your material I should not have wasted any emotional stress and been totally unsurprised!
 
Whilst I am fully in line with your thinking about endorsement of other religions, I totally disagree with your perspective on Protestant (non Catholic) faiths. I am neither a fan of the Catholic church (I grew up in the Catholic system which sent me off to be an agnostic (athesist?) for more than a decade), nor many of the large Protestant churches. However I do not see why you take exception to any true Christian faith that believes in the Bible and the Lord Jesus Christ but not Catholic dogma. I am curious how you can find scriptural support for the notion that acceptance of the Papacy is conditional to salvation? Likewise, any scriptual endorsement as opposed to condemnation for what I would call a 'dangerous' level of adoration of Mary, Jesus' mother; nothwithstanding that she is clearly 'chosen' and blessed amongst women - I would not argue with that, nor about the supernatural and unique immaculate conception. Note however that in line with protestant thinking, I also believe that scripture indicates a normal marital relationship subsequent to  the birth of Our Saviour.  These issues and others in Catholic dogma truly have perplexed me for some time. So if you have the time please reply and enlighten me.
 
Thanks
 
Yours in Christ

 

Sp…

 

MHFM: You write: “I am curious how you can find scriptural support for the notion that acceptance of the Papacy is conditional to salvation?  It’s covered in this audio: The Bible teaches that Jesus made St. Peter the first pope [new 51 min. audio].  Since Christ set up His one Church upon Peter, one cannot belong to the one Church of Christ without accepting the Papacy.  Regarding the other points you ask about, Protestants are not Bible-believing Christians. Protestants rejects the clear truth of the Bible on the Papacy (Mt. 16:18-20; John 21-15-17), on the Eucharist (John 6), on Confession (Jn. 20:23), on the necessity of Baptism (John 3:5) and much more.  In order to make room for their man-made religion, the Protestants also kicked seven books they didn't like out of Christian Bible – books which had been accepted by the Christian Church for over a millennium.  It’s precisely because Protestantism is not true and biblical Christianity that those who adhere to it cannot be saved.  You need to look that the information in our Refuting Protestantism and Eastern "Orthodoxy" section.

 

Papal Infallibility, late?

 

Dear Bros,

 

I am a fellow sedevacantist, and believe in the one true Catholic religion, apart from the phony N.O., but I have a question that's been bugging me which I'd like an answer to. If I'm not mistaken, wasn't the notion of papal infallibility not "invented" (for lack of a better word) until the late 1800's? If this is so, it seems odd to me that God would have His church go so long before coming up with such a doctrine which seems should have been created towards the beginning of the church. Now it's possible that I'm reading too much into this, or maybe I just don't have my facts straight, but please humor me for a moment. Doesn't it seem awfully convenient for the church to come up with this doctrine at a time when Protestantism was young and the Reformation was in its infancy? It seems like a convenient doctrine to come up with at the spur of the moment to keep people from leaving the church rather than a doctrine inspired by God. Again, I don't doubt the validity of the doctrine, but the timing is questionable it would seem. Your comments, please. Thanks, and keep up the good work.

 

Ds…

 

MHFM: As this audio shows, The Bible teaches that Jesus made St. Peter the first pope [new 51 min. audio], papal infallibility comes right from Luke 22.  It also flows logically from papal primacy.  In other words, there would have been no point for Jesus to institute the papacy (which He clearly did, as proven in that audio), in which one person is given authority over the Church, if Jesus would have allowed that one person to teach error when teaching to the universal Church in a binding fashion; for then the entire Church could be led into error.  So besides Luke 22 and the full import of the power to bind on Earth what is bound in Heaven, which is given to St. Peter in Mt. 16, Papal Infallibility flows logically from the authority over the flock (Jn. 21:15-17) which Jesus gave to St. Peter. 

 

Papal Infallibility wasn’t formally defined until 1870, but it was believed long before that.  You can see the concept in the early Church.  You can see it in the teaching that the Chair of Rome is undefiled:

 

Pope St. Gelasius I, epistle 42, or Decretal de recipiendis et non recipiendis libris, 495: “Accordingly, the see of Peter the Apostle of the Church of Rome is first, having neither spot, nor wrinkle, nor anything of this kind (Eph. 5:27).” (Denz. 163)

 

Notice that Vatican I, in expressing the truth of papal infallibility, said the same thing:

 

Pope Pius IX, Vatican Council I, 1870, ex cathedra:
SO, THIS GIFT OF TRUTH AND A NEVER FAILING FAITH WAS DIVINELY CONFERRED UPON PETER AND HIS SUCCESSORS IN THIS CHAIR” (Denz. 1863)

 

John Paul II and Vatican II

 

Hi

 

I just read your materials on Vatican II and was a bit suprised at you conclusions, though I agree. Why did Pope John Paul II not address the non-catholic issues of Vatican II?

Why did he fail to condemn and correct the error?  Being infallible, Pope John Paul VI, as has been declared by the Catholic Church leadership, how could he deviate from the truth of Catholicism?  Being infallible, why did't Pope John Paul make the truth known about Vatican II to the millions and millions of Catholics who adhere to the Vatican II doctrines, new mass and heretical teachings?  I hope you can provide some insight.

 

Joel

 

MHFM: John Paul II didn’t address the non-Catholic issues of Vatican II because he was in full agreement with its heresies.  He was involved with writing The Heresies in Vatican II [PDF File].  John Paul II was a manifest heretic at Vatican II and prior to his “election” in 1978.  Thus, he never validly assumed the office of the Papacy.  He never had protection in his official teaching because he was an antipope, not a true pope.  You need to read this file: The Heresies of John Paul II [PDF file].

 

Sister Lucia

 

Sister Lucia (1907-2005), one of the three seers at Fatima who conversed with the Blessed Virgin Mary many times throughout her life accepted the Vatican II Popes as true successors of Saint Peter.

I hope that this information helps you to grow closer to Our Lord and Our Lady.

Sincerely in +JMJ,

Roger

 

MHFM: As shown in The Whole Truth about the Consecration and Conversion of Russia and the Impostor Sr. Lucy, the post-Vatican II “Sister Lucia” was not the real one.  The aforementioned file provides the facts to substantiate that claim, but really it’s just common sense.  For instance, the post-Vatican II “Sister Lucia” fully endorsed the completely phony version of the Third Secret of Fatima which was released in 2000.  Anyone who knows anything about the issue knows that that “Third Secret,” which was given to the world in the year 2000, could not have been the real one.  Thus, the fact that the post-Vatican II “Sister Lucia” fully endorsed it as authentic proves, by itself, that she was not the real Sister Lucia.  And that’s in addition to all the other evidence.

 

Another NO “baptism”

 

Dear MHFM

 

Re: NO baptism.  I saw such a baptism about 1994.  It has bothered me ever since. 

 

It happened at the San Luis Rey Mission parish Hall where they were having "Mass".  This man "priest"  dressed like St. Francis but wearing large gold rings on his fingers, entered the church and picked up a naked baby and dunked it ceremoniously into the baptismal font or whatever.  When he lifted the "baptized" baby up, it wasn't even wet.  If he had immersed it so its head was wet, it would be dripping and its hair wet, but it wasn't. 

 

Such a horror.  It's as if the devil is insulting the sacrament by having children falsely baptized in the opposite areas of their bodies.  And you know they have been taught how to properly baptize, even in the NO church.

 

I just had someone tell me that the NO Mass is a terrible mass but still valid.  In other words, this is the Mass that Jesus wants us to attend so we can learn heresy and confusion and watch Christ being blasphemed and insulted, his words of consecration changed… and where we can watch men sin by viewing half naked women receiving "communion" because no one will ever tell them to leave or refuse them their sacrament...

 

This abomination is from the Holy Spirit?  Not even in the best of circumstances, even if their orders were valid, which they are not.  All anyone has to do is check.  They are not.  …I witnessed a Protestant baptism (before my conversion to true Catholicism) that was more reverent and correct than that N.O. baptism and "Mass".  And just imagine sending converts to Catholicism to this so-called church.  They would lose their faith.  My daugher in law got her tubes tied so there would be no more annoying children in her life.  She said she properly went to a priest, a N.O. priest.  Did he tell her it was a mortal sin and that she would lose her soul?  No.  He told her he was from the old school and that he didn't believe in it.  He never told her not to do it.  This is forbidden in the N.O. church, as is proselytism…

 

PM

 

JP2’s nude “Masses”

 

In trying to convince people that John Paul II was evil and not Catholic I sometimes bring up the fact that John Paul II had nude women at his “Masses.”  They always defend him by saying that that’s the way they are in those cultures, that that’s what is accepted in those cultures.  What would you say to that?

 

Wayne Lang,

Hays, KS

 

MHFM: First we would say that a Catholic cannot accept or tolerate elements of cultures which are opposed to faith or morals.  Walking around nude is opposed to decency and modesty.  That’s why the Catholic missionaries, who worked in all kinds of wicked and pagan cultures, always made sure to instruct the converts that they had to wear some clothing.  They would not give them the sacraments if they were not dressed.  Below is one quote which is relevant to that point.  It comes from the life of Padre Jose de Anchieta, who was called “the Apostle of Brazil”:

 

“Truly the Superior would drain the population to colonize Brazil, which, he wrote, is ‘our undertaking and has the greatest number of inhabitants in the world.’  Certainly clothing was needed.  At least one garment in all decency should be available for each new convert to wear to church.” (Helen G. Dominian, The Biography of Padre Jose de Anchieta, S.J. [1534-1597], Exposition Press, 1958, p. 46.)

 

Second, John Paul II not only tolerated the immoral nudity, but allowed this pagan way of acting into the liturgy itself.  That’s specifically condemned as Modernism.

 

Pope Pius X, Pascendi Dominici Gregis (# 26), Sept. 8, 1907, On the Worship of Modernists:THE CHIEF STIMULUS IN THE DOMAIN OF WORSHIP CONSISTS IN THE NEED OF ADAPTING ITSELF TO THE USES AND CUSTOMS OF PEOPLES, as well as the need of availing itself of the value which certain acts have acquired by long usage.”

 

New Audio on Papacy posted

 

The Bible teaches that Jesus made St. Peter the first pope [new 51 min. audio]

 

·         This is a very important audio for people to hear.  It contains devastating and irrefutable evidence from the Bible which proves that Jesus made St. Peter the first pope.  Among other things, this audio covers: the change of Peter’s name; the keys of the kingdom; who is the Rock of Matthew 16?  It’s Peter; Peter’s unfailing faith; Jesus entrusts all of His sheep to Peter; the prominence of Peter’s name in Scripture; Peter takes the prime role in the replacement of Judas; Peter’s primacy in the Acts of the Apostles and more.  This Part 1 contains the Biblical (and some patristic) evidence for the Catholic teaching on the Papacy.  Part 2 (which will be posted in the future) will demonstrate that the early Church recognized the Bishop of Rome as the successor to St. Peter’s authority.

 

This audio will be found permanently in the “Refuting Protestantism and Eastern Orthodoxy” section of our website.

 

Thank you

 

Thank you and may God bless your apostolate for giving us the truth!

 

Ralf Karlsen,

Sweden

 

Sister Faustina

 

To most misguided

How Dare You MISGUIDE Catholics in saying not to believe The Divine Mercy and the writings of Sister Faustina's Diary. I had severe bipolar and suffered. If it wasn't for the dedication of my family and finding and saying of the Divine Mercy Novena I would never have survived it and be a normail and mentally healthy woman today.

May God forgive you misguiding His children who believe the trash you write. The Divine Mercy Chaplet is a Power System for all God's children and I am completely sickened by what I found YOU SAYING ON THE NET to all around the world.

How I pity you who are so blind

Debra Farry   CATHOLIC

 

MHFM: No, you are so blind.  Her writings were on the Index of Forbidden Books prior to Vatican II.  You are obviously not a traditional Catholic, and thus not a real Catholic at all.  All you people care about are people you think are visionaries, not the dogmas of the faith. Sister Faustina's Divine Mercy Devotion is something to avoid [PDF File].

 

Perfect contrition, baptism of desire?

 

Dear Brothers:

I have a question about the Church's teaching on the perfect act of contrition.  I do not hold the baptism of desire theory, but I have always believed in the Catechism's teaching that you can make a perfect act of contrition to remit mortal sins if you cannot receive a sacramental confession in the case of imminent death. Isn't this sort of like baptism of desire in the sense that you can receive a sacrament without the outward sign in certain extraordinary circumstances? If a perfect act of contrition without the outward sign is a possibility for the sacrament of penance, then why not for baptism? They are both sacraments we need to obtain salvation.


Thank you for your time.

Melissa U

 

MHFM: The answer to your question is that we know that a baptized person could be restored to justification by perfect contrition plus the desire for confession because the Church has infallibly taught that this can happen (Council of Trent, Sess. 14, Chap. 4).  But the Church has not infallibly taught that an unbaptized person can have justification by baptism of desire.  On the contrary, the Church has infallibly taught that John 3:5 is to be understood as it is written (which contradicts baptism of desire); that the Sacrament of Baptism (desire is not a sacrament) is necessary for salvation; that the spirit of sanctification (i.e. justification) is inseparable from the water of baptism; that the unsacramentally baptized are not part of the Church; that the unsacramentally baptized cannot be subject to the Roman Pontiff; and on and on.  All of the infallible teachings which contradict baptism of desire are covered in Outside the Catholic Church There is Absolutely No Salvation [pdf file].  So, to give a short answer to your question: the Church teaches one concept but doesn’t teach the other.

 

Heresy of the Week

 

MHFM: If you haven’t seen it this week the Heresy of the Week was posted.

 

Confirmation

 

Dear Brothers,
         
I have recently converted to the true Catholic faith.  I am wondering whether or not my confirmation was valid since it was done in a Novus Ordo church by a bishop whom I have no idea of his ordination date.  If it was not valid, what do I need to do if anything?... Thank you for all of your help!  God Bless you all!                      

 

Jodi

 

MHFM: No, the Novus Ordo “Confirmation” is not valid, as shown here: The Changes to the Other Sacraments [PDF file].  Confirmation is not absolutely necessary for salvation.  Thus, if one doesn’t have a place to receive it (as is the case with almost everyone today) then there is no obligation to do so. 

 

A real Catholic

 

I completely desagree with the ideas written on your web site, although I respect them. A real catholic, which means a real Christ's follower, wouldn't abandone the Church of Christ just because he or she desagrees for a while with what the Church has decided. That's exactly what some eastern churches, Luther and all the protestants did. That's not to follow Christ's teachings about the unity of his Church. On the contrary, a real Christian would persevere within the Church, in spite of not understanding very well the religious decisions taken by its liders. That's to keep the unity of the Church and not attempting against it, as Saint Paul tells us with his epistles. Besides, Christ himself teaches in the Gospel that every decision taken by the Church's liders that has to do with moral or religion is inspired by the Holy Ghost. Therefore, by not accepting and by damning the Vatican II Council reforms you're away the true church of Christ and against it, so you would be considere as some heretics. I hope that this comment should help you to ponder. Thanks.

 

Paulo Hidalgo,

Catholic Layman.

 

MHFM: Paulo, you’re very confused and mistaken.  The men you are following are heretics and outside the Church precisely because they agree with the Protestants and accept them as true Christians.  Here’s just one example: The Vatican II sect's Protestant Revolution: the 1999 Joint Declaration with the Lutherans on Justification [PDF File].  They also teach that they shouldn’t be converted, that they can receive Holy Communion, etc.  Both Benedict XVI and John Paul II praised Luther, as our files document.  You should look at them.  You need to wake up and realize that staying with the Catholic Church and the Papacy is staying with the dogmatic teachings of all the true popes in history.  It’s not staying with men in Rome who are posing as popes, yet teaching a new religion contrary to what all the true popes have taught.  By following them you are leaving the Catholic Church and rejecting the Papacy.  The men you are following have been proven to be non-Catholic antipopes.  There have been over 40 antipopes in Catholic history, and the saints and doctors tell us what to do when confronted with heretics posing as true popes: The Catholic Teaching that a heretic cannot be a valid pope [PDF file].

 

Wow… a NO “baptism”

 

Dear Brothers,

I recently had the profound displeasure of witnessing the "baptism" of a child in the Novus Ordo. I know that I should not have attended, but was somewhat coerced and not as vigilant as I should have been.  The liturgy began normally enough, with the markedly unorganized air typical of the liturgical goings on of this parish. The altar girls, priest, and "deacon" processed out. They began by announcing what was going on that day, introduced the child to be baptized, paraphrased an opening prayer, anointed the child with chrism, then some laywomen read aloud the readings. A man read the gospel. The children are apparently dismissed before the readings, as there was a mass exodus of them from the nave into the narthex, where I imagine they received a watered-down lesson, or something like that. The priest, apparently an ultra-modernist, gave a sermon about repenting and "what it means to him." They then sang some nasty music. There was not one lick of traditional music in the whole thing; tambourines and electric piano, though, were given pride of placement. Then was the offertory, a time for a great many little children to run around making noise and coming up to the altar to put their offerings in a basket. It was at this point (if memory serves) that the deacon and priest walked to the font and began what appeared a typical baptism.

Then what happened I thought VERY strange. Apparently the child wrapped in towels was unclothed the whole time. The deacon removed the baby from the towels, and presented the naked baby to the congregation holding her at about chest level. He then held her behind the back and by the legs, and barely dunked her bottom into the font thrice, pronouncing the form. This was no immersion, this was a mere moistening of the bottom. The water didn't come anywhere near her head, it certainly did not flow on her head. Then there was the typical large amount of clapping as the child was handed back to the parents. I thought I was witnessing some pagan sacrifice; my jaw was probably on the floor the whole time.

The bad music started in again, the priest went to the altar and continued. The vast number of chalices and ciboria on the altar were eventually dispensed to eucharistic ministers (mostly women) who handed the "eucharist" over to people standing in long lines, many of whom proceeded to chew it as though the Body of Christ is merely a cracker of some kind - and indeed in this case it was. Most people didn't receive what is allegedly the blood, probably because they find it disgusting to drink out of the communal cup, I imagine. Those who did were typically small children who seemed to be making an effort to get as much as they could - I saw eucharistic ministers somewhat grabbing the chalices back from some kids... It ended just as it began. The closing hymn involved castanets and shouting "hallelujah!" A truly moving experience… I found this experience quite disturbing. This "baptism" was almost certainly invalid, and how many others like it have occurred unwitnessed by someone who is even aware of the concept of validity. I am baffled as to why it was done this way. I'm sure that this was more work than simply following the rubrics they had in front of them...

My question to you is this: What would be the proper course of action? I intend to write to the NO bishop, though I don't expect much. This did, afterall, occur at what is probably the second largest church in his cathedral city. But, perhaps it will incite a sudden outbreak of common sense, if only for a fleeting moment.

EE

 

MHFM: Yes, you shouldn’t have attended.  There’s no point in writing the heretical Novus Ordo “bishop.”  You should inform those who have care of the child about the necessity of a conditional baptism, if they ever intend to have the child raised in and as a member of the Catholic faith.  But since they are obviously and unfortunately immersed in the Vatican II religion, that’s obviously not their intention right now.  They need to accept the true faith.

 

Honorius “Proof”

 

Proof that Sedevacantism is wrong

Although Pope Honorius I was post-humously condemned for heresy by a general council, the Church does not consider him to have ceased to be Pope, even though he stood accused of heresy during his very reign.  Pope Honorius I was accused of heresy during his reign as Sovereign Pontiff but YET, the Church still considers him to be Pope and during his reign there was NO vacancy in the Papacy.  If you look in the complete list of Popes, Pope Honorius I was the 70th Pope who reigned from 625 to 638 and was not taken out of the list of Popes by the Church.

 

J…

 

MHFM: No, the case of Honorius doesn’t prove sedevacantism wrong.  Your objection is addressed and refuted in Objection 14 of this file: Responses to 19 of the Most Common Objections Against Sedevacantism [PDF file].  It’s also addressed and refuted in Part 3 of this file: A Response to the Attack on Sedevacantism.  Here’s a brief portion of the response:

 

…if you want further confirmation that heretics ipso facto cease to be popes, and that the case of Pope Honorius provides no evidence to the contrary, you don’t have to take our word for it. 

St. Francis De Sales (17th century), Doctor of the Church, The Catholic Controversy, pp. 305-306:  "Thus we do not say that the Pope cannot err in his private opinions, as did John XXII; or be altogether a heretic, as perhaps Honorius was.  Now when he [the Pope] is explicitly a heretic, he falls ipso facto from his dignity and out of the Church..."[9]

In the same paragraph in which St. Francis De Sales (Doctor of the Church) mentions Pope Honorius, he states unequivocally that a pope who would become a heretic would cease to be pope.  St. Francis De Sales wasn’t sure if Pope Honorius was a heretic or merely failed to stamp out heresy; but, whatever it was, St. Francis knew that the case of Honorius didn’t affect the truth that heretics cannot be popes. 

 

Shocked by the Novus Ordo

 

Hello,

 

I don't know how I received  the DVD of four programs in 1…  I held on to it for at least a year and am watching it today because in my visit to my mother in Long Island, NY, I met a man on the train and we had a conversation on the Catholic Church, both of us having come from pre-Vatican II backgrounds.  He mentioned the name Dimond and I recalled that I have the dvd.  

 

Not knowing that there was the term sedevacantist, I used to say that I felt that more authentically I was a "tridentine"  Catholic.  Interestingly, I stopped attending mass just before the novus ordo replaced the traditional mass and when I returned in 1987, it was strictly to a latin mass in NYC (St. Ann's and St. Agnus).  I finally decided to see what the the novus ordo was like and I was shocked, really shocked.  People walked in in shorts; the communion rail was gone; the priest was facing all of us; people touched the host; the genuflection was gone; the only latin prayer--what prayer?--was an "alleluia".  I was horrified.  But the worst part, as MHFM DVD indicates is that all those beautiful prayers and offerings of the liturgy WERE GONE!  Luckily I had my St Joseph Missal to remind myself.  And I still recite the Memorare and Prayer to St Michael to people to display the beauty and humility of those prayers.  I grew up with a protestant  father who was not around much and I knew early on that it feels like nothing is happening in a protestant church; it is like walking into an empty bowling alley.  So seeing what the Catholic churches were like in their new form, I was totally uninterested.  In Minnesota, I am surrounded by the nothingness of these structures…

 

Sincerely,

 

Rosemary Stanfield-Johnson

 

“Jehova’s Witness”

 

Hi Brothers:

 

…what would you advise a lady, whose daughter is an extremely hateful jahova's witness (with 2 hateful kids under 10), to do in addition to praying the Rosary & offering Masses for the daughter's conversion?   The daughter steals Rosarys, demands that the statue of our Blessed Mother be removed from the porch (The mother's owned mobile home is on the daughter's property) & does other more cruel/hateful things.

 

Is it fair to consider any Heretic actually possessed?

 

thanks,

 

john 

 

MHFM: Since “Jehova’s Witnesses” don’t believe that Jesus is God, we would advise her to share this file with her daughter: Where does the Bible teach that Jesus is God?  Next, we would say that she should move off her daughter’s property, if that’s possible.  If that’s not possible, she should ignore and avoid her as much as possible.  To your last question, yes many heretics are possessed.

 

Receiving sacraments from non-sedevacantists

 

MHFM: At some point soon we will be posting some comments and thoughts on the issue of whether it’s ever lawful to receive sacraments from priests who are not sedevacantist or hold a heretical position.  These thoughts will refute some schismatic views being spread in this area.

 

Creation and Miracles, Final Edition

 

MHFM: If you have not seen it, the final edition of our video Creation and Miracles, Past and Present can be seen on our WATCH OUR DVDS ONLINE FOR FREE page.

 

EENS- 1439

 

I read part of your website and found this:

 

Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, Sess. 8, Nov. 22, 1439, ex cathedra: “Whoever wishes to be saved, needs above all to hold the Catholic faith; unless each one preserves this whole and inviolate, he will without a doubt perish in eternity.– But the Catholic faith is this, that we worship one God in the Trinity, and the Trinity in unity; neither confounding the persons, nor dividing the substance; for there is one person of the Father, another of the Son, another of the Holy Spirit, their glory is equal, their majesty coeternal...and in this Trinity there is nothing first or later, nothing greater or less, but all three persons are coeternal and coequal with one another, so that in every respect, as has already been said above, both unity in Trinity, and Trinity in unity must be worshipped.  Therefore let him who wishes to be saved, think thus concerning the Trinity.

 

The Catholic Church was the only Christian church in 1439.

 

So what’s the big deal? Are they not saying in 1439 that to be saved one must have faith in Jesus Christ? And the only church that was teaching Jesus was the only Christian Church at the time the Catholic (Universal) Church.

 

That’s how I see it.

 

          Peter Flood

 

MHFM: Well, that definition does emphasize the point that the Catholic faith, if broken down in terms of its simplest mysteries, is belief in the Trinity and Incarnation.  That simply means that that’s the bare minimum requirement, along with baptism, for one to positively know in order to be saved.  For instance, if you met a pagan on an island who had 3 minutes to live and he wanted baptism, what would he have to know to be baptized, hold the Catholic faith and be saved?  The answer is the Trinity and the Incarnation.  (No person above reason who is ignorant of these mysteries can be saved.)  It doesn’t mean that one can reject other teachings of the Catholic faith and be saved.  Once this baptized person who believes in the Trinity and the Incarnation becomes aware or should be aware of other teachings and rejects them, he becomes a heretic.

 

Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, “Cantate Domino,” 1441, ex cathedra: “The Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that all those who are outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans but also Jews or heretics and schismatics, cannot share in eternal life and will go into the everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels, unless they are joined to the Church before the end of their lives; that the unity of this ecclesiastical body is of such importance that only for those who abide in it do the Church’s sacraments contribute to salvation and do fasts, almsgiving and other works of piety and practices of the Christian militia produce eternal rewards; and that nobody can be saved, no matter how much he has given away in alms and even if he has shed blood in the name of Christ, unless he has persevered in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church.”

 

All who become heretics by rejecting a teaching of the Catholic Church place themselves outside the Church.  So, even though this definition was promulgated before Protestantism began with Martin Luther in the 16th century, it applies to the Protestants just as well.  By rejecting the teachings of the Catholic Church, they become heretics.  All heretics are not saved, as this definition makes clear; and those without the Catholic faith are not saved, as the definition you asked about makes clear. 

 

Terrors of Vatican II

 

Dear Brothers Michael and Peter

 

I am grateful for your website.  Thank you.

 

I was Catholic schooled in the late 1950's and early 1960's just before the terrors of Vatican ll were unleashed upon us all.  I can distinctly remember the near frantic tearing down of our stately old church buildings only to be replaced with bowling alley like ultra-modern sanatoriums. Cold and sterile.  Gone were the Saints!  No more stations of the cross!  The tabernacle shoved into one corner while Our Lady was relegated to the shadows!  All this and more, all in the name of bringing the Church into the twentieth century.  Now we reap what they have sown!

 

As a young boy I loved our Church and our Faith.  As a young man I lost interest for a while.  Later, while I was raising my children, the Catholic Church ,once again, was an important part of our familys' life.  All my children were Baptised, went to Confession, received Holy Communion and were Confirmed into our Faith. My one married child was married in the Church.  Now that I am old I have learned ( from you primarily) that all those years were wasted. What a shame!  Well, the time may have been wasted but not the prayers.  For I am sure the prayers of yesterday have led me to your site today.

 

I must confess that from the very beginning I suspected that something was wrong.  As much as I loved Our Lord, I could no longer make that personal connection that had come so easily in my youth.  I attributed this emptiness to my own sinfulness.  And I am sure that this was a large contributing factor but now I am even more convinced that God no longer resides in this new religion. He is no longer approachable through these new priests with their new sacraments.

 

I have watched your videos, listened to your CDs and read your books and my question to you is: Now What?  I must get to Confession. I must receive Communion.  I must reside in the State of Grace or I will surely be dammed.  There are, no doubt, millions of lost Catholics just like me with a burning desire restore their relationship with God. Yet there are no valid Catholic Priests to administer these Sacraments.  So, I am left with the Rosary and the hope that Our Blessed Mother will intercede on my behalf.  She may well be our ONLY hope.  Pray for me brothers as I will pray for you.

 

Aidan

 

MHFM: It’s great to hear about your interest.  We have guidelines on our website concerning the issue of where to go to receive sacraments in these perilous times.  The options are limited, but there are still options out there for people.  If you contact us, we can help you more specifically with that question.

 

Confused about Vatican II

 

Dear Brothers,

I have recently came back to the catholic faith. There is a lot of hate in the world today and hatred to the Catholic Church. There has been an invasion of liberal ideas and practices that have infiltrated our church. I believe most if not all of these cases are confined within the United States. Regardless of who is pope or not pope we must stand firm together as children of our Lord. The Pope's office is a position of authority. We should have faith that no matter how evil or sinful a man becomes, that raises to the office of the papacy will be able to destroy the church.

The purpose of Vatican II was to refine and stand firm to our traditions and not fall into secular influences. Many people who called themselves catholics became upset because of the Church's position was too conservative and didn't adjust the church to the standards of society. Many of these people disregarded what Vatican II set out to do and took the power of the church into their own hands. We have seen this recently with so-called catholics ordaining women and holding untraditional masses.

Vatican II did change the translation of mass to the common language and this lead to some of the minor changes to mass but it did also effect the Old mass and made members of the church think that if the language of the church can change other disciplines of the church can be changed as well.

EWTN has reached out and spread the word of our Lord to those who were lost. I've listened to several EWTN broadcasts and I have yet to hear one that says one does not have to be Catholic to be saved. They have said those who have not heard the Gospel of our Lord through no fault of their own, but seek the grace of God, Jesus will have mercy on them when they die. This is because it is the Catholic Church's Mission to make sure every Man woman and child here the good news of the Lord if the Church fails this mission a person who is seeking God will not be denied. Those who say they know the Lord but do not hold true to his teachings will receive the judgment they deserve.

Your site and the language you use right now sounds a lot like the language used by Luther when he split from the church. He let the hate and sin of others blind him from the truth. I pray for you brother so that you will not let hate cloud your mind and your heart…. This is not an issue you face alone many see the evil that has infiltrated our church. From what I am seeing is between this pope and the last pope there is a focus on unity. The popes seem to be meeting with these "heretics" and praying with them. Does that mean the pope will allow their influences infiltrate our Church. No it doesn't, but we should keep an eye out and pray for them so that they will not err. What ever is to come God knows and as long as we hold true to what he has taught us we will not be lead astray.

Thank you,
Thomas DiGaetano

 

MHFM: You're very confused and mistaken.  You need to research the facts on our website, such as the clear heresies taught by Vatican II [PDF File], John Paul II [PDF file], Benedict XVI [PDF file], etc.  You also hold an incorrect view of Outside the Church There is No Salvation.  There are no exceptions for anyone; see Outside the Catholic Church There is Absolutely No Salvation [PDF FILE].  To say that there are any exceptions is heretical.  EWTN has indicated on many broadcasts that non-Catholics can be saved, which (as just mentioned) is heretical.  You should also look at this file: EWTN and the Charismatic Movement [PDF File].  Even EWTN’s most "conservative" preachers consider Protestants brothers in the faith, not heretics.  That’s contrary to Catholic teaching, of course.  Also, it’s the Vatican II antipopes who have praised Martin Luther and have adopted his heresies: The Vatican II sect's Protestant Revolution: the 1999 Joint Declaration with the Lutherans on Justification [PDF File].  We, on the contrary, totally condemn the arch-heretic and his heresies.

 

Bind and Loose

 

Good Evening Brothers,

 

I wonder if you may help me out on an issue that I have a hard time explaining when debating the EVILS of the Norvus Ordo Mass, the new doctrine, and all of these ANTI-POPES.  " What you shall bind on earth shall be bound in Heaven, and What you loosen on earth shall be lossened in Heaven"  has been spewed at me from some liberal Catholics and I dont know how to answer them. How would you answer that?

 

Thank you

 

g…

 

MHFM: That refers to Matthew 16, of course, and the power that Jesus gave to St. Peter.  We will not get into a discussion of the precise meaning of the binding and loosing reference (which also appears in Mt. 18 in reference to the apostles), but the short answer is that it’s precisely those dogmas which have been bound which prove that the Vatican II antipopes are not true popes.  It’s precisely because we are dedicated to the Papacy, to the papal dogmas and to the papal prerogatives that we follow what the true popes have taught and reject heretics.  And there is no doubt that the Vatican II impostors are heretics.

 

The Miracles of Blessed Martin De Porres

 

MHFM: Blessed Martin De Porres (1579-1639) was an interesting person.  Blessed Martin was a Dominican brother who was beatified by Pope Gregory XVI and, during his life, was favored by God with extraordinary gifts.  He raised the dead and bilocated.  He also had a special love for animals and was rewarded with favors in this area.  He has often been invoked, especially in Italy, as a special patron to relieve distress caused by the destructive presence of rats or mice” (William J. Kearns, The Life of Blessed Martin De Porres, 1937, p. 112.).  He also raised a dog to life:

 

The procurator of the convent had a dog that served him faithfully for eighteen years.  But now, as the animal was old and loathsome, he ordered him to be cast out.  However, the faithful beast always came back, looking for his master.  Then orders were given that the dog be taken off some distance and killed.  This was done, and Blessed Martin on discovering such ingratitude, as it seemed in his eyes, was moved to compassion and asked that the dead dog be carried to his cell.  He then sought out the procurator and said to him: ‘My Father, why did you order them to kill that animal?  Is that the reward you give him after he has served you for so many years?’  Then shutting himself up in the cell where the dead animal had been placed, Martin knelt for some time in prayer, begging God to restore life to the unfortunate animal if He so willed, and God did not turn a deaf ear to this humble petition.  On the following day Martin’s brethren saw him leave his cell, accompanied by the faithful dog, alive and perfectly well.  While feeding him in the kitchen, Martin was heard to utter these words of sober advice to the dog: ‘Now, be sure not to return to your ungrateful master’s service, for you have experienced only too clearly how little your long years of faithful service have been appreciated.’  It is said that the dog survived for many years, but that he always followed Martin’s warning, fleeing from his old master whenever he saw him approach.” (Ibid., pp. 113-114)

 

Blessed Martin also bilocated, even to Japan.  “… Father Francisco d’Arce declared that an old religious, whose proven virtue made him a reliable authority, assured him that Brother Martin also visited Japan, where persecutions threatened to destroy the Faith, in order to aid the martyrs in those islands” (Ibid., p. 122.).  Blessed Martin made the most of his time: “Brother Martin was a model of industry – his days and even his nights were crowded with activity.  How he found time to accomplish so much good would be very difficult were we not dealing with the life of a saint” (Ibid., p. 22.).  And like all the other saints, Blessed Martin held strongly to the necessity of the Catholic faith and preached it to others:

 

“Blessed Martin [who happened to be of dark skin color] has been teaching his white devotees a great many lessons of inestimable social worth; but he has a message of vital import to convey to his colored brethren.  He points out to them that their only hope for true happiness here and hereafter lies in their acceptance of the Catholic Faith; and that their only true friend is the Catholic Church, wherein they may find a spiritual equality that is based on love of God and not on wealth, education, or social distinction.” (Ibid., pp. 193-194)

 

Questions from Cameroon

 

Hi dear brothers

Peace with be you in the of Our Mighty Lord and Saviour JESUS CHRist.  I am so impressed to read all what you wrote and put in your website. It is really at the same time astonishing and amazing.  I can't believe such revelations are true.  But dear Brothers, don't you think you are too hative in your conclusions? are you sure things are taking place just the way you are describing them? Why are the council; the popes and the doctrine devilishly qualified as you do? please , I am writing from Cameroon; a country in West africa. I am catholic christian and believer.

I sincerely look forward to hearing from you!

fred…

 

MHFM: Yes, we are sure what we are saying on our website is true because it’s not based on our opinion but on the infallible and unchangeable teachings of the Catholic Church.  We cite popes, dogmas and councils.  They are what all Catholics must follow.  And we prove that the Vatican II “Church” rejects those teachings and is therefore heretical.

 

Implicit Desire?

 

Dear Brothers Michael and Peter,   I am interested to know if you have any material stating that the so called implicit baptism of desire is not a teaching of the Church. I of course know that it is a heresy, but I need the material for my son who wants to use it in his arguments with the many people whom he knows  who believe it to be a teaching of the Church, as also for myself to use in refuting the heresy.
 
                          +    Sincerely yours in Christ,   +
 
                                                           Norton Lewis 

 

MHFM: We recommend that you obtain the book: Outside the Catholic Church There is Absolutely No Salvation.  It covers the objections that people bring up on this issue and will equip your son with the in-depth facts he needs to refute denials of the dogma.  It’s quite in-depth because it covers in detail the history of the issue, as well as the many objections people raise.  Regarding implicit desire, it’s proven to be heretical when you iron out what people mean by their use of the “implicit desire” idea.  In other words, you have to question them, and get them to define and explain what they mean by implicit desire.  When they do that it becomes clear that they are applying “implicit desire” to people who don’t believe in Jesus Christ and the Trinity and/or to people who belong to false religions (those “invincibly ignorant” of the Gospel).  The former denies the dogmatic Athanasian Creed and many responses of the Holy Office; the latter is contradicted explicitly by Pope Eugene IV and other dogmatic teaching.  So, their explanation of implicit desire will demonstrate that they are rejecting dogmatic teaching.

 

But people must be on their guard about something.  As our material explains, there were saints who believed in explicit baptism of desire for unbaptized catechumens only.  They were wrong on that point; their opinions are not consistent with the infallible teaching of the Church on that issue.  But those saints who believed in it never applied it to pagans, Jews, etc.  They didn’t apply it to people who didn’t believe in Jesus Christ and the Trinity.  However, in certain contexts, while trying to express their (false) opinion on explicit baptism of desire, they used the word “implicit” to mean “not expressed in words.”  In other words, they might be speaking about a person who knows of baptism and believes in Jesus Christ and the Trinity, but does not express that desire in words.  Their (false) view would apply baptism of desire to that person.  They were wrong, but they were clearly not endorsing the utterly heretical “implicit desire” theory as it is understood today: that baptism of desire can apply to people who don’t believe in the essential mysteries of the Trinity and the Incarnation.  Nevertheless, implicit desire advocates will dishonestly attempt to use those passages, by taking them out of context, in order to promote their wicked heresy.

 

There is also this quote from Pope Pius X in Pascendi.  In the following quote he is denouncing the doctrine of the Modernists.  The Modernist doctrine which he denounces sounds almost exactly like what the modern day “implicit desire” heretics say regarding people who are not Catholics being saved by a desire within them, even though they don’t know of Jesus Christ, the Trinity, the Catholic Faith.

 

Pope St. Pius X, Pascendi (#6), Sept. 8, 19007: “They [Modernists] labor in fact to persuade man that in him, and in the innermost recesses of his nature and life are concealed a desire and need for some religion; not for any religion, but for such a one as is the Catholic religion; for this, they say, is absolutely postulated by the perfect development of life.  Here, moreover, we should again complain vigorously that there are not lacking among Catholics those who, although they reject the doctrine of immanence as a doctrine, yet employ it as a method of apology…” (Denzinger 2103)

 

Devastated by V-2 sect

 

Dear Brothers,

 

I converted to the Catholic Church a few years ago after a long journey to get there.  I had been drawn to the Church since I was a child.  I'm 53 now.  In the past few years I have had a terrible struggle with my faith.  Since joining the Church I have been so disappointed and offended.  I have stopped going, and I thought something was wrong with me.  People have told me that my expectations are too high, but I have been devastated over what I have seen at the Catholic churches I have attended.  I'm offended by the Eucharistic ministers, the altar girls, the people coming to church looking like they are wearing their pajamas or clothes they might wear to a nightclub, the terrible priest scandals, the sanctuaries that look like warehouses or some sort of "new age" temple, and many other things.  The Church has been nothing like what I thought it would be.  Thank you for the DVD's and other materials that you sent me.  They have been very enlightening.  I'm so relieved to know that I don't have to go to the N.O. mass.  I just wanted to ask you if you know of a valid mass or priest in the Jacksonville, Florida area… Thank you.

 

Cynthia Morris

 

Heresy of the Week

 

MHFM: Benedict XVI’s latest heresy is in the Heresy of the Week, which we put up on Wednesday night.

 

Annulments

 

to whomever at MHFM,


I am currently seperated and am seeking information on annulments.  You have so much on your website that somehow I am unable to locate this information.  I have close friends who are traditionalist Catholics who have advised me that I should seek an annulment.  I am not yet divorced and I feel that this legal process could take forever.  My main concern is my standing in the eyes of the Church.  My marriage is not what was intended, how do I go about seeking an annulment.


IK

 

MHFM: Thanks for the question.  Our article on annulments is here: The Annulment Fiasco - The Vatican II sect's De Facto acceptance of Divorce and Remarriage [PDF File].  Among other things, it points out that an annulment is a declaration that a “marriage” never was valid to begin with – it never existed.  Annulments are difficult to prove, were very rarely given, and were only given when there was clear evidence that a marriage had not been validly contracted.  If there is any legitimate doubt, the presumption is in favor of the validity of the marriage.  Since we’re in the Great Apostasy, there is presently no authority which could issue a binding decision that such a union never was a marriage.  But from what is stated in your e-mail, it sounds like you are definitely married.  Just because your marriage was “not what was intended” doesn’t mean that you can do away with it and marry again.  If you exchanged the vows and there wasn’t a clear-cut impediment, then you are married.  You may certainly separate from your spouse for grave reasons such as adultery, heresy, etc., but (based on what you’ve presented) you are not free to marry again.

 

More on Garabandal

 

Dear Bros Michael and Peter Dimond,

 

As a promoter and devotee of Garabandal for more than 20 years here in New Zealand up until about 1999, I present here a few good reasons why people should avoid this false apparition of Our Lady:… Our Lady is said to have "praised' Vatican II, a non-catholic heretical council.

 

Our Lady is meant to have told the girls that after John XXIII, there will be three more popes.

- no comment needed here!

 

About the time of the Cuban crisis (1962) Our Lady is meant to have told the girls "no third world war".( No mention here about a spiritual war which would have been more relevant in these latter times....salvation of.souls being more important than salvation of bodies)

 

A worldwide warning from God to correct the conscience of the world (that's nice, because now we don't have to worry anymore about having to tell all those souls who are on the road to damnation, and warn them that if they remain outside the Catholic Church they will burn forever in Hell ...that will save a lot of hassles!)

 

A miracle to occur at the village of Garabandal to confirm the events at which all the sick will be cured who are present....and Russia will be converted as a result of the miracle.(now that's an interesting one isn't it with Pope Pius XII having already consecrated Russia in 1952… The conditional chastisement if men do not amend...again a physical punishment and no mention of a spiritual chastisement.  Secondary considerations include the absence of the traditional Mass in the daily lives of the seers and at the village church in Garabandal...promotion of the freemasonic jewish Mess.

 

And a few others already mentioned by the MHFM in previous articles on this website.(and Deo volente, this one) St. Joan of Arc and St. Philomena - pray for us

 

David Shone

Auckland, New Zealand

 

New MP3

 

Mhfm,


My computer wont play the audio(no broadband)so ill buy it pretty soon. I noticed ye said ye will have it on the 4th audio mp3 disc comming out soon.(when is soon??),and will the 4th one have more Protestant beliefs explained?? And are ye writing a Catholic Apologetic book?? If so,when will i be able to get it??
Faithfully,

 

MHFM: The 4th edition of our MP3 disc is now available for order here: 4th edition of MP3 disc.  It contains 48 hours of audio programs including all of our recent audio programs. 

 

 

There are more projects coming in the area of refuting non-Catholics from the Bible.

 

How Absurd

 

In regards to your recent article ''SF Mayor to attend V2 ''Mass''.  I would like to mention that in the Diocese of Madison WI.  They just allowed the Latin Mass to be celebrated downtown at Holy Redeemer.  The retired N.O. Priest who was ordained in the old rite was to be saying the Mass this past Sunday.  So I decided to go to the Mass .  When I got there, someone came to me in the parkinglot  & told that the priest would not give me the sacraments due to my rejection of the three baptisms and being sedavacantist and something about  excommunication for going to independent Chapels,  unless I went to confession 1st.  So I got back in my car and left...    So let my get this straight...The SF Mayor, John Kerry and others can receive and nothing is being said against them...but yet I got turned away because I proclaim  One Baptism for the forgivenss of sins...  How absurd!!  

 

SM   Madison WI
                        

Truth found

 

Dear Sir

 

   My name is shebli Geegieh. I was born in Jordan (middle east) from catholic parents. I remember that when I was a kid I used to go to the church where there was an old traditional mass held. and when I became eighteen years old I saw major changes in the mass. they start to sing and to use musical instruments. they change the rhythm, and now I can see women  who are servants in the alter, and women who give the holy bread and the holy wine our lord body and blood to the catholic.

 

   when I talk to the priest in my country regarding that he screams on me. I couldn't understand what's happening. The salvation of non catholic was not a new thing to hear from your esteemed web site that I found suddenly by accident, I heard 5 years ago from my catholic priest. And I wondered at that time why don't I turn to a Muslim and marry four women, since the salvation is guaranteed !!! I'm 27 years old and I didn't went to the confession chair, nor taking the holy mass. for I couldn't find one good holy catholic priest.

 

I want to thank the lord for the Truth that revealed to me through your website. and I would like to thank you also. Also I would like to take your permission to translate some of your books to the Arabic language. And I'm sure that the lord will be with us. since we work for the glory of his name.

 

Kindest regards

 

shebli

 

Catholic vs. Protestant missionary work

 

MHFM: In the lives of Catholic missionaries and saints who were active in the new world after its discovery (especially those active among native peoples), it’s interesting to note the contrast between the efforts (and successes) of Catholics to convert people to the true faith and the lack of efforts by Protestants to convert people to their heretical version of the Gospel.  The following quote, coming from a Protestant, is interesting:

 

The Protestant historian Prescott, in the History of the Conquest of Peru, calls our attention to the zeal for the spread of Christianity that actuated even ruthless conquistadors and to the unselfish character of the pioneer [Catholic] missionaries: ‘The effort to Christianize the heathen is an honorable characteristic of the Spanish Conquest.  The Puritan [i.e. Protestant]… did comparatively little for the conversion of the Indian, content, it would seem, with having secured to himself the inestimable privilege of worshipping God in his own way.  Other adventurers who have occupied the New World have often had too little regard for religion themselves to be very solicitous about spreading it among the savages.  But the Spanish missionary, from first to last, has shown a keen interest in the spiritual welfare of the natives.  Under his auspices, churches on a magnificent scale have been erected, schools for elementary instruction founded, and every rational means taken to spread the knowledge of religious truth, while he has carried his solitary mission into remote and almost inaccessible regions, or gathered his Indian disciples into communities…’” (quoted by J.C. Kearns, The Life of Blessed Martin De Porres, 1937, pp. 10-11.)

 

V-2 changes

 

I don't know where to go.  My name is Cindy and I was baptized in the Catholic church in 1959.  My father stopped attending Mass when they brought in guitars and a priest who told jokes.  He had several arguments with family members that Mass was not the same and he was not going to attend anymore.  My Aunt said the changes were made by the Pope and that he is infallible and my father was committing mortal sin by not going to Mass anymore.  I have gone to Mass on and off since then and it gets creepier and creepier.  While in college, I went to different churches...mostly protestant and found that the service was much like mine.  The only difference I saw was that the minister could marry. 

 

I've read several things on your website about Mass being invalid.  Does this mean that the sacraments I've received are invalid as well?  I've had my daughters baptized in the church too and after reading your website I feel I am doing them a great disservice.

 

What is someone to do that wants to be a Catholic but can't stomach the changes that have been made?  I really need to know.

 

Sincerely,

 

Cynthia

 

MHFM: The New Mass is invalid, as covered in The Invalid New Mass [link to section].  The New Rite of Ordination is also invalid, as covered in Why the New Rite of Ordination is Invalid [PDF File].  As far as the other sacraments go, they are covered in The Changes to the Other Sacraments [PDF file].  This last file points out that anyone can validly baptize.  Thus, there’s no reason to conclude that your daughters haven’t been baptized, unless the person who baptized them drastically altered the matter or form or didn’t intend to baptize them (which would be extremely bizarre).  Our website explains what people need to do, and people can call us as well for more specific information if they’re in full agreement.

 

Astounded

 

Dear Most Holy Family Monastery: Do you issue a newletter currently?  If so, please send details.  Came across your website quite by accident and am astounded to read your articles!

 

Converted to Roman Catholicism about 7 years ago....am at a loss now!!  Your articles sure make sense and read them avidly!!

 

MAX EDELSON            MANY THANKS!!!

 

MHFM: Our newest updates and the newest items we offer are all posted on the website, so we encourage you to come back to it frequently.  But if you haven’t already, we would also strongly recommend that you obtain our DVD special offer which includes 6 DVDs (with 10 different programs), as well as 3 important books (including our 610-page book with 200 color photographs), an audio disc (with 20 hours of programming) and flyers for only $10.00 (no shipping charge in U.S.).

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        

Born-Againism

 

Subj: Please help, I’m losing the faith

 

Mhfm,

I need help.I believe what you teach but recently i feel that im turning to ''born-againism''.Ive recently seen some,um i think ye call them ''Gospel'' channels in America,well the christians on them seem so devoted to the Bible and they seem to have the Holy Spirit pouring out of them.Ive tried to defend Catholic teaching on bebo against born-again christians but they seem stronger,and im starting to think that theres a reason why??-i really cud do with help here because once again-a believe that Jesus founded one church not many-i would greatly appreciate if ye did that book on Protestantism that ye were talking about.  My main concern is really Mary.I mean why do we need to go to Jesus through her??I mean she is just a women,she didnt die on the cross.Ive read ''true devotion'' and to be honust it didnt really help.  I guess i could do with yer prayers and help.Perhaps alot of talks on different issues??  Actually,i was trying to prove that Mary was a perpetual virgin yesterday,and how brothers really means cousins,or family members.Then the Protetant siad ''how come we know Mary and Elizabeth were cousisns??'' and theres other places where the word cousin is used 2.

Yours faithfully,
Michael.

 

MHFM: We would recommend that you listen to this audio, which shows that “born-againism” is not true biblical Christianity: Justification by Faith Alone refuted and the Catholic teaching on Justification proved by the Protestant Bible [1 hr. 30 min. audio].  Also, you need to pray the Rosary and stop watching the heretical channels.  It’s poisonous to listen to heretics in that fashion.  It’s like hearing the Devil’s message.  The Holy Spirit is not pouring out of them; their religion is not remotely biblical.  Not only do they reject the clear teaching of the Bible on salvation/justification, but the Papacy (Mt. 16) and all the rest.  Their apparent devotion to God is unfortunately just a matter of externals and it lacks a true and pure intention to follow God’s law and truth.  It’s all about community and experience and making people feel good, but not about the truth.  When examined, you would discover that about 100% of those people you think are dedicated not only commit clear cut mortal sins (e.g. contraception, etc.) besides their heretical beliefs, but also hold that those who commit such mortal sins can be saved.  Don’t be deceived, and shut the spiritual poison out of your mind.

 

Contra Adultery

 

MHFM: In the book The Vatican’s Exorcists, which discusses certain cases of demonic possession, there’s this interesting quote.  It reminds us of the malice of adultery and mortal sin.

 

There’s the case of “a thirty-five-year-old woman, an accountant with significant responsibilities at a commercial firm, who suddenly became overcome with asthma-like suffocation every time she attempted to enter a church.  Her trouble began when she entered into an affair with her boss, who practiced black magic…” (Tracy Wilkerson, The Vatican’s Exorcists, 2007, p. 62.)

Baptizing a new convert today

 

MHFM: We’re happy to announce that we will be baptizing a new convert to the traditional Catholic faith today (Monday, Jan. 7).  He’s 40 years old.

 

Death and the Journey Into Hell, 2nd edition

 

MHFM: The 2nd edition of our Death and the Journey Into Hell video is available on our website; it has a classical music soundtrack throughout.  (The audio quality of the online version will not, of course, be as good as the quality on the future DVD.)  You can watch it on our WATCH OUR DVDS ONLINE FOR FREE page.

 

Interregnum

 

Hey Brothers,


Quick question. I was wondering at what point in history was the three year period without a pope. In between what two popes.
Thanks


Nate P.

 

MHFM: The longest papal interregnum (before the Vatican II apostasy) was between Pope St. Marcellinus (296-304) and Pope St. Marcellus (308-309).  It lasted for more than three and a half years.[10]

 

Who’s Amazed

 

I am amazed at the irony of your website. And I am sorry you dishonour the name of the most Holy Family, especially Our Lady, who is always obedient to the Pope and the authority of her Son's Church. (And it HAS ecclesial authority in Jesus' name, whether you like what it decides or not). To call an authentically elected Pope such as Benedict a heretic is scandalous. To publicly declare it, doubly so! The Spirit leads the Church into all truth. The early Church and previous popes were for their time. THe Church GROWS through history as new things are revealed to it by the Spirit. To denounce Vatican II, a valid ecumenical council, is to sin against the Holy Spirit. May God have mercy on you for your website and your disobedience to Church authority and your assurance that most catholics are going to hell!! How arrogant! Only God knows who is going to hell, and then only at the point of their death! "Do not judge, lest you be judged!" Or do you not accept Scripture either? Do you not see the hypocrisy in your site? I pray for enlightenment and humility for you and all so-called "traditional Catholics" with all sincerity. The only "traditional Catholics" are those that continue to accept apostolic tradition and Church authority! "Outside the Church there is no salvation" is one of your topics! Well then, come back inside and submit in humble obedience to your Pope! Come back to the "most holy family" of the Church that Jesus promised would not be led into error. For all your good intentions and fine sounding arguments, I am convinced that Satan has you in his pocket! Be humble enough to realise this! There is no conspiracy! The Pope IS Petrus!

Yours in Christ...

A concerned Catechist and student of Catholic theology

 

MHFM: We’re amazed at your blindness.  It’s truly amazing that you can be so blind to deny what’s documented and irrefutable (e.g., in The Heresies of Benedict XVI [PDF file]), that Benedict XVI completely rejects many Catholic dogmas (including the Papacy).  It’s amazing that you can be so blind that you fail to see that, by any traditional Catholic standard, Benedict XVI is a public heretic against the Catholic faith.  You obviously don’t have even a basic concept of what constitutes fidelity to the Catholic faith.

 

This is Benedict XVI with the “Orthodox” schismatic patriarch of Constantinople, Bartholomew, in Nov. of 2006.  They signed a joint declaration which declares that the schismatic leader is a “pastor in the Church of Christ,” even though he rejects the Papacy, Vatican I, etc.  Benedict XVI thereby denied that the Papacy is a dogma which must be believed to be part of the Church of Christ, thus making Benedict XVI a public heretic.

 

No Mass or priest in Malaysia

                                                                             

Dear Brothers,

 

My name is Dominic.  I am 62 and a cradle Catholic. I live in Malacca, Malayisa (a small Muslim country in South East Asia). The Catholic Churches here are 100% Novus Ordo and so are all the priests. I am not sure whether there are any priests ordained before 1969.

       

Since the new mass is invalid I cannot attend any mass offered in these churches.  This means that I have no way of fulfilling religious obligations, including confessions.  There is no way for me to know whether the novos ordo priest will say the words of absolution,  as mentioned by you.  I have not been attending Mass for quite sometime now.  Please advise me on the course of action I should take to fulfill my Catholic religious obligations.  Thank you.

       

May God Bless Your Good Works.

 

Dominic.

 

MHFM: It’s good to hear about your interest, Dominic.  As our material explains, there’s no obligation to attend Mass if the Church doesn’t provide you with a fully Catholic one in your area.  Since all you have is the invalid New Mass, you obviously have no obligation to go anywhere and you should just stay home.  As far as confession goes, just look for a priest ordained in the Eastern Rite (e.g. a Ukrainian priest, but not “Orthodox”) or a priest ordained prior to 1968 who can say the proper words of absolution.  If you cannot find one of those, then just continue to pray the Rosary (15 decades each day if you can) and make an act of contrition with the intention to go to confession when you can.  The Church teaches that perfect contrition with the desire to go to confession can restore a person to the state of grace (if he’s lost it) prior to sacramental absolution.  And if you ever travel, then we’re sure that, at that point, you can find some priest who can hear your confession.  Also, make sure you accept without compromise all the dogmas of the traditional faith and that you reject all the modern heresies (as discussed on our website) and that you make the Profession of Faith from the Council of Trent (also on our website).

 

Thank you

 

I greet you in the name of our Lord.

Happy new year.

I thank the Most Holy Monastery community for the good work your doing to help the people understand our religion more.

I have printed out many copies on how to pray a rosary, i will distribute them to my people so that we can be serious on praying the Rosary.

God Bless you

Regards

Kigambo Juliet

 

Heretical relatives

 

Dear Brothers,

 

Here is a tough choice and I inquire your opinion.

 

I was released from prison and recently a halfway house in August. While at that halfway house I befriended a man who opened my eyes to the truth that the Novus Ordo I had belonged to my entire life was a false religion, not the true Catholic faith, and I now hold true to the sedevacantist position, having done a ton of research on the matters.

 

The few people I care the most about in my life, my mother, brother, and sister, refuse to listen to me attempt to tell them the truth of what's going on. I've tried for 3 straight months to get my mom to quit the N.O. but she refuses and downright gets angry at me for bringing it up at all any more.

 

I love my mom and other family members dearly, and am desperate for them to see the truth. But despite my best efforts, it's falling on deaf ears. I read in an e-exchange recently that the (true) Catholic faith forbids us to hold company with anyone who doesn't accept the church's teachings inviolate. Well, am I supposed to cut off all communication with my mother, brother, sister? If so, that's asking the biggest sacrifice I will ever have to make. Not only would it break their hearts, it happens that I am living in a house my mom bought for me to live in since I got out of prison. She has been the only one who gives a darn about me in my life and I'm supposed to leave the home I'm living in that she has provided me with and go live God knows where, perhaps even go homeless? I have no where else to go. Also considering the nature of the crime I had committed, I can't just go live anywhere, even if I did find someplace else to live. Is there no exceptions??? Can't I continue contact with my beloved family AND CONTINUE TO TRY TO CONVERT THEM?? At what point do we give up on people who are obstinate in leaving the novus ordo?

 

I know this was a long email, but I need the help very much. Thanks.

 

MHFM: We think that the E-Exchange you’re referring to was in the context of giving Christmas gifts to heretics.  That’s not something you could do, since it gives them the false impression that they celebrate Christmas as Christians.  In your situation, you should cut of religious communication with those family members your speaking about; you shouldn’t do things which give them the impression that they are of the true faith.  Don’t say grace with them or the rosary, etc. 

 

But you don’t have to leave the house which your mom bought.  Similarly, if a person lives with his non-Catholics parents or a non-Catholic sibling, then he/she can have normal interaction with them, just not religious communication.  However, since you’re mom is very obstinate and you’ve already tried to convert her many times, you don’t need to (and probably shouldn’t) bring it up anymore unless she brings something up in that regard or a matter has to be addressed.  Titus 3:10 says that one should avoid the heretic after the second rebuke.  In your case, that would just mean cutting off religious communication.  

 

Bayside, Vatican II, denouncing priests

 

I hope you don't mind a question.  I'm sincere in this, I'm confused and don't know.  My search originated with whether the apparition at Bayside, New York was approved by the Catholic Church and this is how I ended up at your site.  Before, I let myself be drawn into any articles I saw on other sites about prophecies from there and so forth.  From there I started reading a little about Vatican II, (which I see all over other sites as well) and a picture of people worshipping the Pope as the Christ and so forth.

Ok, this is my question.  All this Vatican II stuff, which I am still trying to understand may very well all be true.. Personally, as I said, I am still looking into it and trying to understand it.  One thing stands out in my mind.  In the Pieta prayer book, you read that it was revealed to Mutter Vogel that you should never attack a priest but pray for them, because they are the Vicar's of Christ on Earth.  This apparently was a directive from Our Lord.  So then shouldn't we just pray for Our Pope, Our Church and Our priests and not paint them in a bad light?

Thats my question,

Sincerely I'm curious of your answer,
Roxane

 

MHFM: First, Bayside was not approved by the Catholic Church; it’s followed by members of the Vatican II (false) Church.  The Message of Bayside contains heresies, which shows that it’s false.  See those heresies here: The False Apparitions at Bayside, NY [PDF File].  If you’re reading on Vatican II, you want to start here: The Heresies in Vatican II [PDF File] It’s the most in-depth document on the many heresies in Vatican II.  Regarding the Mutter Vogel “revelation” in the Pieta booklet, we’ve discussed it before.  It’s clearly a false message from an evil spirit.  To say that a priest should never be attacked or criticized is contrary to justice and all of Catholic tradition.  That would mean, for instance, that the worst heretics in the early Church (most of whom were bishops and thus priests) should never have been denounced and attacked.  Yet, the saints, fathers and councils attacked these heretics and evil men with vigor in order to defend truth, expose lies and teach souls.  It was necessary.  One of the most famous examples of this concerns the 5th heretic Nestorius.

 

On Christmas Day in the year 428, Nestorius denied that Mary was the Mother of God from his pulpit.  A simple layman named Eusebius stood up and protested the public heresy.  This resulted in the Catholics of Constantinople breaking communion with their bishop, Nestorius; for they recognized that since he was a public heretic, he had no authority in the Church: he lost his office automatically.  They even chanted: “An emperor we have, but no bishop.”  This reaction was praised by councils and popes, as we see described below.  Notice that Pope St. Celestine says that Nestorius had no power to excommunicate after he began to preach heresy.  This confirms that heretical bishops lose their offices ipso facto (by that very fact) when they become heretics.  And this teaching on the loss of Episcopal office due to heresy applies precisely to the manifestly heretical “bishops” of the Vatican II sect: they have no authority and are outside the Catholic Church, even though they hold the buildings and possess the putative authority of a diocese.

 

Dom Prosper Guéranger, The Liturgical Year, Vol. 4 (St. Cyril of Alexandria), p. 379: “It was then that Satan produced Nestorius… enthroned in the Chair of Constantinople… In the very year of his exaltation, on Christmas Day 428, Nestorius, taking advantage of the immense concourse which had assembled in honor of the Virgin Mother and her Child, pronounced from the Episcopal pulpit the blasphemous words: ‘Mary did not bring forth God; her Son was only a man, the instrument of the Divinity.’  The multitude shuddered with horror.  Eusebius, a simple layman, rose to give expression to the general indignation, and protested against this impiety.  Soon a more explicit protest was drawn up and disseminated in the name of the members of the grief-stricken Church, launching an anathema against anyone who would dare say: ‘The Only-begotten Son of the Father and the Son of Mary are different persons.’  This generous attitude was the safeguard of Byzantium, and won the praise of popes and councils.  When the shepherd becomes a wolf, the first duty of the flock is to defend itself.’”


 

Heresy of the Week

 

MHFM: Sorry for the delay in the Heresy of the Week; it will be posted soon. 

 

Some popes?

 

Strict adherence to church doctrine is great! I am only 43 and ,of course, was born after the 2nd Vatican council. I am also a Catechism teacher at my church. My question is why do you follow changes Popes have made but not the changes made at the 2nd Vatican council? Why do you accept the papal infallibility of some Popes but not all Popes? What causes some Popes to be Anti-Popes? Thanks for your time.

Tom

 

MHFM: All the popes from St. Peter to Pius XII (not including, of course, the 40 or so antipopes who at different times claimed to be popes but weren’t) taught the same Gospel and the same traditional Catholic faith.  All the popes held the same views toward non-Catholic religions, the members of non-Catholic religions, etc.  The Catholic Church teaches that to depart from the Catholic faith is to cease to be a member of the Church.  If one is a priest or a bishop or even a “pope,” the person not only loses membership in the Church when departing from the faith (i.e. when becoming a heretic), but also loses any authority in the Church.   If that person had been elected pope, he would cease to be pope.  See this file:  The Catholic Teaching that a heretic cannot be a valid pope [PDF file]. 

 

If the person departed from the faith prior to the papal election (as did John XXIII, etc.) the election itself is invalid, as the aforementioned file also documents from the teaching of Pope Paul IV and his bull Cum ex apostolatus officio (1559).  So we know, by the very fact that John XXIII, Paul VI, John Paul I, John Paul II and Benedict XVI are heretics, that they possess, according to Catholic teaching, no authority in the Catholic Church whatsoever (since they are outside of her). 

 

To say that these men do have authority is not to be obedient to popes.  It is to be obedient to those who, according to Catholic teaching, are heretical non-Catholic antipopes who must be rejected.

 

Consecration of Russia

 

I did read all four volumes of Frère Michel's book, the whole Truth About Fatima, which was pretty compelling.
 
None of Fr. Alonso's material has been permitted to be printed.  He was even more thorough.
 
If Our Lady REQUESTED that the consecration be made in conjunction with all the bishops of the world on the same day, that's what she wanted.  Nobody in their right mind disregards their Mothers requests.
 
So what's the Dimond Brothers' point?

 

P

 

MHFM: First of all, Frere Michel’s work is three volumes, not four.  Secondly, the point is explained in detail in the article: The Whole Truth about the Consecration and Conversion of Russia and the Impostor Sr. Lucy.   Our Lady never promised that Russia would be consecrated with all the bishops.  From the article:

 

But didn’t Our Lady promise that Russia would be consecrated in union with all the Bishops of the world?  No!  This is a key point.  Our Lady requested that Russia be consecrated in union with all the Bishops of the world, but on July 13 she only promised that “In the end my Immaculate Heart will triumph.  The Holy Father will consecrate Russia to me, and it will be converted and a certain period of peace will be granted to the world.”  Notice that Our Lady didn’t promise: “The Holy Father and all the Bishops will consecrate Russia to me…”  Further, heaven revealed that the actual fulfillment of the consecration of Russia would not be fully in accord with heaven’s original wishes; for instance, it would be “late” (more on this in a bit).

 

Heaven also revealed that the actual consecration would, in the end, give only a “certain” period of peace, as opposed to the unqualified “period of peace” which was promised if her requests were completely fulfilled.  Thus, this is another indication that the actual fulfillment of the consecration would not be in full conformity with her original requests (e.g. not with all the bishops, etc.), yielding only a “certain” period of peace.  The article explains this.

 

Garabandal

 

Hello, I am confused as to the indignities perpetrated to the 4 young girls at Garabandal.The walking backwards, the sand in the eyes etc...Why was this necessary ? What are your views on the Apparitions there ?.... I dont see any mention of Garabandal on your website....regards,

 

Lee Alexander ...........

 

MHFM: We’d like to study Garabandal more, but based on what we do know, there are some problems.  The children had the vision while stealing apples; the walking backwards is problematic (as you mentioned), and there is another seemingly positive reference to the Second Vatican Council in the messages.  So for those reasons we don’t believe it.  There’s also the fact that the message stresses a “great warning” and a world-wide physical chastisement, when the real chastisement is spiritual.  It seemed to direct people away from the spiritual aspect and on to the physical chastisement, at the very time when the great spiritual deception of the Vatican II sect was getting underway.  It also promised people a warning and worldwide illumination, which contradicts the Bible’s teaching that the last days will be as the days of Noe (Mt. 24:37).  And not even when Our Lord came was every person given a personal “warning.”

 

Liked book

 

Praised Be Jesus Christ!

           

Dear Most Holy Family Monastery,

 

I just listened to the May 10 radio program and it was great. I heard that you might do a book for refuting protestantism. This would be very helpful. I don't like to use Vatican II friendly material. Please do this. I will pray for you on the project. Thanks and May God Continue to bless you

           

 

 Tom

 

MHFM: Thanks, we plan on doing more in-depth things relating to Protestantism.

 

Protestant rejection of the Eucharist

 

MHFM: Many Protestants are familiar with the writings of the famous early Christian bishop and martyr, St. Ignatius of Antioch (approx. 35-110 A.D.).  Along with some others, the epistles of St. Ignatius are a staple in every collection of the very earliest extra-biblical authentic Christian writings.  These fathers of the Church (and their writings) were so early in the Church that they are called “the apostolic fathers,” because they were early enough to have had contact with the apostles.  (These writings come from the end of the first century to the first half of the second century).  St. Ignatius was the third bishop of Antioch and was taught by the apostle St. John.  Here’s what St. Ignatius says about a group of heretics and the Eucharist:

 

St. Ignatius of Antioch, Epistle to the Smyrnaeans [ca. A.D. 110.], Chapter 7: “They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they confess not the Eucharist to be the flesh of our Saviour Jesus Christ, which suffered for our sins, and which the Father, of His goodness, raised up again. Those, therefore, who speak against this gift of God, incur death in the midst of their disputes. But it were better for them to treat it with respect, that they also might rise again. It is fitting, therefore, that you should keep aloof from such persons, and not to speak of them either in private or in public, but to give heed to the prophets, and above all, to the Gospel, in which the passion [of Christ] has been revealed to us, and the resurrection has been fully proved. But avoid all divisions, as the beginning of evils.”

 

Is it not mind-boggling that Protestants and Protestant scholars, many of whom regard St. Ignatius as a great early Christian and are well aware of his writings, can read something like this (in conjunction with the overwhelming evidence in Scripture: John 6, the other fathers of the Church, etc.) and still fail to see that the Catholic teaching on the Eucharist is the true Christian teaching?  Bad will is truly a horrible thing.

 

Extreme Unction – dilemma and basis?

 

I've a Catholic friend dying at a VA hosp..  His Prot. wife switched to N.O. years ago thinking she's now Catholic.   She claims Bill received the last Rites which isn't possible W/O a real Priest.

 

Would you please email me (or tell me where to find the info.) the basis for Extreme Unction.  I'll mail the info. to her hoping she'll allow me to try to find a Priest near them in PA. to see Bill while there's a chance he'll be lucid.  Unfortunately he stayed in the N.O.

 

They've both been devout to the Rosary.

 

through JMJ,

 

dave

 

ps:  She told my wife, by phone, that when they called for a Priest, at the recent death of their son, that a N.O. minister arrived (at the hosp.) for 5 min. & left when they asked the minister to pray the Rosary with them.  The N.O. minister said she (Bill's wife) could do it and then immediately left.

 

MHFM: The Biblical basis for the Sacrament of Extreme Unction comes from James chapter 5.

 

James 5:14-16: “Is any sick among you?  Let him call for the elders [i. e., priests] of the church; and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord. And the prayer of faith shall save the sick, and the Lord shall raise him up, and if he have committed sins, they shall be forgiven him.”

 

If these people claim to be Catholics, you shouldn’t need to give them proof for the Sacrament of Extreme Unction.  They should already know that it’s one of the seven sacraments!  If we are understanding your e-mail correctly, it’s problematic that they seem to be requiring proof for something that every adult Catholic must know and believe.  Further, if they are Novus Ordo, you could not arrange for a priest to administer the Sacrament of Extreme Unction (or any other sacrament) to either one of them.  You must contact Bill and first get agreement from him on the traditional Catholic faith; he must indicate that he rejects the New Mass, the Vatican II sect, etc.  He must indicate that he accepts the traditional teachings of the Church, that the Catholic faith is truly necessary, etc.  Until he manifests an agreement on these matters, a Catholic cannot arrange for him to receive any sacrament.

 

New Catholic, most important stuff to get?

 

Hello brothers.

My names Stanley and i live in California. I'm 19 years old and I'm a new catholic, i wanted to thank you for all your help on your website it is amazing. i had always believed in god but he only recently shown me the right way to go about thing's.  Your site is full of information that has gone along way to help me. I also have a few questions as a new catholic i really need to know. The number one thing is what are the most important things i should buy off your site. As I'm low on money right now i would want the most important things first of course. Also i just started to say the rosary as i was unaware of the importance of it. But my question on how to say the rosary is this. Do i need the beads like in the picture on your site on how to say the rosary? Also it says to meditate on the mystery's I'm not sure on exactly how to do this. i await your reply and thank you! by the way I'm sure i have a lot more questions but at the moment I'm not sure so I'm sure ill keep in touch.

 

MHFM: Stanley, the most important thing to get is our $10.00 DVD special.  (There’s a video version of the same special for $15.00 if you don’t have a DVD player.)  That’s the most important thing to get because it includes 6 DVDs (with 10 different programs), as well as 3 important books (including our 610-page book with 200 color photographs), an audio disc (with 20 hours of programming) and flyers for only $10.00 (no shipping charge in U.S.).  If you can get more, but only a few more things, we would recommend True Devotion to Mary, The Secret of the Rosary and Preparation for Death – tremendous spiritual books which are crucial for proper spiritual formation.  But we really recommend everything we offer.  We don’t sell a ton of items because we try to only sell things which have a lot of value. 

 

For instance, the video on Rock Music which we sell (even though it was done by a Protestant) is one of the most important tapes which those who are immersed in popular music/culture and/or don’t believe in the Devil can see.  Even those who don’t listen to that music can benefit tremendously from the tape.  The videos on the Shroud of Turin and the Exodus are tremendous.  The book Denzinger, which is the best handbook one can have for the traditional pronouncements of the Church, will give a person a good feel for where traditional Catholics are getting this stuff.  It’s also a book which our material cites frequently.  Just flipping through it will also give a person a clear idea of how the Vatican II sect is completely opposed to historical Catholicism.  And the Douay-Rheims Bible, if you don’t have one, is also very important.  The tapes we sell on 9/11, even though they obviously do not concern a strictly spiritual issue, can show people how the world is deceived on a major event.  They are all extremely powerful and important.  But if you’re very limited, we would first recommend that special offer and those first spiritual books mentioned above.  But we consider the other tapes and books we sell to be very important, which is why we offer them.

 

You should have a rosary (with the beads) if you are going to say it.  Until you obtain one, however, it would still be very efficacious to say the prayers of the Rosary without the beads: Our Fathers, Hail Marys, etc.  This file explains: How to Pray the Rosary

 

Archived Radio programs

 

Hi,

I have tried the link on your website for the radio program, but it does not work.  It keeps saying "the server is busy.  Please try again later."  This may be a stupid question, but can I get your program on a regular radio?  If so, what channel?  I am in East Tennessee.  Thank you.

Michele

MHFM: Michele, you have to click on the link at the time we are doing a program.  We do a program from time to time.  We post a notice when we’re going to do a new one.  But we have many programs archived, which you can listen to at anytime.  Just click here to see them: Archived Radio Programs.  We would recommend listening to the first and second programs (which are listed at the top) first, if you're new to the information.

 

Jesus and Church

 

… it doesnt seem like the loving Jesus I know to damn you to hell if you dont go to a certain church...It seems to me that he would be more interested in you simply worshipping him, and loving him. Im sorry, you do have some good passages you told me, but it doesnt seem in-line with the Jesus I know...PLZ HELP ME. Thanks for your time.

 

Chester Taylor

 

MHFM: No, Jesus founded His Church upon Peter (Mt. 16:18-20) and said that you must hear that Church or you will be as the heathen (Mt. 18:17).  That means that the only Jesus of the Bible teaches that if a person doesn’t hear the one true Church which He founded, which is the Catholic Church, that person will be damned.

 

To do?

 

Hello, I was looking at your website and was very disturbed but I remembered what I had read about Fatima and the Great Apostacy.  I live in a rural area where only one church serves the entire county.  I do not drive; however, if I did I would have to travel 2.5 hours to pray the nearest Latin mass.  What is a person to do?

 

In Jesus,

 

Judith Smedley

Portland, Ohio

 

MHFM: We're glad to hear about your interest.  If you called us someone could help you with that question.  There’s also a section on our website which gives guidelines on that issue.  There’s no obligation to attend Mass if the Church doesn't provide you with a fully Catholic option in your area.  The New Mass is not an option, of course, and must be avoided under pain of grave sin.  We also encourage you to pray the Rosary each day, 15 decades if possible, if you're not doing that already.  Once a person is convinced that the Vatican II “Church” and New Mass are not Catholic, and accepts the rest of the traditional Catholic faith, the Profession of Faith from the Council of Trent (on our website) is also something which those who are new to the traditional Catholic faith or coming out of the Vatican II Church need to make.

 

Convinced

 

Dear MHFM,

 

I just wanted to commend you for the hard work and dedication you have put forth for the conversion of poor sinners.  May God reward you in your efforts to lead poor sinners back to The Holy and unchanging Catholic Faith.

 

I too have been converted to the Holy Catholic Church. I also accept all of the Dogmas that have been given to us, because they are perfect in every way.  I have to admit when I began my journey….the information on your website was shocking and it hit directly to my heart and soul. I may have not understood everything in the beginning, but by the grace of God and the Blessed Virgin Mary my mother I have been able to understand and change my life around. Needless to say I am convinced that we are living in these last hours of End Days. I am just so grateful that our Merciful God has sent your Monastery and the Truth to us. Your website is a necessity for all True Catholics to hear, to have, and to live by, till the end of time.

 

I continue to pray for The Most Holy Family Monastery, and I hope you have a Very Blessed Christmas and a Blessed New Year!

 

Thank you, and May God reward you and Bless you!

Mary

 

Mary Anne Szweda

Aurora, IL

 

H.O.W.

 

MHFM: The Heresy of the Week will now be changed on Wednesdays instead of Mondays.

 

Liked audio

 

I really want to listen again to that MP3 on FAITH ALONE I am so impressed with the "ALMANAC, OF DOZENS OF BIBLE VERSES supporting this very true subject!

You know, after receiving that FAITH ALONE e-mail of yours, I sent it out to about 90 e-mail addresses in one single group  e-mail.

Within 5 days of receiving your MP3, I received not one, but TWO MIRACLES.  Your timing was so crucial in the exact sequence of events, God used you to save/rescue me out of a potential embarrassment.

My female boss at my place of employment gave me the biggest hug, right in front of 2 false slanderers who have been trying to get me fired for the last 3 and a half years!  Also a Catholic friend, Frank, witnessed this miracle at my work.  He could hardly believe the swift turn of events! Thanks with all my heart, in Jesus Christ forever for all the wonderful help you've been!  Your Monastery is so appreciated!

 

David

 

Christmas gifts

 

Dear Brothers,

Recently I sent you a sarcastic e-mail mocking your position on giving Christmas gifts to heretics.  I apologize for having done so because now I see things in a different light after having read your recent e-exchange on the subject.  I know it's absurd to think that God could bless a heretic, so logically heretics do not deserve God's blessings during Christmas.  So now it's more clear to me.  This year I gave a present to my sister-in-law who is a heretic.  But from now on every Christmas I will only give presents to other faithful Catholics and celebrate the holidays with them only.

AP

 

How to rebut this

 

Subject: How do you rebut this?

 

Dear Bros,

 

Whenever I try to explain to someone or debate the sheer evils of V2 and the Novus Order, such as to a N.O. priest or layperson, 9 times out of 10 they come up with the easy out of "Well, I don't know all the specifics/details of religious dogmas so I can't say for sure what their original intentions were". Brothers, how do I effectively refute this excuse which they seem to think lets them off the hook?? I try to point out specific heresies, the most clear cut examples such as the Joint Declaration of Justification, but they just don't get it. Please help.

 

-Josh

 

MHFM: The easiest way to refute it is to point out that dogmas are to be believed as they were once declared and that it’s therefore heretical to depart from the meaning of the dogma as it was once declared.

 

Pope Pius IX, First Vatican Council, 1870: “Hence, also, that understanding of its sacred dogmas must be perpetually retained, which Holy Mother Church has once declared; and there must never be a recession from that meaning under the specious name of a deeper understanding.” (Denz. 1800)

 

So what the people you bring up are saying is a combination of modernism and indifferentism; they could really care less what the dogma actually says.  To assert that one must investigate the “intentions” of the popes who promulgated those dogmas is pure nonsense.  Obviously one could never know all the thoughts and intentions of all the popes who promulgated infallible statements. 

 

We would recommend that you bring forward the above quote from Vatican I, and also the fact that Pope St. Pius X condemned the idea of the evolution of dogma.  If the evolution of dogma is a heresy, as Pope St. Pius X taught, it follows that dogma must have a declared and fixed meaning. 

 

If those points don’t get you anywhere, then you are obviously dealing with hard-hearted and totally faithless liberals.  In that case, there’s really nothing you can say to them, since they have not a whiff of real belief in Jesus Christ, His truth, the infallibility of the Papacy, etc.  In that case, they care neither how authoritative the pronouncement you bring up might be nor what it actually says.

 

Ranked 11th in the world

 

MHFM: In our Christmas letter we mentioned that, among “Catholic” websites, our website is the 17th most active in world.  Our website is actually higher than that; our website is actually ranked 11th in the world.  The ranking of 17th counted different sections of, for instance, the Vatican’s website as different websites.  But when you consider that these subdivisions are actually part of the same website, our ranking is 11th. 

 

John XXIII

 

Dear Brothers Dimond,

 

I have a question;

 

The third secret of Fatima was supposed to be opened and read to Catholics by no later than 1960.   Of course it was not.  Did that make John 23rd a valid pope, at least until he refused to do it?  I have no doubt that those who followed him were never true popes...

 

                                            T. B.

 

MHFM: No, as shown in this file, The Scandals and Heresies of John XXIII [PDF File], John XXIII was a heretic prior to his “election” in 1958.  Since he was a non-Catholic, he could not have been validly elected.  That’s the teaching of Pope Paul IV, which is also quoted in that file, at the end.

 

The third secret of Fatima was supposed to be released no later than 1960 almost certainly because it mentions a false council.  It was in 1959 that John XXIII announced that he was going to hold Vatican II.  Therefore, if the third secret had been released to the world in 1960, it would’ve had concrete meaning for people because everyone would have been thinking about the upcoming council.

 

Christmas Letter and Update

 

MHFM: This is a Christmas Letter and Update on the Activities of our Monastery.

 

Help in New Zealand

 

May Almighty God bless you in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit Amen!  Greetings to you all doing great works for Christ Jesus and his true Church!  my name is Clinton Edmonds of New Zealand. I'm writing you because I need some help regards to faith. I am married with 4 children, I don't have a job and I am failing my self and my family in my duties as a Father to my Children and, a Husband to my wife, but most of all, as a Catholic.  I understand the structures of the evil one although not completely, but have definate understanding of the plan in which the Devil has worked and continues in the world and through the detruction of faith and the Catholic Church and the rising Evil in all world powers! I have seen some of your videos… and am now more informed than ever before!  I now know I am weak at the moment and need help!

 

You have mentioned the need to return to the Holy Latin Mass of our Most Holy Catholic Faith but the problem New Zealand has is.....there may be 5-7 Churches that practice the True Latin Mass and where I live, I would have to travel 3-4 hrs to get to 1 of them which is extremely hard to do without a paying job and No money to gas my car etc.

I desire to take my family and attend The Sacred Mass everyday but can't! I am surrounded by Novus Ordo Mass and can sometimes feel the Evil one laughing at us....I don't know if I should stay home or not?... I ask you humbly to do this for us!

 

and thank you

 

God bless you!

 

Amen

 

regards, Clint

 

MHFM: Thanks for the interest, Clint. You need to stay home because the New Mass is invalid and must be avoided under pain of grave sin.  You don't have to travel 3 to 4 hours to get to a traditional mass.  There is no obligation for you to go anywhere and you certainly cannot go to the New Mass.  So you can just stay home.  But if you can find a priest who was validly ordained before 1968 or in a traditional rite of the Church then you could go to confession to him, provided you agree with the faith on all issues, including: sedevacantism, no baptism of desire, etc.  We encourage you to pray the Rosary each day, 15 decades if possible, and continue to look at the information.  We pray things go well for you.

 

Unbaptized infants

 

You must have a very low opinion of Gods Mercy, to think that he would not look kindly on an infant or aborted fetes would not show them mercy. Then again the Vatican's recent pronouncements on Limbo is worth you taking a look at. Or is this also heretical, Say what you will I will continue to believe in Gods Mercy.

 

dj

 

MHFM: You reject Catholic dogma. That's how simple it is.  You’re not a believer; you can’t submit to what Christ has revealed to the Church.  And yes, the recent Vatican pronouncement on limbo is absolutely heretical.  That’s proven in this article: The staggering implications of Benedict XVI's new blatant heresy on Limbo and in detail in the second half of this radio program: August 11, 2007 Radio Program.  This program covers many quotations from the not widely read document.

 

Position on Baptism of Desire?

 

Gracious Sir,
       

I have a question, I was wondering if you could answer.   I agree with you on the current situation of the Catholic Church.  However, on your website I found it inplied that their is absolutely no such thing as Baptism of Desire.   I learned from my cathicism from a Catechism of the Council of Trent, not a new revised post-vatican II catechism and I found that there is such a thing as Baptism of Desire.  And in the Catechism they mention three ways to be baptized, baptism of water, baptism of blood, and baptism of desire.  Now I know that baptism of desire does not mean everyone who desire salvation, makes it.  I was taught that Baptism of Desire was when a person wanted to become a Catholic but forces out of their control did not allow for that.  And the person wanted to be saved through the Catolic Church, but for some strange reason could not be baptized by water.  Please explain what your position on Baptism of Desire is, so, I can understand if your entire position is consistent with the Catholic Church's teaching throughout the ages.  (I understand that some people take Baptism of Desire and say it applys to everyone therefore everyone must be saved and we do not need to convert them and that this is heretical).
Please let me know what you think.


Sincerely,
Mike

 

MHFM: Mike, we have a book, which we sell, which is the most in-depth book on that issue.  There is a section on the Catechism of Trent and much more.  You can get the book with our $10.00 special, which we encourage you to do.  Click here to: order the book.  Click here to look at the book online: Outside the Catholic Church There is Absolutely No Salvation [PDF].

 

What the book proves is that the infallible teaching of the Catholic Church leaves no room for the idea of baptism of desire.  It teaches that Jesus's words in John 3:5 are to be understood literally and without exception.  It teaches that the Sacrament of Baptism is necessary for salvation without exception.  Baptism of desire is an error that has been taught in many fallible sources; it hasn’t been taught infallibly by the Church.  The Catechism of Trent is not infallible.  There are about ten arguments from the infallible and dogmatic teaching of the Church which contradict baptism of desire.  No baptism of desire advocate can successfully answer any of these arguments; they basically never even try.  They just lump together a calculated combination of distortions: fallible sources combined with misinterpreted teachings combined with an occasional falsely translated text.  When they put all of these things together they can appear formidable to a person not familiar with how to refute them.  But in sections 16 and 17 of the aforementioned book, in addition to the history and principles covered in sections 14 and 19, these objections are scrutinized individually and, when that occurs, it can be seen that not one of them proves baptism of desire.  The Catechism of Trent does not teach baptism of blood, by the way, but does contain a short paragraph which says, in a rather weak way, that people who desired to receive baptism could have righteousness.  It also contains statement after statement that no one can be saved without water baptism. 

 

Catechism of the Council of Trent, Comparisons among the Sacraments, p. 154: “Though all the Sacraments possess a divine and admirable efficacy, it is well worthy of special remark that all are not of equal necessity or of equal dignity, nor is the signification of all the same.

     “Among them three are said to be necessary beyond the rest, although in all three this necessity is not of the same kind.  The universal and absolute necessity of Baptism our Savior has declared in these words: Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God (Jn. 3:5).”

 

Catechism of the Council of Trent, Matter of Baptism - Fitness, p. 165: “Upon this subject pastors can teach in the first place that water, which is always at hand and within the reach of all, was the fittest matter of a Sacrament which is necessary to all for salvation.”

 

Catechism of the Council of Trent, Baptism made obligatory after Christ’s Resurrection, p. 171: “Holy writers are unanimous in saying that after the Resurrection of our Lord, when He gave His Apostles the command to go and teach all nations: baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, the law of Baptism became obligatory on all who were to be saved.”

 

The Catechism of Trent is not infallible.  We really hope you get the book we have on this topic because all the facts on this issue will be at your fingertips.  It covers all the issues and the objections.  Also, it should be pointed out that almost 100% of people who believe in baptism of desire hold the heresy that it can apply to people of every religion, just not all people of every religion. 

 

Four New DVDs

 

MHFM: We’re now selling four new interesting DVDs at our online store.   For an order form you can print: order form [PDF].

 

Mortal error?

 

Reverend Sirs,

 

Whilst commending your zealous adherence to the word of Catholic Faith, I believe you to be in mortal error by ignoring the spirit thereof, and by so doing to be in great danger of inducing yet another schism in the Church.   Whether you like it or not the Holy Father in Rome has absolute God-given authority over your Church; to resist that is evil.  Both Popes John Paul and Benedict XVI personally experienced and endured the horrors of World War II; one knew and the other yet remembers the severe damage and unspeakable misery inflicted upon this world by political and religious divisions.   Both, as men of peace, sought and are seeking to heal differences, to bring understanding, to replace hatred by love, to banish hostility, being true followers of Christ.  The first left a great legacy of goodwill and the second is continuing what he inherited.   “Blessed are the peacemakers …” Of course you, products of a land with an ingrained bellicose tradition, will neither understand not appreciate such goodness, but at least will you not see the immense harm that you are doing to the Church and to all Christendom through disseminating your rigid bigoted propaganda?   Or are you merely, as much puppets of Manhattan as your political masters, simply trying to replace Rome by New York, pursuing colonialism?

I shall pray for you.

 

Dr. Lionel Mann.

 

MHFM: First of all, dogmas are to be adhered to as they have been once declared.  To depart from the meaning of a dogma (e.g. Outside the Church There is No Salvation) as it has been declared is to fall into heresy and a truly mortally sinful error.

 

Pope Pius IX, First Vatican Council, 1870: “Hence, also, that understanding of its sacred dogmas must be perpetually retained, which Holy Mother Church has once declared; and there must never be a recession from that meaning under the specious name of a deeper understanding.” (Denz. 1800)

 

Second, even a true pope does not have the authority to change Catholic dogma, contrary to what you imply. 

 

Pope Pius IX, First Vatican Council, 1870: “For the holy Spirit was promised to the successors of Peter not so that they might, by his revelation, make known some new doctrine, but that, by his assistance, they might religiously guard and faithfully expound the revelation or deposit of faith transmitted by the apostles.” (Denz. 1836)

 

If a pope denies one dogma he becomes a heretic and ceases to be pope.  There have also been over 40 antipopes in the history of the Church, some of whom reigned in Rome for periods of time.

 

St. Robert Bellarmine, Cardinal and Doctor of the Church, De Romano Pontifice, II, 30:  "A pope who is a manifest heretic automatically (per se) ceases to be pope and head, just as he ceases automatically to be a Christian and a member of the Church.  Wherefore, he can be judged and punished by the Church.  This is the teaching of all the ancient Fathers who teach that manifest heretics immediately lose all jurisdiction."

 

Third, the fact that John Paul II and Benedict XVI endured World War II does absolutely nothing to change the fact that both proved themselves to be heretics against the Catholic faith.  Try to focus on that fact and forget the irrelevant and sentimental nonsense.  In these files: John Paul II (manifest heretic who claimed to be pope 1978-2005) - Benedict XVI (The Heresies of Benedict XVI File), it is proven beyond any doubt that both men accept false religions, embrace religious indifferentism, endorse pagan and idolatrous religions, and hold that heretics and schismatics don’t need to be converted, to name a few. By ignoring that and writing what you have written, you sadly exude thoughts of a person who perhaps deems himself sophisticated, but is actually blind to penetrating and meaningful facts. 

 

Rosary while driving and meat on Friday

 

Hi,


What is one to do if he or she forgets and eats meat on a Friday?

I have done this on an occasion or two. I either realized it as soon as I was done eating or latter in the day. This has happened because of habit. I always get the same breakfast on my way to work everyday that includes sausage or bacon. About two or three times in the past I eat the meat not thinking. I even say the rosary on my way to work in the car; but as I said, I forgot a few times and eat the sandwich.
Is there something I can do like not eat meat on saturday to make up for it or do i need confession?

Also I am worried because I feel maybe I forgot because I am getting laxed in my faith, but I do say the Rosary on the way to work.

Last question is is it a bad practice to say the Rosary while I am driving? I know I must concentrate on the road and this somewhat takes away from my concentration on the mysteries of the Rosary.

Thanks

 

MHFM: Regarding your second question first, we believe that it’s a good thing to pray the Rosary while driving.  It’s time very well spent.  Regarding forgetting to abstain from meat on Friday, if a person truly forgets what day it is then it’s not a mortal sin.  However, if a person’s negligent attitude toward such matters caused him or her to forget, then it would be a sin.  And if it happens repeatedly then that’s problematic.  In that case, a person needs to take action to prevent it from happening.  For example, place a note on the dashboard of your car or wherever you might eat that breakfast meal. 

 

For a person who has been practicing the traditional Catholic faith, abstinence from meat on Friday should be something that one practices so often that it’s built into one’s schedule.  Thus, a traditional Catholic should basically never or almost never forget about it.  But a person who is very new to traditional Catholicism might be more inclined to forget, once in a while, about the Friday abstinence.  We would recommend mentioning it in confession; just state what happened: that you ate meat on Friday because you forgot what day it was.

 

Jansenism and Fewness of the saved

 

Dear Sirs

 

       I am a Jesuit priest and one with a strong devotion to the Sacred Heart of Jesus.  The other day I accidentally ran across your website the other day.  I am curious about your position on whether many or few are saved.  Could you explain to me how your position on this mystery of God's providence compares with that of Jansenism, and specifically the position held by the Jansenist bishop Scipione de Ricci?

 

       Thank you,

       Fr. Thomas Sherman, S.J. 

 

MHFM: We can tell you that as Catholics we reject Jansenism, for it advocates many propositions which have been condemned by the Magisterium of the Catholic Church.  Some of these can be read in Denzinger (e.g., Denz. 1092, 1291 and following).  Regarding the fewness of the saved, we have a section on our mainpage which covers that issue.  We do hold that few are saved.  That few are saved is not only the teaching Jesus Christ and St. Peter in Sacred Scripture, but of many traditional saints, doctors of the Church, etc. 

 

Matthew 7:13- “Enter ye in at the narrow gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way that leadeth to destruction, and many there are who go in thereat.  How narrow is the gate, and strait is the way that leadeth to life, and few there are that find it!”

 

1 Peter 4:18- “And if the just man shall scarcely be saved, where shall the ungodly and sinner appear?”

 

In fact, since it’s a defined dogma that there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church, and most of the world is not Catholic, it’s certain that few are saved.  The traditional teaching of the saints went much further, of course, not only acknowledging that all who die as non-Catholics are lost but that most of those who profess to be Catholics are lost as well because they don’t have sufficient interest in the things of salvation and thus die in mortal sin.  Many saints and doctors of the Church, even during the ages of faith, taught that most adult Catholics are lost. 

 

St. Leonard of Port Maurice [A.D. 1676-1751], on the fewness of the saved: “After consulting all the theologians and making a diligent study of the matter, he [Suarez] wrote, ‘The most common sentiment which is held is that, among Christians [Catholics], there are more damned souls than predestined souls.’  Add the authority of the Greek and Latin Fathers to that of the theologians, and you will find that almost all of them say the same thing. This is the sentiment of Saint Theodore, Saint Basil, Saint Ephrem, Saint John Chrysostom. What is more, according to Baronius it was a common opinion among the Greek Fathers that this truth was expressly revealed to Saint Simeon Stylites and that after this revelation, it was to secure his salvation that he decided to live standing on top of a pillar for forty years, exposed to the weather, a model of penance and holiness for everyone.  Now let us consult the Latin Fathers. You will hear Saint Gregory saying clearly, "Many attain to faith, but few to the heavenly kingdom." Saint Anselm declares, "There are few who are saved." Saint Augustine states even more clearly, "Therefore, few are saved in comparison to those who are damned."  The most terrifying, however, is Saint Jerome. At the end of his life, in the presence of his disciples, he spoke these dreadful words: "Out of one hundred thousand people whose lives have always been bad, you will find barely one who is worthy of indulgence."

 

When St. Leonard of Port Maurice uses the term “Christian,” he means Catholics, not heretics.  St. Leonard is repeating the consistent teaching of the fathers and doctors: most adult Catholics (not even including the non-Catholic world) are lost.  If this was the sentiment about the salvation of Catholics in the ages of faith, what would they say today?  If you have trouble accepting the truths presented on this website because “it’s just too hard to believe that this many people could be wrong or deceived,” consider the teaching of Our Lord and the saints above.  Consider how much more true the teaching on the fewness of the saved is today:

 

“Lucia found Jacinta sitting alone, still and very pensive, gazing at nothing.  ‘What are you thinking of, Jacinta?’  ‘Of the war that is going to come.  So many people are going to die.  And almost all of them are going to Hell.’” (Our Lady of Fatima, p. 94; p. 92 in some versions)

 

Jacinta of Fatima, who had visions of future events, said that of those who would die in World War II almost all of them would go to Hell.

 

St. Anselm: “If thou wouldst be certain of being in the number of the elect, strive to be one of the few, not of the many.  And if thou wouldst be quite sure of thy salvation, strive to be among the fewest of the few… Do not follow the great majority of mankind, but follow those who enter upon the narrow way, who renounce the world, who give themselves to prayer, and who never relax their efforts by day or by night, that they may attain everlasting blessedness.” (Fr. Martin Von Cochem, The Four Last Things, p. 221.)

 

If one in any way attempts to equate the traditional Catholic teaching on the fewness of the saved or Outside the Church There is No Salvation with Jansenism that is a major mistake.  Nevertheless, some dishonest individuals do attempt to equate the uncompromising view of Outside the Church There is No Salvation with Jansenism by engaging in distortion.  For instance they quote an error of the Jansensists like this:

 

Errors of the Jansenists, #5: “Pagans, Jews, heretics, and others of this kind do not receive in any way any influence from Jesus Christ, and so you will rightly infer from this that in them there is a bare and weak will without any sufficient grace.” – Condemned in 1690 (Denz. 1295) 

 

As anyone can see, this merely condemns the idea that pagans, etc. do not receive any graces.  It doesn’t in any way condemn the fact, which is a defined dogma, that those who die as pagans, etc. are not saved. 

 

But we have a question for you: do you accept the Council of Florence’s infallible definition that all who die as non-Catholics are lost?  Keep in mind that Vatican I defined that we must accept dogma “as it was once declared.”  If the answer is yes, don’t you have a problem with Vatican II’s teaching that Protestants are in the way of salvation (Unitatis Redintegratio #3) and that Jews are not rejected by God and thus can be saved (Nostra Aetate #4)?

 

More nonsense

 

Gentlemen, I have just stumbled across your website, quite by accident. I did not go through it thoroughly, but saw enough to get the gist of things. I refuse to sink to the same level, that you do, apparently without any sense of shame or reverence for the Church. However, I would like to say that I think you should perhaps spend your time doing something more constructive. I am a faithful, conservative Catholic, and I find your website very offensive. I know that you will surmise that this is because I have been completely brainwashed by the devil and his infiltration of the Church. I have dealt with others who share your opinions and know that you perceive the greatest sin as "compromise", when, in point of fact, Our Lord clearly tells us that the greatest sin is the rejection of the Holy Spirit. It would seem to me that our Beloved Lord, Jesus Christ would be better served by your living His Love, as opposed to spreading hatred and suspicion masked as righteousness. I can't help but feel in my heart that you just may have cast the first stone at the adulterous woman, had you been there to watch Our Lord write upon the ground with His finger and forgive her. Do not lead the world into further scandal. Be a light that shines. "Nor do they light a lamp and then put it under a bushel basket; it is set on a lampstand, where it gives light to all in the house."

 

Pax, Bill

 

MHFM: Bill, your e-mail demonstrates that you’ve ignored the specific points and facts we’ve brought forward on our website.  Your e-mail presents a vague and emotional response and doesn’t point to one specific thing.  That shows that you are ignoring the truth right now because it’s discomforting to you.  Look at the material more carefully.  Consider, as just one example, that the Catholic Church has infallibly taught that Outside the Church There is No Salvation.  That’s a dogma which all Catholics must accept under pain of heresy and damnation.  Then consider that the post-Vatican II Church teaches that there is salvation for Protestants, schismatics, pagans, etc.  It even teaches that Protestants and schismatics don’t need to be converted.  Consider that such a fact proves that the representatives of the post-Vatican II Church are heretical and therefore outside the Church.  Consider the fact that there have been antipopes and that a Great Apostasy, to be led from Rome, is predicted to come in the last days in order to lead professing Catholics astray.  When you face up to the facts, rather than ignoring them, you will begin to see the truth you need to see and believe in order to be truly Catholic and saved.  We ask you to listen to this radio program, for it shows how all of what our website covers about what’s going on is true and based on Catholic teaching.

Aug. 22 Radio Program: An Overview of Present situation (First Show) (click here to listen, about 2 hrs.)

*This show contains a very important overview of the present situation of the Catholic Church and the reasons why the post-Vatican II Church is not the Catholic Church.  It discusses the facts, the evidence and the arguments which prove that the post-Vatican II Church is not the Catholic Church.  This is a show people should listen to.   It covers the heresies of Vatican II, the apostasy of John Paul II, Benedict XVI, Paul VI, that there have been antipopes, that our present situation has been predicted, and more.

Christmas get-togethers

 

Brothers,

Do you stand by your advice that it is forbidden for faithful traditional Catholics that agree on all your issues (Church Teachings) to attend family Christmas get-togethers and/or exchange gifts.

Please adress this issue on your e-exchanges as I am sure many traditional catholics will be dealing with this with their familes as the Holy Day of Christmas approaches.

Our son faithfully follows your "spiritual direction" and will not be giving his father a Christmas gift or will not attend the family gathering at his father's house. His father is a novus ordo catholic.

Thank you AP

 

MHFM: “Forbidden for faithful traditional Catholics… to attend family Christmas get-togethers and/or exchange gifts” with those who are Novus Ordo, Protestant or reject some other Catholic teaching - of course we stand by that.  It follows logically from apostolic teaching (II John 10), which was repeated in Pope Pius XI’s encyclical Mortalium Animos.  Thus, your son is without question doing the correct thing.

 

Pope Pius XI, Mortalium Animos #9, Jan. 6, 1928: “Everyone knows that John himself, the Apostle of love, who seems to reveal in his Gospel the secrets of the Sacred Heart of Jesus, and who never ceased to impress on the memories of his followers the new commandment ‘Love one another,’ altogether forbade any intercourse with those who professed a mutilated and corrupt form of Christ’s teaching: ‘If any man come to you and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into the house nor say to him: God speed you’ (II John 10).”

 

To celebrate Christmas with heretics or with those who reject the faith is tantamount to acknowledging those heretics as members of the true Christian religion who can share in the blessings of Christmas.  And that would be very wrong, of course.  Hence, those who really love God’s truth and believe it matters should not only agree that one cannot celebrate Christmas with such individuals, but should be enthusiastic about not doing it.  To put it another way, a person shouldn’t need a lot of persuasion that it’s not something one can do; rather, it should make complete sense.  The very thought of celebrating Christmas and exchanging gifts with someone who is, for instance, obstinate in the Novus Ordo should spark an internal discomfort in a traditional Catholic who really believes that truth matters.

 

Changed

 

“I watched your video… and it totally changed my life.”

 

Rich Helbig,

 

Pittsburgh, PA

 

Challenge refused

 

MHFM: This is a continuation of the “Get a clue” exchange below.  That person responded with more critical comments, so we challenged him to a debate on our radio show and he (not surprisingly) refused.

 

If you are referring to the works of the evil one your divisiveness is one. Second, the Holy Father is the Vicar of Christ. The manner you speak of the Holy Father thus equates to Christ Himself whom the Holy Father represents here on earth. The evil manner in which you write exposes that you do not have the heart and mind of Christ. The vitriol with which you write… makes you an easy pawn for the evil one, for whom you work fervently. Yours in Christ,


Jim.

 

MHFM: Oh really? Would you like to come on our radio program and debate the issue of whether the post-Vatican II claimants to the Papacy are true popes?

 

Thank you for the invitation. However, There is nothing to debate.  I pray God will have mercy on your immortal soul.

 

MHFM: Exactly as we expected... you prove that you are a coward.  In a debate it would be quite clear just how wrong you are that you know nothing about fidelity to the Catholic faith.  You are exactly like so many other heretics we encounter; they throw out their comments but are afraid to meet us in a debate and defend their position- just as we expected.  Someone just like you wrote a few weeks ago.  We challenged him to a debate as well.  He refused just like you.

 

No Salvation without baptism

 

Dear Most Holy Family Monastery,

 

I have been reading alot of the articles on your website and watching your DVDs and I agree and understand alot of what you are explaining, but I am struggling to accept no salvation without baptism.  I know God is Holy, but He is also Merciful.  I can't understand how a man can, for example, abuse and kill a toddler who was not baptized by the parents and send that child to Hell, but that killer can attain salvation if he has been baptized and repents of his sin.  Or a person who has no opportunity of ever hearing the gospel, such as a Muslim girl in a militantly Islamic country, and her being condemned if she never had the knowledge of what baptism was or even Christianity.

 

In my mind, your argument is logical that we must be baptized and I know that Our Lord Himself said we must be born again of water and spirit, but perhaps it is my faulty human heart that still hopes that these souls can be saved.  If I can accept your teaching logically, but my heart holds reservations, what do I do?

 

I remember reading in the books about the life of Venerable Anne Catherine Emmerich that she strongly said that the Church was the only way, but even she was surprised to learn that several of her ancestors were saved because Jesus said that had they known the Church, they would have been very devout Christians.  Also, in the lives of other Saints, everyone thought certain souls were damned, even the Saint himself, but later learned the soul was saved because they had a particular devotion to Our Lady.

 

Can you please help me to accept this better?  I know God's ways are not our ways and we cannot possibly understand them unless he reveals them to us, but I have a hard time understanding why a sinner like me has a chance at salvation after having lived a horrible, sinful life while a baby in it's mother's womb who is aborted has no chance at all.

 

Can you please help me understand this?  Thank you in advance for any help that you can give.  (And your DVD on Freemasonry is excellent!  I have ordered more copies to share with friends in the hopes it will open their eyes like it did mine...)

 

Sincerely,

 

Rachelle Wickstrom

 

MHFM: It comes down to submitting one’s mind to the revelation of Christ, which is found in Catholic dogma.  You are refusing to believe until you understand.  St. Anselm points out that a person with true faith believes in order to understand.  If God has revealed that all who die without baptism are lost, as He has, that’s because He knows infinitely more than we do about the lack of good will in those souls who die without the faith.  St. Augustine said it well:

 

St. Augustine (+428): “… God foreknew that if they had lived and the gospel had been preached to them, they would have heard it without belief.” (Jurgens, The Faith of the Early Fathers, Vol. 3: 1997.)

 

So one who doubts that all who die without baptism and the faith are lost lacks faith in Jesus Christ; for He is the one who ensures the integrity of dogmatic teaching.  The sad fact is that most men are of bad will; that’s why so many are left in ignorance of the true faith and baptism.  They are not sincere and thus God leaves them in ignorance.  In the case of infants, perhaps God taking them in infancy is merciful because if they had lived they would have died in mortal sin and gone to the fires of Hell.  If that’s the case, then taking them in infancy, even though they are barred from Heaven and put in a place of Hell where there is no fire, is the merciful thing.  Regardless, we know for certain that all infants who die without baptism are not saved.  They go to a part of Hell called the limbo of the children and God has a perfectly just reason for it.

 

You ask what you can do to help you be convinced.  We say: pray the full 15 decade Rosary each day.  If you pray it well and sincerely we believe that you will have a firm faith in this and all other Catholic teachings.

 

Fr. Francisco de Vitoria, O.P., a famous 16th century Dominican theologian, also summed up the traditional teaching of the Catholic Church on this topic very well.  Here is how he put it:

 

When we postulate invincible ignorance on the subject of baptism or of the Christian faith, it does not follow that a person can be saved without baptism or the Christian faith.  For the aborigines to whom no preaching of the faith or Christian religion has come will be damned for mortal sins or for idolatry, but not for the sin of unbelief.  As St. Thomas says, however, if they do what in them lies [in their power], accompanied by a good life according to the law of nature, it is consistent with God’s providence that he will illuminate them regarding the name of Christ.” (De Indis et de Iure Belli Relectiones, ed. E. Nys, tr. J.P. Bates (The Classics of International Law), Washington, 1917, p. 142.)

 

Regarding Anne Catherine Emmerich, some of things attributed to her are heretical and thus must be rejected.  The following section from our book Outside the Catholic Church There is Absolutely No Salvation [PDF FILE] would be relevant for you on the point of accepting all the truths of Catholic dogma.

 

THE CHAIR OF PETER SPEAKS THE TRUTH THAT CHRIST HIMSELF DELIVERED

 

     The truths of faith which have been proclaimed by the popes speaking infallibly from the Chair of Peter are called dogmas.  The dogmas make up what is called the deposit of Faith.  And the deposit of Faith ended with the death of the last apostle. 

 

Pope St. Pius X, Lamentabile, The Errors of the Modernists #21: “Revelation, constituting the object of Catholic faith, was not completed with the apostles.”[11][15] - Condemned

 

     This means that when a pope defines a dogma from the Chair of Peter he does not make the dogma true, but rather he proclaims what is already true, what has already been revealed by Christ and delivered to the Apostles.  The dogmas are therefore unchangeable, of course.  One of these dogmas in the deposit of Faith is that Outside the Catholic Church There is No Salvation.  Since this is the teaching of Jesus Christ, one is not allowed to dispute this dogma or to question it; one must simply accept it.  It does not matter if one doesn’t like the dogma, doesn’t understand the dogma, or doesn’t see justice in the dogma.  If one doesn’t accept it as infallibly true then one simply does not accept Jesus Christ, because the dogma comes to us from Jesus Christ. 

 

Pope Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum (# 9), June 29, 1896:

… can it be lawful for anyone to reject any one of those truths without by that very fact falling into heresy? – without separating himself from the Church? – without repudiating in one sweeping act the whole of Christian teaching?  For such is the nature of faith that nothing can be more absurd than to accept some things and reject others.  Faith, as the Church teaches, is that supernatural virtue by which… we believe what He has revealed to be true, not on account of the intrinsic truth perceived by the natural light of human reason [author: that is, not because it seems correct to us], but because of the authority of God Himself, the Revealer, who can neither deceive nor be deceivedBut he who dissents even in one point from divinely revealed truth absolutely rejects all faith, since he thereby refuses to honor God as the supreme truth and the formal motive of faith.”[12][16]

 

     Those who refuse to believe in the dogma Outside the Church There is No Salvation until they understand how there is justice in it are simply withholding their Faith in Christ’s revelation.  Those with the true Faith in Christ (and His Church) accept His teaching first and understand the truth in it (i.e., why it is true) second.  A Catholic does not withhold his belief in Christ’s revelation until he can understand it.  That is the mentality of a faithless heretic who possesses insufferable pride.  St. Anselm sums up the true Catholic outlook on this point. 

 

St. Anselm, Doctor of the Church, Prosologion, Chap. 1: “For I do not seek to understand that I may believe, but I believe in order to understand.  For this also I believe, that unless I believed, I should not understand.”

 

Romans 11:33-34- “O the depth of the riches of the wisdom and of the knowledge of God!  How incomprehensible are his judgments, and how unsearchable his ways!  For who hath known the mind of the Lord?  Or who hath been his counselor? Or who hath first given to him, and recompense shall be made him?”

 

Isaias 55:8-9- “For my thoughts are not your thoughts: nor your ways my ways, saith the Lord.  For as the heavens are exalted above the earth, so are my ways exalted above your ways, and my thoughts above your thoughts.”

 

Not confusing

 

Hello. I have been confused about my Catholic Church/faith for many years, now. I grew up in the Catholic Church of the '50s, so I felt I had a fairly substantial Catholic background. In recent years, I have become disillusioned and thoroughly confused by what I see and hear. ....In any New Order Catholic Church I attended, I never saw (or thought I saw) the irreverence or disrespect I now know so many New Order churches have experienced. ...I understood the Catholics, who stayed away from the changes, to be the so-called break-away Catholics, while I was certain staying with the church I'd attended for all my life....and under the pope....was the TRUE Church. Now, I'm not so sure. ......In recent years, I've have become so confused I could cry....literally. ........I found EWTN, which I thought to be wonderful in showing the reverence that should come with Mass attendance. Then, I began hearing from Christ The King Abbey in Alabama, which has made me consider that they ("Traditionalists") have held together the True Church. Then, I got literature from The Fatima Crusade, which warns us against the New Order Church, EWTN and this wonderful Monastery (or so I thought) in Alabama. ....Now, I've come across your web-site and become even more confused. You truly need to be a Theologian to understand what's going on and who is right. I am not the smartest person in the world, but I am not stupid, either, and I don't understand half of what's being presented by many of  these different groups.....I've read through some of your writings, and have become yet more confused. ......The Alabama monastery has asked we pray for the pope, while they are not in communion with Rome at this time, and yet you warn this is a place to be avoided. Of all the places I've checked into, they seemed to be the ones I felt were holding to the True Faith. ....Many years ago, I went to a Charismatic Prayer Meeting at my church. I did not want to be a part of it. I was there to observe, only, and sat way in the back. There, I agree, that it was not a Catholic event. Beautiful prayers were recited, followed by swaying back and forth with hands held. People had phony-looking smiles on their faces and their eyes were glassed-over making them look like they were on drugs (to me!). I did not like the idea of spouting out unintelligible phrases, assuming they were "of God." ....I never went again! ........So, all these CATHOLIC teachers have done is to confuse someone (me!) who doesn't know where to turn for the Truth. Where is the True Church and why am I having such a hard time in finding her? .....My soul is at stake here. This is something I do not appreciate being made so very confusing by the very persons who should be making clearer the correct path to heaven. .....One of your articles sites the Priest-Abuse scandals of the New Church. I've seen story after story about the same abuse going way back to before the New Church came into being. Problems were there long before the New Church. Abuse was kept hidden and not spoken of. (NEVER criticize the Church. That, I learned from the nuns in grade school!)............Is there something you can recommend to help me with my struggle. Something I can read? A priest to talk with? Anything that will help me to recognize and FIND the TRUE Catholic Church? I feel more and more lost each day. .............I live in the Denver area of Lancaster Co., PA. Any guidance would be most gratefully appreciated.

 

Thank you.                  Susan McGuire

 

MHFM: We do appreciate the interest, but the facts on our website are not confusing.  They cut through the fog and give people the clear truth.  Once these facts are examined, there is nothing confusing about the situation.  What one should conclude about what has happened becomes very clear to those who savor the truth and are of good will.  At that point a person is relieved and refreshed to know the clear truth.  You have to be fully convinced on these critical points before we can help you with where you might potentially be able to receive the sacraments.

 

Godparent of Novus Ordo

 

Good Morning,

 

I was named the Godmother of my niece who is now about 17years old and lives in Poland.  She was baptized in the N.O ‘church’.  Assuming this baptism is valid, what duties/responsibilities do I have as a Godmother.  I’ve been living here for a while now and have minimal contact with her.  Her parents are currently separated and the father is living an immoral lifestyle here in the U.S. with another woman!  The mother lives in Poland with my Goddaughter and, at best, follows the N.O ‘church’.  What are my responsibilities as a Godmother in this situation?  First, do I have a responsibility to inform my Godchild about the faith?  Second, and/or about the immoral lifestyle of the parent, specifically her father?  Thirdly, has the Catholic Church made any pronouncements about the responsibilities of the Godparents?  For example, does the Church speak about under what circumstances these responsibilities apply (upon the death of the parent(s), or when the parent(s) neglects to raise the child in the faith)?

 

Please help, as I have nobody else who can.

 

Thank you so very much.

 

r…

 

MHFM:  Yes, you absolutely must inform her about the faith.  A Catholic needs to do that with anyone he or she knows well.  Yes, you should inform her that her father is living in a state of mortal sin.  Your responsibility as a godparent is essentially to look after the spiritual well-being of this person, but with a special solicitude.  It’s basically what you would do for anyone you know well, but to an extra degree.  You can only try to give her the information about the traditional Catholic faith and what she must do.  You need to tell her not to go to the New Mass, to pray the Rosary, believe in the traditional dogmas, etc.  If she’s not interested, then you have to move on.   

 

Out of Novus Ordo

 

I was raised in the perfect Vatican II church family. My family members taught ccd, hosted renew groups, are Eucharistic ministers and one member was ordained into the priesthood in 2003. THANK YOU for the info on your site, if not for the info many of us would still be members of that church.

 

Kate

 

Catholics?

 

Hello,

 

I a catholic from India, follower of Syro-Malabar Church ; one of Oriental Eastern Churches, under and obedience to Pope and Rome, happened to read from “An Introduction to False Ecumenism and some comments on Heretical Actions

 

My questions:

 

Are you Catholics under Pope ? If not then which Christian sect / Church ?

If yes how can you explain the above article’s contents?

Do you believe Popes mentioned: Paul VI, Benedict XVI are no true Popes ?

If  yes who is the ‘present’ true pope, if at all there is one?

Are you and your website are approved by Roman Catholic Church?

Admitting their views and so called Ecumenical teachings and programs are contradictory and anti- St. Thomas Aquinas, what should one do?

How to counter this problem of anomalies of Vat II, staying with which platform ?

These are some genuine questions from a Catholic faithful. We don’t believe in infallibility of Popes.

Pls reply in little detail, which may lead many to truth in my area.

 

Regards and prayers,

Sunny Alanoly

 

MHFM: We are Catholics.  We believe in all the dogmas of the Catholic Church, including papal infallibility.  If you don’t believe in papal infallibility, then you are not a true Catholic.  Vatican I defined papal infallibility as a dogma.  It flows logically from the supreme authority which Christ gave to St. Peter.  The roots of it can be seen in Mt. 16 and Lk. 22.  For if whatever a pope binds upon earth is bound in Heaven, as Mt. 16 says, then what the pope binds must be infallible; for Heaven doesn’t bind that which is false.  The unfailing faith that Christ promises St. Peter in Luke 22 also shows infallibility.  You should listen to the talks on the Papacy which are found in this file: Refuting Protestantism and Eastern "Orthodoxy" * Audio Programs.  For if you don’t believe in papal infallibility then you are in heresy right now and need to convert.  You should also read this file and look at the other information on our site more carefully: 

 

The Glossary of Terms and Principles [PDF]

(This glossary contains important definitions of key terms and principles about the Catholic Faith, about the post-Vatican II “Church,” about how the Catholic Church views non-Catholic religions, etc. which people should see.)

 

In examining the information more carefully, you will find the answers to the questions you have.

 

OT saints?

 

Hi, I've been reading some of your info and playing some debates on the subject on your site. I sure it on the web site some where but there's a lot of info. What about the theif on the cross and Moses David and other who neither were baptised or with the excepting of the thief knew or accepted Christ? Thank you for you time.

In Christ
Tony Valente

 

MHFM: This is answered in our book: Outside the Catholic Church There is Absolutely No Salvation [pdf file].  The answer is that the Good Thief, Moses, etc. cannot be used as examples against the necessity of Baptism, etc. because they died under the Old Law, not the New Law.  They died before the Law of Baptism was instituted by Jesus Christ after the Resurrection.

 

Catechism of the Council of Trent, Baptism made obligatory after Christ’s Resurrection, p. 171: “Holy writers are unanimous in saying that after the Resurrection of our Lord, when He gave His Apostles the command to go and teach all nations: baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, the law of Baptism became obligatory on all who were to be saved.”

 

Effort

 

I viewed your site, although rather superficially, and it is obvious you consider yourselves to be the arbiters of truth.  From where do you decide what is truth and what is not?  You make some intertesting statements, many out of context, and then jump to conclusions that you have not defended but only state as truth.  Are you in communion with Rome?  Who is the Pope (the real Pope) as you would see it?  Do we not have one?  How did the Magiseium get it so wrong?  Is not the Magisterium in coordination with the Pope the authority of the Church?  How did you get this authority?  I am confused at your positions.  You seem to contradict yourselves by your very existance.

 

Bob Nolan

 

MHFM: You need to look at the site more carefully.  You are the one who is confused and contradictory.  The Magisterium didn't get it wrong.  The Vatican II sect rejects the teaching of the Catholic Magisterium.  You should read this file:

 

The Glossary of Terms and Principles [PDF]

 

But if the level of effort which you have thus far exerted in understanding the facts we’ve brought forward is typical of what you will put out, then we cannot help you.  People have to put out some effort or else they will remain in their ignorance and spiritual fog.

 

V-2 book

 

I have your recent book What Happened after Vatican II.  That is the best sledgehammer of a presentation that has been done.  I really like all of your other books as well.  They are outstanding.  Thanks for what you are doing.

 

Henry Benton,

NJ

 

Recent audio programs

 

I added your two most recent audio files to the rest of them on my myspace page and someone who listened to them left me a message that said they were awesome and very informative, so I thought I would pass that along to you.

 

Is…

 

Older priest writes in

 

Quite by accident I came across your website this morning… I am an 86 year old Jesuit priest, ordained in 1952, when Pius XII was pope. I later had the privilege of speaking with him personally and receiving his blessing. He is one my heroes. I am writing to you because I am puzzled. You evidently regard the vast majority of those who call themselves Catholics as involved in heresy and schism and not truly members of the Catholic Church. I am one of these. My puzzle concerns where you think we went wrong.

 

I was teaching in Rome as a young professor of theology when Pope Pius XII died. I was in St. Peter’s Square a few weeks later when the election of Angelo Roncalli was announced. He took the name of John XXIII. Do you regard this election as somehow invalid? Was the whole church deceived? Had the Holy Spirit failed to preserve her? What could we have done to discern that this man was actually not the pope? Did anyone at all contest the validity of his election at that time? Would not the promise of Christ that the “gates of hell shall not prevail against it” prevent such a tragic deception?

 

If then Pope John XXIII was truly pope, was his calling an ecumenical council an invalid act? I was in Rome when the council was called. I remember many saying that the council would not last long and would not accomplish much. But when the bishops of the world assembled as the Second Vatican Council, was it not truly an ecumenical council, guided and protected by Holy Spirit from leading the faithful into error? Was there any way of knowing that this was not the case? Did the Holy Spirit desert the Church after the death of Pius XII? I had returned to the United States to teach theology when the council actually met, but I followed the reports on its doings with great attention.

 

There, you have my puzzle. When would you say that the great majority of Catholics actually fell into heresy?  I was struck by the earnestness of what I read on your site, of your evident love of God and of the truth. I think of myself also as one who throughout a long life has tried to love God and to promote the truth. Where do you think that I have failed? How do you think I could have avoided this?

                                       

Sincerely in Our Lord.

[Name withheld]

 

MHFM: Thanks for the e-mail.  You obviously have many questions.  We're really glad to hear about your interest.  The answers to your questions can be found in our material.  We hope that you continue to look at the information.  John XXIII’s “election” was invalid because he was a heretic.  There is also some evidence that he wasn’t elected first, but that another cardinal was.  As our material explains, the promise of Christ to the Church (that the gates of Hell cannot prevail) does not preclude 1) a massive apostasy, 2) antipopes in Rome, 3) a Counter Church arising in Rome which reduces the true Catholic Church to a remnant.  With the exception of #3, we've had this before at different periods of Church history (e.g., the Arian crisis, the Great Western Schism, etc.).  The promises of Christ to the Church simply ensure that the Catholic Church will always exist and that the Church itself and the Magisterium cannot err. 

 

What has occurred with the Vatican II “Church” has been perpetrated by men who are not true popes.  They do not wield the power of the Catholic Magisterium and so their false teachings do not taint it. Vatican II was called and confirmed by manifestly heretical non-Catholic antipopes.  It was not therefore a true ecumenical council.  It was a false council which taught many heresies. 

 

When should people have seen it, you ask.  When Vatican II promoted rapprochement with Protestants and other non-Catholics, they should have seen it.  Any Catholic who is concerned about the faith (and studies it as he should) knows that the Catholic Church rejects all who don’t agree with her teachings.  The only “coming together” which can happen is the conversion of the non-Catholics.  So any program of acceptance of non-Catholics as they are in their non-Catholic beliefs is a betrayal of the Catholic Faith.  For example, the anathemas of the Council of Trent (and other councils), which were launched against all who would contradict Catholic dogmas, are well-known.  So a program of union with, and acceptance of, non-Catholic sects/religions should have alerted any vigilant and educated Catholic that something heretical and revolutionary was afoot.

 

This entire situation has been predicted in Scripture and in Catholic prophecy, as our material explains.  To answer your other question: yes, the great majority of Catholics fell into heresy and lost the faith.  Sadly, these former Catholics are now pseudo-Catholics and on the road to damnation. 

 

When did people lose the faith?  This happened and continues to happen on an individual basis: when a person obstinately embraces one or more of the heresies of the new religion.  At that point a person ceases to be a Catholic and becomes a member of the Vatican II sect.  This certainly has happened and continues to happen to all who accept the Vatican II heresies of ecumenism and a general religious indifferentism.  For example, even if people believe that the Catholic Church is the one true Church, if they accept Protestant sects as okay (even though less true) they have embraced a heretical religion and lost the Catholic faith.  This attitude is probably held by almost all who attend the New Mass today.  (And this is just to examine the situation from the standpoint of heresy.  We must remember that mortal sin alone will send a person to Hell.  The Vatican II preachers generally don’t communicate even the moral truths of the Catholic faith and the spiritual life.  So even if an individual has not yet been excommunicated for heresy, if he has not been taught to pray, do spiritual reading, avoid the occasions of sin, etc., then he will not avoid mortal sin.  He would therefore be on the road to damnation, regardless of whether he rejects a dogma of the Church.

 

Since you asked, you have failed by giving in to the Vatican II heresies and the New Mass.  Ecumenism represents apostasy, as our material proves.  It represents a repudiation of the necessity of Jesus Christ and His one true faith.  It repudiates the dogma Outside the Church There is No Salvation.  The New Mass represents the acceptance of sacrilege and a liturgical revolution. 

 

But we’re really happy to hear about your interest.  God wanted you to see this material because he wants you to return to the traditional Catholic faith, the only true faith.  It’s a matter of your salvation to come a complete rejection of the New Mass, Vatican II and the false Vatican II Church.  It’s also necessary to hold the dogma Outside the Church There is No Salvation without any exceptions.  Coming to these positions is the most important thing in your life, for no one can be saved without holding the Catholic faith whole and undefiled (Athanasian Creed).  Again, we are truly glad to hear about your interest and you will be in our prayers.  We hope that you review the information. 

 

The Truth about What Really Happened to the Catholic Church after Vatican II Audio Program, Part 1, Part 2

Benedict XVI (The Heresies of Benedict XVI File)

John Paul II (manifest heretic who claimed to be pope 1978-2005)

Vatican II - false council

The Invalid New Mass

Outside the Catholic Church There is Absolutely No Salvation [pdf file]

 

There are many other important files.  These are just a few.

 

Thanks

 

Thank you for the order that I received today. It seems that I have my work cut out for me. The breadth of the gift you sent me today cannot be measured; the little bit of money is a poor compensation for the efforts you men have made on behalf of us trying to work out our salvation. I was wondering, perhaps, if you knew someone that is still selling the unabridged version of "Preparation For Death", I lent mine to a friend that was dying of cancer and never saw it again, the friend or the book. Thank you both for the time and encouragement that you have given me. One more favor I ask is that you can remember me in one of your prayers. Once again,

 

Thank you Matthew Rhodes

 

MHFM: We think Tan Books has it.

 

Easter

 

MHFM: What one should take from Easter is power.  The true Catholic faith has power because Jesus Christ has power over all things, including death.

 

Council of Toledo XI, 675: “… He accepted the true death of the body; also on the third day, restored by His own power, He arose from the grave.” (Denz. 286)

 

What must that have been like – only about 200 decades ago – when the apostles (true men who lived just as we are living now in the 21st century) saw Jesus after His Resurrection and were astonished?  They were regular men who had seen Him dead, and now they saw Him alive.  The unimaginable zeal with which this must have filled them can hardly be imagined.  For they had seen – and now knew – the key to all of human existence.  They were actual witnesses of it:

 

Luke 24:46-50- “And he said to them: Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise again from the dead, the third day: And that penance and remission of sins should be preached in his name, unto all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.  And you are witnesses of these things.  And I send the promise of my Father upon you: but stay you in the city till you be endued with power from on high.  And he led them out as far as Bethania: and lifting up his hands, he blessed them.”

 

One can only imagine how much they wanted to share it with everyone.

 

The Feast of the Resurrection reminds us that Jesus Christ is the Truth and that His true faith is reality.  The Resurrection shows us that the true faith has a real supernatural power which we can access at any time.  Jesus’s last days on earth and His Resurrection should truly give us a combination of hope, joy and zeal.  It should make us realize that nothing can stop the true faith.  The Feast of the Resurrection should make us excited to bring the Gospel (the fullness of the Catholic faith) to others. 

 

Interest in Lebanon

 

Hi there,

 

I’m Lebanese Christian Maronite (Catholics of Lebanon), and I’m finding very interesting all the things you are writing in your journal (website).  I agree with you on most of the things, especially when you mention that the power of the people deceiving us is so strong. This is true, because they seem like so much loving people... yes we are in very difficult times where evil is being camouflaged in good theories that people will unconsciously act upon without knowing that these things are bad. Brain washing, sweet-evil propaganda, tougher politics restricting human choice between good or evil, media promoting all kinds of devilish acts, computer banks controlling the world, an atheist new world order being implemented to everyone and everyone should accept it under the image of democracy, and also a swivelling world into chaos of unfinished wars and chaotic persecutions and politically-religious justified human genocides.........

 

It’s a narrow way to heaven.... and it’s a highway to hell... And it’s so difficult for believers of true faith in Jesus Christ to live it 100% because they are being persecuted by body & most specifically by soul... And the only solutions at the end of times, is the Holy Rosary and Devotion to the Immaculate Heart of Mary… let me know of all news and updates… Thanks and best regards,

 

Rock Sfeir

 

Interest in Nigeria

 

Dear Brother Dimond,

 

Compliment of the season! I am writing from Nigeria. I am a young Catholic Priest working in the eastern part of Nigeria. I came across your work and was highly edified. I am working in an area of primary evangelization where people are still trying to grasp the authentic meaning of their Catholic Faith.

 

My purpose of writing you is to know how I can send money to your community so that you can ship some books to me. Mean while I have seen the price of the book in your web site. And that book is: “The Truth about what really happened to the Catholic Church after Vatican II”…

 

Sincerely yours in Jesus and Mary.

 

Rev. Fr. Johnbosco

 

Binding and Loosing

 

When Christ gave St Peter the keys of the kingdom he gave the power to bind or loosen
 
When a Pope makes a binding ruling (infallibility -on matters of faith or morals)  its been suggested to me that you are wrong as you suggest a later Pope is not free to change such a ruling and must be bound by it, in which case the power to Loosen has no meaning. Are you saying this? If so how do I answer this argument. If you are being misinterpreted can you clarify whether a later pope has power to change a ruling on matters of faith or morals?? 

 

b…

 

MHFM: No, Vatican I defined that dogma is unchangeable.  It also made specific mention that even a pope cannot give a new doctrine.  So it is heretical to say that a pope or anyone else can change a dogma:

 

Pope Pius IX, Vatican Council I, 1870, Session 4, Chap. 4: “…the Roman Pontiff, when he speaks ex cathedra [from the Chair of Peter], that is, when carrying out the duty of the pastor and teacher of all Christians in accord with his supreme apostolic authority he explains a doctrine of faith or morals to be held by the universal Church... operates with that infallibility with which the divine Redeemer wished that His Church be instructed in defining doctrine on faith and morals; and so such definitions of the Roman Pontiff from himself, but not from the consensus of the Church, are unalterable.

Pope Pius IX, First Vatican Council, Session 3, Chap. 4, on the true progress of knowledge:
"For, the doctrine of faith which God revealed has not been handed down as a philosophic invention to the human mind to be perfected, but has been entrusted as a divine deposit to the Spouse of Christ, to be faithfully guarded and infallibly interpreted."

Pope Pius IX, First Vatican Council, Session 4, Chap. 4:
"For, the Holy Ghost was not promised to the successors of Peter that by His revelation they might disclose new doctrine, but that by His help they might guard sacredly the revelation transmitted through the apostles and the deposit of faith, and might faithfully set it forth."

Pope Pius IX, First Vatican Council, Session 3, Chap. 4, Canon 3:
"If anyone says that it is possible that at some time, given the advancement of knowledge, a sense may be assigned to the dogmas propounded by the church which is different from that which the Church has understood and understands: let him be anathema."

The idea that dogma can change was also condemned by Pope St. Pius X in Pascendi as the "evolution of dogma."

Pope St. Pius X, Pascendi Dominic Gregis (# 26), Sept. 8, 1907, On the doctrine of the Modernists:
"To the laws of evolution everything is subject - dogma, Church, worship, the Books we revere as sacred, even faith itself, and the penalty of disobedience is death. The enunciation of this principle will not astonish anybody who bears in mind what the Modernists have had to say about each of these subjects."

Transformation

 

I had an amazing transformation after hearing the information that Bro. Michael Dimond gave in an interview on the radio.  I contacted you and received your information.  I read your book on Vatican II [The Truth about What Really Happened to the Catholic Church after Vatican II].  That is a fantastic book.  Thank you.

 

Michael Cotton,

 

Laguna Woods, California

 

Confusion disappeared

 

Dear Brothers Dimond,

 

I am so thankful that God led me to your website. I knew things were terribly wrong with the new mass, I used to think John Paul II was such a good pope but I had to ask God ‘Why doesn’t John Paul II fix this mess’ but things just seemed to get worse horrible music, altar girls, communion in hand etc. when I read your website I new I had found the truth and all my confusion disappeared. In addition, when I read about the imposter Sister Lucie I actually got chills but it made perfect sense. In just a few days the information on your website changed my entire perspective on life. Keep up the good work; I will keep you in my prayers.  Also could you explain Lenten practices prior to Vatican II?

 

Sincerely,

Maria

 

MHFM: Thanks for the e-mail.  In the Traditional Catholic Calendar and Fast Days section of our website we have the traditional rules for Lent and the rest of the year.

 

USA?

 

Dear Brothers,

 

If we claim to be true authentic traditional Catholics, should we then shun being Americans? If you take the fact that this country was founded as a result of rebellion against the Catholic monarchies so as to usher in "personal freedoms and liberties" and at the same time was constructed by the anti-Christian freemasons, you can see why I ask this. I believe that the founders of this country knew they were establishing a new world order right from the get-go and today we see signs all around us that the new world order is alive and thriving and continues to escalate, especially when considering that this country is scheduled to soon merge with Canada and Mexico to become the North American Union.

 

As a traditional Catholic, I'm wondering if I should love and support the country I live in, or rather shun it. Yet there is no other place on earth that holds a true traditional Catholic monarchy is there? So if I'm to not support my country, the USA, and yet continue to live in the USA, then isn't that like "biting the hand that feeds me"? I really would appreciate your thoughts on this.

 

Thanks, and God Bless!

-Josh

 

MHFM: As bad as the spiritual situation in America is, the fact is that it provides a better situation than most countries do for traditional Catholics.  In America, one is (theoretically) able to promote the fullness of the Catholic faith without fear of fines or jail time.  This is not the case in many countries, where offending certain groups can land you in jail.  So this is not to praise America, but rather to acknowledge that it provides a better situation than most countries at this bleak stage of human history. 

 

Pope Leo XIII provided the Catholic outlook on this matter.  In the following encyclical he noted that America affords opportunities that aren’t available in some other countries.  He was quick to point out, however, that the separation of Church and State in America contradicts Catholic teaching:

 

Pope Leo XIII, Longinqua (#6), Jan. 6, 1895: “For the Church amongst you, unopposed by the Constitution and government of your nation, fettered by no hostile legislation, protected against violence by the common laws and the impartiality of the tribunals, is free to live and act without hindrance. Yet, though all this is true, it would be very erroneous to draw the conclusion that in America is to be sought the type of the most desirable status of the Church, or that it would be universally lawful or expedient for State and Church to be, as in America, dissevered and divorced.”

 

New Audio on Papacy – Section C of Part 2

 

Hermas, Victor, Irenaeus and Cyprian - The Early Church recognized the Bishop of Rome as the successor to St. Peter's authority - Section C of Part 2 [new 15 min. audio]

 

This section covers the evidence for the Papacy from the second and third centuries.  It covers Hermas, Anicetus and Victor in the Easter Controversy, Irenaeus, Cyprian and the rebaptism controversy.  It shows how, at this early stage of the primitive Christian Church, the supreme authority of the Bishop of Rome was recognized.  The primitive Christian Church recognized the unique authority and primacy of the Bishop of Rome because he held the universal jurisdiction which was given by Jesus Christ to St. Peter.

 

This is found permanently in our: Refuting Protestantism and Eastern "Orthodoxy" page.

 

Struck

 

Dear Brothers,
  

We have been visiting your website almost daily since we found it, very well done and Thank You. I was baptized in the Catholic Church when I was less than a year old but that was it, I feel fortunate that I am able to learn the true teachings of the church now. When I read the material on your website I feel as though I am receiving food for my soul and the more I read the more content I feel knowing that I am learning the truth, I have to admit I was following all kinds of heretical teachings mainly because of my ignorance to the Catholic dogmas and my lack of proper understanding in various areas of the Bible. Again we thank you and commend you for your perseverance in spreading the truth.

 

Also I have to tell you how I was originally introduced to Catholicism, because I had no religious training growing up, it was through the apparitions at Bayside in New York. Years later after they ended we went searching one day to see if anything had ever come from them, that is when we found your website, and after having visited a few times and putting two and two together everything started to make sense, we have been struck with awe ever since. We always thought something was wrong with those messages but did not have the true knowledge of Catholicism to know they were false.

 

We also bought your dvd’s and some of your books, when I watched the part about Hell that was enough for me that section made me realize how complacent I had become and how I was following heretical teachings, I am ashamed but also thankful to God that we were lead to your website. Thank you, your work is highly appreciated, never stop.

 

Thank you,

 

Gail Bhimasani

 

Masonic Confirmation

 

I would like to ask a question..on something I saw at a Confirmation ceremony at my church recently.  The church was beautifully decorated all over with lots of banners listing the gifts of the Holy spirit.

 

On one of these banners...was a picture which decribed the words meanings... what bothered me was... under one of these words

was a picture of a pyramid with an open eye in the center.  I always thought that was a Mason sign or am I wrong.?  and what would it be doing in a catholic church ?  As I have seen some of your tapes I thought you'd be the one to ask.

                     

Thank you,

Mrs. d. Smith

 

MHFM: Yes, it sounds very much like the all-seeing eye used in Freemasonry.  That’s why you need to get out of the invalid New Mass.  The Novus Ordo “Confirmation” cannot be considered valid either, as our material shows.

 

 

Comment

 

Brian's letter which you published under the heading "Scales of Deception" is probably the most mind boggling critique of your work that I've ever seen.  What makes it so amazing to me is the fact that Brian seems to have some foundation in Catholic teaching beyond the superficial "kumbaya" Vatican II one, yet he derives such a ridiculous conclusion.  He actually tries to apply the very sound principle, given to us by the Lord himself, that "by their fruits you shall know them". 

 

But what "fruits" does Brian see?  I quote: "I would suggest the constant emphasis on the punishment of evil doers is a bad fruit."  Huh?  That doesn't even make sense.  What you choose to emphasize (and I don't agree that punishment is an "emphasis" of yours) is a feature or a characteristic of your work, not an effect of your work or a "fruit".  But of course we know that evil will be punished on the authority of Christ!  On the other hand, what are the "fruits" of Vatican II??  How about rampant homosexuality, legalized abortion (do you think that legalized abortion could ever fly in this country in a pre-Vatican II world?), probably a hundred fold increases in divorce, cheap and easy annulments, a total dearth of religious vocations, and every foul scandal imaginable. 

 

On second thought, and I'm just old enough to have a sense of this, let me restate:  These kind of things we've seen in the last couple of decades were not even "imaginable" in a pre-Vatican II world.  Rather than you guys being deceived by Satan as Brian suggests, I suggest to Brian that such obstinate blindness as he exhibits can only be supernatural in origin.      

 

Bill Mulligan

 

Scales of deception

 

To members of the Most Holy Family Monastery,

 

I have just finished reading your web site, which has left me truly saddened and very disturbed. It is obvious you are sincere and convinced you are doing the will of God. Your dedication and enthusiasm for what you perceive to be the truth is magnificent, but sadly, it is the will of the devil that is being carried out on this web site. The evil one has cleverly led everyone astray on here.  The devil is very cunning and is a past master of deception. Change is always unsettling and the changes brought about by Vatican II worried many people. Why were people worried? They lacked trust in God and the Church that had been established by Our Lord himself. Lucifer thrives on people's worries. He takes advantage of the concerns of people and uses them for his own evil purposes. The devil also takes advantage of spiritual pride.  And what are those evil purposes? The destruction of the True Church on this earth, the destruction of the Catholic Church. By allowing yourselves to be deceived into thinking that the present Pope and his predecessors were anti-popes, you are doing the devils work and furthering his ambitions of destroying the Church. This site is doing damage to the truth of God, because you are wrong. The present Pope and Pope John Paul II are not anti-popes, and to think they are, is terribly, terribly wrong.

 

A person's work can always be judged by their fruits. What are the fruits of this web site. I would suggest the constant emphasis on the punishment of evil doers is a bad fruit. There is an almost sadistic pleasure in the wording of what will happen to evil doers. This site gives the impression that it's members will not have to worry about the condemnation and punishment that awaits those "outside the Church". This judgmental and self-righteous stance of yours is in fact the same fruits that are produced by the Protestant doctrine of Salvation by Faith Alone. Protestants who hold this misguided belief display self-righteousness and spiritual superiority just as you do. 

 

On this site there is little reference to the Love of God, which is another bad fruit. God does not go round looking for souls to cast into hell. God does not will anyone to hell. It is difficult see any love for humanity that God has for us on this site.  I ardently call on you here, on this site, to turn away from attacking God's True Church on earth and to return to the fold and pledge allegiance and loyalty to Pope Benedict XVI. The Church has enough enemies on the outside, which is where you stand at this moment. I will pray that Christ will lift the scales of deception that the devil has placed on your minds and heart.

 

Yours in Christ,

 

Brian.

 

MHFM: What’s interesting about your e-mail is that it reveals how those who are trapped in a spiritual deception, as you are, have become blind to how they are wrong.  You really think you’re right, yet you couldn’t be more wrong.  If you can read the following files and still assert that Vatican II, John Paul II and Benedict XVI are not heretical but Catholic, then there’s really nothing we can do for you except hope and pray for your conversion.  For you are of despicable bad will and totally dishonest.

 

Benedict XVI (The Heresies of Benedict XVI File)

John Paul II (manifest heretic who claimed to be pope 1978-2005)

Vatican II - false council

 

It’s a fact that Benedict XVI and John Paul II are/were complete heretics.  Those files (from our book) prove beyond any doubt that they endorse false religions, sign agreements which deny the Papacy and the Council of Trent, teach that we shouldn’t convert Protestants, teach salvation outside the Church, etc.  In case you didn’t know, all of those things are heresies.  That means that they have taught a new and false religion.  You are following manifest heretics who preach a new and false gospel.  Wake up, for you are a blind heretic.  Wake up to the fact that there have been antipopes, that it has been predicted that there will be a Great Apostasy which will implant a Counter Church in Rome, which will reduce the still-existing true Church to a remnant.

 

Shocked

 

I came upon your web site… I was shocked that you do not believe the words of Jesus when he said  to Peter "You are the rock and upon this rock I will  build my church AND THE GATES OF HELL SHALL NOT PREVAIL AGAINST IT"  Your website denies the above statement  and makes Jesus words mean nothing!  BE CAREFUL WHEN YOU DENY HIM OR HE WILL DENY YOU! You sound more like a Protestant website except with Latin and incense.

Fernando Gaviria

 

MHFM: We only have a whole talk on the Papacy and Mt. 16: The Bible teaches that Jesus made St. Peter the first pope [51 min. audio].  You should listen to it.  The indefectibility of the Church doesn’t mean what you think it does.  It doesn’t mean that there can never be an antipope in Rome posing as the pope; it has happened.  It doesn’t mean that the Church cannot be reduced to a remnant.  In fact, that’s what’s predicted to happen.  You need to read this file and learn something about Catholic principles: The Glossary of Terms and Principles [PDF].  And then you should look at this file and see how Benedict XVI denies the Papacy:  The Heresies of Benedict XVI [PDF file].  That’s precisely why he’s not the pope.  Benedict XVI and John Paul II have agreed with the Protestants on Justification:  The Vatican II sect's Protestant Revolution: the 1999 Joint Declaration with the Lutherans on Justification [PDF File].  Wake up!

 

Thoughts on Mass attendance

 

March 18, 2008 – Why the position that “all traditional Masses which recognize the antipope are absolutely off limits” renders the New Mass pointless or drastically less significant than Jesus indicates

 

MHFM: There are those out there who say that no priest at all who recognizes Antipope Benedict XVI as the pope can lawfully be approached for Communion or Mass.  In addition to all of the points we’ve made in our file about this issue, here’s a thought which we believe further shows that such a position doesn’t add up.  This is not a strict argument, but more something to consider: If it were mortally sinful or heretical for anyone to approach any priest who is praying in communion with a heretical antipope, why did the Devil push for the implementation of a New Mass at all? 

 

Jesus makes it clear that the “abomination of desolation” in the “holy place” (Mt. 24:15) is a major feature of the end times.  It’s a major part of the spiritual deception which leads many astray.  Many believe that this “abomination of desolation” is the New Mass.  But no one can deny that the New Mass/the Liturgical Revolution has been a major feature of the Devil’s plan – one of the biggest.  So why would the Devil have pushed for a New Mass at all, if all the people were going to be damned anyway at all the traditional Masses for praying in communion with an antipope?  If they were all falling – or would have fallen – into mortal sin, heresy, etc. for staying at a traditional Mass where the antipope is mentioned, then implementing the New Mass would only serve to alert more people to the heresies of Vatican II and the true character of the antipopes.  In that case, a New Mass wouldn’t benefit the Devil at all.  It would only make his heretical sect and heretical antipopes easier to identify as revolutionary.

 

The truth is that the Devil obviously pushed for the implementation of a new and invalid “Mass” because he recognized that it had real effects of depriving souls of salvation.  The Devil didn’t want the traditional Mass, even at the churches where the antipopes were accepted.  He didn’t want it even at the places where the antipope is accepted because he recognized that certain people, who hold the fullness of the faith and are uncompromising about it, could be, have been and still are (in certain cases) led to salvation by the true Eucharist and true Mass at certain places where the antipope is accepted (if they don’t accept his heresies or support them).  The Devil, through Antipope Benedict XVI, has only endeavored to return the traditional Mass in a limited away at this very late stage of the apostasy because he knows that almost all of the “priests” who would be using Antipope Benedict XVI’s allowance are invalid anyway and/or notoriously heretical.  But through the great bulk of the Great Apostasy, he made sure that the traditional Mass was almost nowhere to be found at even those places where his antipope was accepted.

 

Again, we emphasize that this is not to say that one can go to all traditional Masses where the priest accepts Benedict XVI.  Many of them should not be attended, as explained in our file.  It is merely to show how far removed from the world of true wisdom is the position that it’s a mortal sin to go to any traditional Mass where the priest recognizes Antipope Benedict XVI.  This has been added to this file: The Question of whether one may receive Sacraments in these difficult times.

 

Mt. 25, Fatima prayer

 

To Most Holy Family Monastery

I would like to hear your comment on Mt.cap.25 v.31-46.  Also about the Fatima prayer: "My Jesus foregive us our sins, save us from the fires of hell and lead all souls to Heaven, especially those who have the most need of thy mercy." It is the the word ALL I think about.

Yours sincerely

Joergen Belling
Denmark

 

MHFM: Well, the first thing that comes to mind is that Matthew 25:41 (the very area you ask about) is quoted in this dogmatic definition.

 

Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, “Cantate Domino,” 1441, ex cathedra: “The Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that all those who are outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans but also Jews or heretics and schismatics, cannot share in eternal life and will go into the everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels [Matthew 25:41], unless they are joined to the Church before the end of their lives; that the unity of this ecclesiastical body is of such importance that only for those who abide in it do the Church’s sacraments contribute to salvation and do fasts, almsgiving and other works of piety and practices of the Christian militia produce eternal rewards; and that nobody can be saved, no matter how much he has given away in alms and even if he has shed blood in the name of Christ, unless he has persevered in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church.”

 

So any idea that Jesus is saying in that passage that those who are good to their neighbors can be saved without the Catholic faith would be a false and heretical interpretation.  We believe that what it means is that in most cases people are damned for things they do in their everyday dealings with other people.  They demonstrate a lack of charity, honesty and good will in natural dealings, etc.  That – in addition to sins of the flesh - is what keeps the bulk of mankind from getting interested in the Catholic faith or practicing it.

 

Concerning the Fatima prayer question, the correct version of the Fatima prayer is given by William Thomas Walsh in Our Lady of Fatima:

 

“O my Jesus, pardon us and save us from the fire of Hell; draw all souls to Heaven, especially those most in need.” 

 

Some people have a problem with the “all” part, as if it indicates something heretical.  We don’t.  St. Paul makes it clear that prayer can be made for “all” men in the very context in which he says that God wants “all” to be saved. 

 

1 Timothy 2:1-5- “I desire therefore, first of all, that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for all men: For kings, and for all that are in high station: that we may lead a quiet and a peaceable life in all piety and chastity.  For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour, Who will have all men to be saved, and to come to the knowledge of the truth.  For there is one God, and one mediator of God and men, the man Christ Jesus.”

 

So there is nothing at all wrong with that Fatima prayer, contrary to what some have said.  This is true even though not all, but very few, are in fact saved (Mt. 7:13).

 

New entry in file on receiving sacraments from non-sedevacantists

 

MHFM: There is a new entry in the following section of our website. Note: this section of our website deals with finer points and issues which concern those who are more familiar with the traditional faith.  Those who are new to the traditional Catholic faith might not find delving into these questions beneficial at this time; for this file concerns the specific target audience who are concerned with this specific question. These individuals hold that there is nowhere to receive Communion or attend Mass today because essentially all the priests hold heretical positions.  This file is found permanently in the “Where to Attend Mass” section of our website.  It will be updated on occasion, when time permits and additional points come up.

 

The Question of whether one may receive Sacraments in these difficult times

*refuting schismatic views in this area

 

The new entry concerns another quote from St. Thomas Aquinas.  This quote further proves our position that it’s not always against the divine law to attend the Mass of, or receive sacraments from, a priest you recognize to be a heretic.  This quote further demonstrates that our position on Mass attendance is the Catholic one.  It refutes the claims of certain schismatics.

 

Protestants

 

I am a little confused.  You say on your website that there is only salvation through the Catholic church???  The bible states that you are saved “through faith in Jesus Christ” not faith in cathalosism or the Pope?  How can you even make that statement?  I can even understand the fundamentalist Protestant position that Catholics can’t be saved because they pray to saints and Mary and the issue of idolatry.  I do not really agree with this but that makes more sense than the idea that a protestant cannot be saved because they do not go to a catholic church.  Let me know you stance on this!!!!!!!!!

 

Ian

 

MHFM: Protestants cannot be saved.  They are not true bible-believing Christians, as we prove in this file: Refuting Protestantism and Eastern "Orthodoxy" Audio Programs.  They reject the one Church which Christ established.  The Catholic Church infallibly teaches that all who die as heretics go to Hell.

 

Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, “Cantate Domino,” 1441, ex cathedra: “The Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that all those who are outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans but also Jews or heretics and schismatics, cannot share in eternal life and will go into the everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels, unless they are joined to the Church before the end of their lives; that the unity of this ecclesiastical body is of such importance that only for those who abide in it do the Church’s sacraments contribute to salvation and do fasts, almsgiving and other works of piety and practices of the Christian militia produce eternal rewards; and that nobody can be saved, no matter how much he has given away in alms and even if he has shed blood in the name of Christ, unless he has persevered in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church.”

 

We hope you review the information in that file on Protestantism.  It always puzzles us why so many who claim to believe in Jesus aren’t immediately inclined to accept the Catholic faith, but fight it or are inclined to some other denomination.  Come on, besides all of the other biblical truths which Protestants reject (i.e. the Papacy, the Eucharist, etc.) – which are so clear in Scripture (Mt. 16, Jn. 6, etc.) – a person should immediately connect with the fact that the Catholic Church was the only original and visible Church from the time of Christ.  Protestantism didn’t come along until the 16th century.  That alone should cause a person to immediately see that the Catholic Church is the true one and that the other “Churches” are false.  If it doesn’t, then there is a problem with bad will.

 

Baptism again?

 

Greetings,

 

I have been brought up a Roman Catholic, however I have been concerned about the Vatican 2 and its teachings. after reading a lot of the topics on this site, I want to convert to the traditional Vatican 1. I read the section about baptism. I was already baptized in 1977 when I was born. This was after Vatican 2 was instated. I have mortal and venial sins on my soul and my question is if I am baptized again in the Catholic Traditional faith, will both my mortal and venial sins be absolved? If you could get back to me as soon as possible this would greatly be appreciated. The other question I have is that there are no Catholic churches around me that follow Vatican 1. I live in Westchester IL. If you know of any in the Chicago land area please let me know also. Thank you for your time.

 

Sincerely,

E.

 

MHFM:  Thanks for the e-mail.  Baptism does remit all venial and mortal sins, but you cannot be baptized again if you've been validly baptized.  When there is a doubt if one has been baptized, then a conditional baptism can be done.  The form of conditional baptism is on our website.  Since you have already been baptized, you would have to be forgiven in a confession.  You would need to make a general confession of all your mortal sins that have not been confessed to valid priests, once you are totally convinced of all points relating to the traditional Catholic faith. 

 

South Africa

 

Dear Brethren

 

Would you possibly know of a validly ordained priest in my area – Thohoyandou, Limpopo province, South Africa. I have not attended a new mass in 20 years, as those priests I am aware of, all celebrate Pope John Paul ii as a saint – I am constantly told to heed other religions as benevolent and to express tolerance and comradelyness  towards such. All these religious practises deny the first commandment.

 

Thank you kindly.

Charlene M.choate.

 

MHFM: We don’t have specific information on any in that area.  So we would recommend applying the guidelines we have in the “Where to Go to Mass” section of our website.  Perhaps you can find a priest who has been validly ordained in the Eastern Rite (Uniate not “Orthodox) who is not a notorious or imposing heretic.  If not, then you would just have to stay home.  But at least you could go to confession, if you could find an old priest who was ordained before 1968 (and thus in the traditional rite of ordination).  As long as he says “I absolve you from your sins in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost,” it would be valid.

 

Better not to

 

Hello,

 

I was hoping you could give me some advice.  I've been really upset about the Vatican I, Vatican II issue.  I was born in 1965 when Vatican II first came into play and was brought up that way.  Not knowing any differently, I went along with it.  For the past few years, however,  it's been haunting me that I'm going down the wrong road.  That I should practice my faith the way Vatican I did.  The church we attend is Vatican II, i.e., female alter girls, other people giving out Holy Communion, not kneeling when we receive Holy Communion, etc, etc.  I read somewhere on the internet that it is better NOT to attend these masses that are worshipping this way.  Is that true?  Sometimes I feel Something is better than Nothing, however, it  really bothers me to see what is going on and that I'm attending it.  Any help you could give me would be greatly appreciated.  Thank you so much.

 

Karen  

 

MHFM: Thanks for the e-mail.  The New Mass is invalid, as we prove here: The Liturgical Revolution: A New Mass  [PDF File].  That means that Jesus Christ is not present there.  The Catholic Church teaches that it’s a mortal sin to approach doubtful or invalid sacraments.  In addition, even if the New Mass were valid (which it isn’t), one still couldn’t go.  This is because it’s essentially a Protestant and sacrilegious service.  So it’s without question better not to attend it.  One must not attend it if one wants to be saved.  There is no obligation to attend Mass if the Church doesn’t provide you with an acceptable option in your area.  Once you’re convinced of all of these points, we can help you with options for places where you might be able to receive sacraments.

 

Some Recent Testimonials

 

Thank you for all your efforts.  We have learned much of great value.

 

Mr. and Mrs. Timura

Necedah, WI

----

Thanks for the insights, remarkable work.

 

Allen Metzger

-----

I can now say I’ve found what I’ve been looking for since the 1960’s.  Thank you for the endless hours spent trying to save one soul at a time.  God bless you.

 

Thomas Miles,

Pinehurst, NC

-----

Thank you very much for your website.  I finally found a website where I can learn about the New Mass and the traditional Mass.

 

J. Vergara,

Montrose, CA

 

Likes Justification audio

 

Dear Most Holy Family Monastery:

 

Thank you for the work you do in His name.  I received Brother Peter Dimond’s tape on Justification.  To say my family merely enjoyed his presentation would be an understatement.  I used the tape to augment our study of Catholic dogma for my family during Lent.  My son who is eighteen and has attended Catholic religious instructions at the local Catholic church that we formerly attended made the comment that he learned more about Catholic beliefs from this presentation than in his entire time in any Catholic instruction group.  I have passed on the tape to help enlighten others.  I first pray that I can reach more people with the truth… I have appreciated all of your presentations and found them enlightening.  God bless you and may the Lord Jesus continue to inspire your work.

 

Sincerely,

Mary Marceau-Hawthorne,

Macedon, NY

 

Today’s mail

 

MHFM: This is a picture of some of the outgoing orders that were shipped on Friday.  64 orders were shipped.

We post this picture to show that, despite the darkness of our world, there are many people who are still coming to, interested in and practicing the traditional Catholic faith.  New people are finding out about the traditional Catholic faith every day.

 

Baptism of Desire

 

Dear Brothers Dimond,

your otherwise commendable website is seriously marred by your misunderstanding of baptism of desire.

Consider this: Is baptism of desire the same thing as desire of baptism?

I look forward to your reply.

 

MHFM: No, you don’t understand.  The Catholic Church teaches that there is only one baptism of water. 

 

Pope Clement V, Council of Vienne, 1311-1312, ex cathedra:  “Besides, one baptism which regenerates all who are baptized in Christ must be faithfully confessed by all just as ‘one God and one faith’ [Eph. 4:5], which celebrated in water in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit we believe to be commonly the perfect remedy for salvation for adults as for children.”

 

The Catholic Church also teaches that the Sacrament of Baptism is necessary for salvation.  It teaches that the words of Christ in John 3:5 are to be understood literally, as they are written.  Baptism of desire is not a teaching of the Catholic Church. 

 

As far as providing you with a definition of the false theory of “baptism of desire”, that would depend of course on which baptism of desire advocate you ask.  That’s a good question for baptism of desire advocates:  Can you please tell me exactly what baptism of desire means (a definition), what its limits are, and in what text this definition for it is found?  If “baptism of desire” is a teaching of the Church which Catholics must believe, then surely providing a definition for what this binding “teaching” says shouldn’t be a problem.   

 

But since the so-called “baptism of desire” has never been taught or defined by the Magisterium, there is no definition of it.  If you ask 10 different people, you would get 10 (at least slightly) different responses.  9 out of 10, however, would give a definition which would allow for salvation of individuals who don’t even know of Jesus Christ or desire baptism. 

 

You need to read our book on this issue: Outside the Catholic Church There is Absolutely No Salvation [pdf file].  It answers all the objections, and it presents the facts which refute baptism of desire:

 

For instance: in Section 33 of the aforementioned book, we summarize the following arguments which baptism of desire advocates cannot refute.  These arguments disprove baptism of desire.  Keep in mind that the book answers and refutes every single major argument they bring up, while baptism of desire advocates don’t ever address these arguments from the infallible teaching of the Church.  They don’t address them because they cannot refute them:

 

The following twelve arguments from the infallible teaching of the Chair of St. Peter (besides others) have been presented in this document.  Every single one of the following points is a divinely revealed truth of Faith (a dogma), not a fallible opinion of some theologian.  These points refute the idea of baptism of desire.  The baptism of desire advocates do not and cannot answer these arguments from the infallible teaching of the Church:

 

1) The Catholic Church teaches that the Sacrament of Baptism is necessary for salvation (de fide, Trent, Sess. 7, Can. 5). [Everyone admits that baptism of desire is not a sacrament.]

2) Unless we are born again of water and the Spirit, we cannot enter heaven (de fide, Florence, Exultate Deo).

3) The Church understands John 3:5 literally every time, as it is written (de fide, Trent Sess. 6, Chap. 4), and with no exceptions (de fide, Florence: Denz 696; and Trent: Denz. 791, 858, 861).

4) The Spirit of Sanctification, the Water of Baptism and the Blood of Redemption are inseparable (de fide, Pope St. Leo the Great, Council of Chalcedon).

5) All Catholics must profess only one baptism of water (de fide, Clement V, Council of Vienne).

6) There is absolutely no salvation outside the one Church of the faithful (de fide, Innocent III, Fourth Lateran Council), which only includes the water baptized.

7) Every human creature must be subject to the Roman Pontiff to be saved (de fide, Boniface VIII, Unam Sanctam), and it is impossible to be subject to the Roman Pontiff without the Sacrament of Baptism (de fide, Trent, Sess. 14, Chap. 2).

8) One must belong to the Body of the Church to be saved (de fide, Eugene IV and Pius XI), and only the water baptized belong to the Body of the Church.

9) Pope Benedict XII solemnly defined that all martyrs, virgins, confessors, faithful, etc. in Heaven have been baptized (Benedictus Deus, 1336, ex cathedra).

10) The Church is defined as a union of sacraments (de fide, Eugene IV, Cantate Domino; Boniface VIII, Unam Sanctam), which means that only those who have received the Sacrament of Baptism can be inside the unity of the Church.

11) All true Justification meets up with the Sacraments (Council of Trent, Sess. 7, Foreword to the Decree on the Sacraments).

12) The Sacraments as such are necessary for salvation though all are not necessary for each individual (de fide, Profession of Faith at Trent and Vatican I; and the Profession of Faith for converts), which means that one must at least receive one sacrament (Baptism) to be saved, but one doesn’t need to receive them all.

 

There is no doubt what the true position is.  However, we say this for those out there who might be struggling with this issue.

 

In light of all this evidence, why would anyone fight for salvation without baptism?  Why would you fight for a “theory” which – at the very least, you must admit – cannot be proven from the infallible teaching of the Church?  Why would you fight for it when all of these things from the dogmatic teaching of the Church militate against the idea of anyone being saved without the Sacrament of Baptism?  Why would you fight for salvation outside of baptism, when there are so many facts (see above) which – at the very least in your mind – you cannot explain how they are compatible with a “baptism of desire”?  (Again, Baptism of desire means salvation outside the sacraments and we have all of these statements from the infallible teaching of the Church on the necessity of being within the sacraments). 

 

In light of all the evidence against baptism of desire from the infallible teaching of the Church, one can see why we say that to fight for it in the face of these facts is simply to demonstrate bad will.  That’s why we say that those who have seen all of this evidence and still say that there is baptism of desire (i.e. that there is salvation without baptism and thus without subjection to the Roman Pontiff, being incorporated into the “faithful,” etc.) are of bad will.  And in almost 100% of cases, they fight for it simply because they believe it applies to pagans, Buddhists, Jews, Muslims, etc.

 

Also, there are many heretics out there who consistently misquote Sess. 6, Chap. 4 of the Council of Trent.  They obstinately use the “except through” false translation instead of “without” (sine).  If they have been made aware of this point, as many of them have by our material, then they commit mortal sin every time they use this false translation.  They also ignore, of course, the fact that the same passage teaches that John 3:5 is to be understood “as it is written,” as our book explains.  This shows that our understanding of this passage is correct.

 

Not sins anymore

 

I just received a free copy of the March, 2008 Homiletic and Pastoral Review, one of the better V2 “Catholic” magazines I once subscribed to.  Unfortunately they also seem to have embraced the V2 theology where the idea of sin and its consequences has been virtually eliminated. The purpose of the Catholic church is salvation of the soul. The purpose of the V2 church is social justice and making better lives for ourselves. This can be done very well in any Protestant church. They are clearly two different churches and this is just one more bit of proof of that fact.

 

The article is titled: A Catholic physician talks to engaged couples by William G. White: “As a physician, I don‘t call them [use of various contraceptives to avoid children] sins; I call them unhealthful practices. I might even justifiably call them poisons. Whether or not they lead to hell in eternity, they can certainly lead to hell on earth. By driving a wedge between husband and wife…. “When he [God] says “Thou shalt not,” he is not trying to take all the fun out of life. He is trying to save us from actions that will harm us, that will distort our natures, that will inevitably make us profoundly unhappy.”

 

pm

 

MHFM: That’s very interesting.

 

Reader against Boxing

 

[To MHFM]

 

That was an excellent response to the gentleman who defended professional boxing.  I just thought I would add something in here.  I was in the Marines from 1996 to 2000.  One of the first things in our training is combat hitting skills (which is essentially boxing).  About a month after I finished Recruit Training on Parris Island, I heard of a recruit who was killed in combat hitting skills.  All the protective gear is used for that training event, namely, gloves, headgear, mouth guard (to keep teeth from being knocked out), groin guard (against low blows), etc.  Even with all of that, a recruit was still killed!  The Marine Corps cancelled combat hitting skills immediately afterward.  That should be a convincer that boxing is a potentially deadly sport.  Take care, and God bless.

 

In the Suffering Christ,

Michael McBee

 

Reader defends Boxing

 

I’m inclined to disagree with your take on boxing.  Catholics were never called to be pacifists, and the occasional necessity of a justifiable use of force has been acknowledged.  That being the case, it would also seem acceptable for men to be practiced in such skills, which might also include marksmanship, fencing, and wrestling.  Competition is a practical, sometimes the only way, of developing such skills.  Organized boxing is designed to minimize the threat of injury to the participants.  Participants must wear padded gloves, mouth pieces, are matched by weight, and a referee is charged with protecting anyone in serious trouble.  Although I understand this is off point, as a practical matter, I think there are actually more football related fatalities and serious injuries (although probably due to the vastly greater number of participants) than result from boxing.   A good boxer must have courage, discipline, and fortitude.  I therefore don’t see that it is intrinsically evil, though of course anything can be abused.  The goal after all is not to truly harm the opponent, though he maybe temporarily incapacitated (as in a way is a long distance runner at the end of say a marathon). Firearms are actually meant to kill people.  Does this make pistol shooting competitions (at targets of course) also wrong?   How about fencing?      

 

William

 

MHFM:  Having played all kinds of competitive sports, anyone who knows us knows that we’re all in favor of the toughness which sports can help provide.  In fact, one of the major problems today with almost all clerics is they lack the toughness to stand up to evildoers; to fight against heresy; to take on and attack and denounce (when necessary) those who would deny the faith; to completely disregard what people will say about them or do to them when they stand for the cause of God.  Since so many priests and alleged teachers of Catholicism today demonstrate such a cowardly attitude in standing up for the truth, one must say that perhaps if they had played sports they might be tougher in standing for the truth and more willing to offend and alienate people when it becomes necessary.  No, Catholics are not pacifists.  However, as much as one might like the aspects of courage and toughness that Boxing might demonstrate, it cannot be defended as an acceptable sport.  A “sport” where the basic concept is to beat the other person up is immoral. 

 

All three of the examples you provide miss the point.  You bring up “the occasional use of justifiable force.”  Obviously that has nothing to do with Pro Boxing.  Pro Boxing as a sport is not an “occasional use of justifiable force,” as in war or self-defense.  It’s engaging in combat – trying to harm another – for sport, gain and fame.  That’s immoral. 

 

The other example you bring up is practicing such skills for the occasional use of justifiable force.  This also has nothing to do with Pro Boxing.  Last time we checked there weren’t any pro boxers being shipped to a foreign country to use their right hooks to attack hostile enemies.  Pro Boxing as a sport has nothing to do with preparation for military conflict or practicing such skills for a justifiable use of force.  

 

If people in military training are sparring in a controlled environment, in actual preparation for war or hand to hand combat they might encounter in the next military conflict, that’s an entirely different matter from Pro Boxing as a sport.  That kind of sparring as training would be acceptable, since it would be in preparation for a presumably just cause.  Moreover, it would certainly be accompanied by all the precautions to make such necessary training as safe as possible.  But in Pro Boxing they don’t even have headgear.  Most importantly, as stated above, it’s simply trying to harm another for sport, gain or fame, which is immoral.

 

Your final example, which involves shooting pistols at competitions, also fails.  Shooting firearms into targets doesn’t injure anyone, nor is it intended to do so.  Thus, it’s not comparable to Pro Boxing at all.

 

Nearly convinced

 

Hi,

 

I wanted you to know I am nearly convinced and very sad about the whole new mass.  I have put the John Paul books in the garbage and also Sister Faustina's book.  Everything you said was right there in print.  I have ordered the DVD.  What about the body and blood of Christ?  Is'nt that what Jesus said we must do, recieve it, I mean. Thanks for answering my E-mail.

 

Betty

 

MHFM: We’re glad you’re nearly convinced and that you saw the facts about Sister Faustina’s book.  John Paul II’s books are worth about as much as garbage, except to expose his heresies.  Before finding a place to receive sacraments, if there is one for you, you have to be totally convinced on all the issues.  That includes being committed to never attend the New Mass again.

 

Pro Boxing

 

First Question  (Is Pro Boxing/MMA immoral) I would like to know if the Catholic Church considers pro boxing or Mixed Martial Arts immmoral (UFC/Pride/K-1). Would it constitute a mortal sin to participate in or watch pro boxing/MMA? If it is immoral why didn't the Pre Vatican 2 Church condemn pro boxing especially since many catholics have participated in it and watched it? If a Catholic made money off pro boxing/MMA from participating in it or promoting it would he be obliged to give the money
to charity?


                                                                   -Serge

 

MHFM: As opposed to other acceptable sports (e.g. Football, Basketball, Baseball), we believe that Pro Boxing is not an acceptable sport.  Pro Boxing is immoral because the goal of the sport is to harm and/or incapacitate the opponent.  In Boxing a person is awarded victory if he knocks his opponent unconscious.  This is immoral. 

 

Pope Leo XIII, Pastoralis Officii (#1), Sept. 12, 1891: “Clearly, divine law, both that which is known by the light of reason and that which is revealed in Sacred Scripture, strictly forbids anyone, outside of public cause, to kill or wound a man unless compelled to do so in self-defense.”

 

Whereas in Football – a physical sport which will rarely result in someone being knocked out – the goal is to bring the opponent to the ground and get the ball into the end zone.  In Football one is not awarded victory or points for knocking the opponent out.  That’s why it’s not immoral, but Pro Boxing is.  Thus, a person should not watch Pro Boxing.  Ultimate Fighting is simply evil.  We don’t know much about Professional Mixed Martial Arts.  If it’s similar to the others, then it would likewise be immoral.  A person shouldn’t watch any of these immoral sports (Boxing, Ultimate Fighting, etc.).  If a person made money in Pro Boxing he should (after taking care of his personal needs) confess his involvement in it and use the money for the glory of God and the salvation of souls.  This would be done in these days by supporting only that which is 100% Catholic, not by supporting any heretical groups.

 

It should also be noted that the quote above is from Pope Leo XIII’s 1891 encyclical Pastoralis Officii.  This is an encyclical which condemns the practice of dueling as mortally sinful.  (Dueling was obviously more common in those days.)  While the analogy wouldn’t be exact, we believe that an analogy can be drawn between the immorality of dueling and the immorality of Pro Boxing. 

 

2 or 3 in the midst of them

 

When Christ says whoever is gathered together in my name there am I in the midst of you, are you saying he only means True catholics?

 

b…

 

MHFM: Yes, He does.  That’s why it says the following in Matthew 18:17, which is just three verses before the one you reference (Matthew 18:20):

 

Matthew 18:17- “And if he will not hear them: tell the church. And if he will not hear the church, let him be to thee as the heathen and publican.”

 

The Church which one must hear is the only Church He founded: the Catholic Church.  Therefore, one cannot truly gather “in His name” unless one has the Catholic faith.

 

False traditionalist heretics on Benedict XVI and Luther

 

MHFM: False traditionalists and defenders of the Vatican II sect have scoffed at the recent report that Benedict XVI is planning on rehabilitating Martin Luther.  It’s interesting that almost none of them even linked to the story until after they thought they had a response to it.  Their response simply dismisses the veracity of the report and proves nothing.  They essentially call it ridiculous.  However, when they assert that the notion that Benedict XVI will rehabilitate Luther is ridiculous, they only further display their ridiculous blindness.  Benedict XVI and John Paul II have both already agreed that Luther’s main heresy (Justification by faith alone) is no longer a heresy at all, as we prove in this file:

 

The Vatican II sect's Protestant Revolution: the 1999 Joint Declaration with the Lutherans on Justification [PDF File]

 

Benedict XVI himself has also stated that Protestantism is not even heresy.

 

Benedict XVI, The Meaning of Christian Brotherhood, pp. 87-88: “The difficulty in the way of giving an answer is a profound one.  Ultimately it is due to the fact that there is no appropriate category in Catholic thought for the phenomenon of Protestantism today (one could say the same of the relationship to the separated churches of the East).  It is obvious that the old category of ‘heresy’ is no longer of any value.  Heresy, for Scripture and the early Church, includes the idea of a personal decision against the unity of the Church, and heresy’s characteristic is pertinacia, the obstinacy of him who persists in his own private way.  This, however, cannot be regarded as an appropriate description of the spiritual situation of the Protestant Christian.  In the course of a now centuries-old history, Protestantism has made an important contribution to the realization of Christian faith, fulfilling a positive function in the development of the Christian message and, above all, often giving rise to a sincere and profound faith in the individual non-Catholic Christian, whose separation from the Catholic affirmation has nothing to do with the pertinacia characteristic of heresy.  Perhaps we may here invert a saying of St. Augustine’s: that an old schism becomes a heresy.  The very passage of time alters the character of a division, so that an old division is something essentially different from a new one.  Something that was once rightly condemned as heresy cannot later simply become true, but it can gradually develop its own positive ecclesial nature, with which the individual is presented as his church and in which he lives as a believer, not as a heretic.  This organization of one group, however, ultimately has an effect on the whole.  The conclusion is inescapable, then: Protestantism today is something different from heresy in the traditional sense, a phenomenon whose true theological place has not yet been determined.”[13]

 

Further, as we prove in our file The Heresies of Benedict XVI [PDF file]: At Vatican II, Benedict XVI even complained that the document Gaudium et Spes relied too much on Teilhard de Chardin and not enough on Martin Luther.[14]  Benedict XVI is also credited with saving the 1999 Joint Declaration with the Lutherans on Justification, which declared that Luther’s heresy of Justification by faith alone (and many others) are somehow no longer condemned by the Council of Trent. 

                                                      

Benedict XVI, Principles of Catholic Theology (1982), p. 263: “That which in Luther makes all else bearable because of the greatness of his spiritual fervor…”

 

Yes, it’s so ridiculous to think that Benedict XVI would rehabilitate Luther, isn’t it?  No, it’s the logical culmination of all of the above.  What’s ridiculous and outrageous is that these compromising false traditionalist heretics actually think that they’re Catholic, while they eat up the weekly plate of apostasy which Antipope Benedict XVI offers them.  They eat up his weekly apostasy because it’s mixed in with the spice of occasionally conservative comments.  The one consolation which those who thirst for justice can have is that compromising heretics such as this, who defend Antipope Benedict XVI and belittle or ignore all the consequences of his undeniable and well-documented heresies, won’t get away with their bad will before the Judgment Seat of Christ.

 

Flashback: Baptism of Desire advocates totally refuted

 

MHFM: About a year back we posted this important article.  It obliterates many of the most popular arguments made by baptism of desire advocates and it vindicates the position we have enunciated on the issue.  We direct people to it again, with some additional comments, because the obstinate heretics who defend baptism of desire/salvation for non-Catholics have generally ignored the fact that the most popular claims they like to make about baptism of desire have been totally refuted by the facts in this article.

 

Examining the Theological Status of Geocentrism and Heliocentrism and the Devastating Problems this creates for Baptism of Desire Arguments [PDF] *very important article which demolishes popular baptism of desire arguments, contains a new quote from a pope on geocentrism and much more

 

For instance, among the many false claims made by baptism of desire advocates, the one that baptism of desire advocates like perhaps more than any other is this: baptism of desire must be the teaching of the Church because St. Alphonsus, Doctor of the Church, said it was de fide.  J.L. put it this way:

 

J.L. “It is one thing to say that a Doctor might have erred (and who would wish to make such a claim???) - it is another thing entirely to say that all theologians for hundreds of years erred without correction, and that a Doctor of the Church labeled that error as de fide!!!  The former is merely absurd - or at least, usually so; the latter is an assault on the Church herself…”

 

The article above shows that J.L. doesn’t have the first clue what he’s talking about.  The article proves that St. Robert Bellarmine, Doctor of the Church, held that the geocentric view of the universe is de fide and that St. Robert’s position was later contradicted by Pope Benedict XV.  Since the baptism of desire advocates have been completely refuted by this article – yet have ignored the fact that they have been refuted and have continued to promote the same lies – we post this summary of points from the article.  We post it here to put them to shame once again.  It demonstrates, for anyone who might question it, that our position on the baptism of desire issue and related issues is totally consistent and that the primary claims of baptism of desire advocates are false.

 

IMPORTANT CONCLUDING SUMMARY OF POINTS

 

In favor that geocentrism is binding         Against that it’s binding

1616- eleven theologians of the Holy Office condemn heliocentrism with tacit approval of Pope Paul V

 

-St. Robert Bellarmine transmits this decision to Galileo and considers it binding; he considers geocentrism to be de fide

 

- The Cong. of the Index published a Decree forbidding all works favoring heliocentrism

 

1633- The Holy Office considers Galileo suspect of heresy for favoring heliocentrism; he is required to make an abjuration which indicates that heliocentrism is heretical and that geocentrism is de fide; this is done with approval from Pope Urban VIII

 

1664-1665- Pope Alexander VII promulgates an Index on his own authority forbidding all works which contradict geocentrism

 

1757- Pope Benedict XIV suspends Decrees of the Congregation of the Index against Heliocentric works

 

1822- With approval of Pope Pius VII, the Holy Office decides that books on movement of Earth could be printed at Rome

 

1921- Pope Benedict XV explicitly states that the Earth might not be the center of the universe in In Praeclara Summorum

 

-All popes from 1757 to 1958 at least tacitly agree that heliocentrism or a non-geocentric view of the universe may be held

 

 

 

 

 

 

I believe I have shown that the acts against the denial of geocentrism are not infallible.  In conclusion I would like to emphasize that this case sheds much light on the parameters of Church infallibility.  In fact, it has ramifications for so many issues that it would be very difficult to include them all in this article.  The facts on this issue obliterate popular arguments in favor of baptism of desire.  In addition, these facts have major significance in refuting arguments in favor of Natural Family Planning, that Mary is the Co-Redeemer, that saints couldn’t be mistaken in good faith about the dogmatic status of truths without being heretics or schismatics, etc.  Allow me to summarize:

 

The argument that baptism of desire must be true because St. Alphonsus (Doctor of the Church) thought that baptism of desire is de fide has been totally refuted.  St. Robert Bellarmine thought that geocentrism is de fide and he was contradicted by numerous popes.

 

The argument that to deny baptism of desire is contrary to the teaching of the Catholic Church because Fr. Feeney was denounced in a 1949 letter of two members of the Holy Office, has been obliterated.  It has been shown that in 1616 eleven theologians of the Holy Office denounced heliocentrism and in a 1633 abjuration composed by the Holy Office geocentrism was declared to be de fide and the denial of it heretical.  Both of these acts were contradicted by later popes.

 

The similar but different argument that the absolute necessity of water baptism could not have been solemnly defined by Pope St. Leo the Great or the Councils of Florence and Trent because then St. Alphonsus would have been a heretic has also been refuted.  I will quote baptism of desire advocate J.D. who unwittingly proves the point:  “… if heliocentrism has been infallibly condemned by the Holy See, there has never been any point in the history of the Church when this has been universally recognised to be the case and nearly four centuries have now passed during which hardly any Catholic has correctly realised the true theological status of heliocentrism.”  What he didn’t add is that if heliocentrism has not been infallibly condemned by the Holy See, then numerous popes (e.g., Paul V and Urban VIII) and a Doctor of the Church (St. Robert Bellarmine) acted like it had been and thus were unaware of the true theological status of this issue.  If they could have been completely wrong about the true theological status of this controversial point, then certainly St. Alphonsus and others could have been as well concerning the dogmatic status of the absolute necessity of water baptism.  Thus, either way our point is proven.

 

The argument that baptism of desire or salvation for “the invincibly ignorant” couldn’t be heretical because numerous popes (especially starting in the late 1800’s) allowed these ideas to be circulated and spread in fallible sources (catechisms, theology manuals, etc.) without condemning them has been totally refuted.  As the table above shows, numerous popes disallowed the circulation of heliocentrism for reasons of faith, and then just as many allowed it.  Thus, the fact that popes such as Pius IX, Leo XIII, and Pius X reigned when clear heresies against the salvation dogma were taught in many catechisms, theology manuals, etc. proves absolutely nothing.

 

The argument brought forward by Bishop Pivarunas of the CMRI, the vigorous defender of “natural” birth control, that Natural Family Planning or the rhythm method must be acceptable because it was taught in speeches by Pope Pius XII, and even by members of the Holy Office in response to queries as far back as the 1880’s, has been totally refuted.  Just as the numerous decisions made by members of the Holy Office in the Galileo affair did not settle that case and were completely contradicted by Pope Benedict XV, the decisions and statements from members of the Holy Office and Pius XII on NFP were not infallible and contradict the more solemn teaching of Pope Pius XI in Casti Connubii.  Further, Benedict XV’s statement that the Earth might not be the center of the universe in an encyclical is more formal than the speeches in which Pius XII taught NFP and baptism of desire.  Yet, the position enunciated by Pope Benedict XV in his 1921 encyclical was not held by Pope Paul V and Pope Urban VIII, who gave their approval to the opposite position.

 

The argument that it cannot be contrary to dogma to say that Mary is our Co-Redemptrix because Pope Leo XIII and one or two other popes called her such in non-infallible statements has been refuted.  The above facts show that numerous popes held that geocentrism was a settled issue of faith, while numerous other popes did not.  Thus, our position that one should not call Our Lady “Co-Redemptrix” because the Councils of Trent (Denz. 984-987) and Florence (Denz. 711) specifically declare that Jesus Christ alone is our Redeemer is perfectly theologically sound from the standpoint of papal evidence and the fact that popes can, in their fallible capacities, fail to recognize this.

 

These facts provide a striking vindication to the approach to these issues which we have enunciated at Most Holy Family Monastery.  This approach sticks uncompromisingly to the infallible definitions of the Catholic Church and their definitions “as once declared” (Vatican I, Denz. 1800), even if numerous statements from esteemed fallible authorities or popes in fallible capacities contradict them.  This information not only vindicates our position, but illustrates in a powerful way that the pernicious heretics [many of them named in the article] who have misled many people based on their pseudo-intellectual appearance of fidelity to the Church by arguments from theologians, from St. Alphonsus, from the condemnation of Fr. Feeney, and their disregard for arguments from dogmatic definitions, have been completely refuted and proven wrong.

 

Audio thoughts and Benedict XVI and Luther

 

Martin Luther's outrageous attacks on the Catholic faith, in light of Antipope Benedict XVI's plans to rehabilitate the heretic [5 min. audio] Martin Luther, the notorious Protestant heretic, said that the Papacy was “founded by the Devil.”  Hear more outrageous statements (which you probably haven’t heard before) from the man whom Antipope Benedict XVI wants to rehabilitate.

 

This will be found permanently in our: Traditional Catholic Audio Programs file.

 

Atheist is a fan of John Paul II

 

You people are what's wrong with the world.I'm an Atheist and a Pansexual and I have friends of all religions including those you deem "heretical" and we all coexist peacefuly with respect,although I am Atheist I respect Pope John Paul II not because he was a religious leader but because he was a good man who respected all life and all faiths you people have no right to call him a "heretic".And abortion is a womans right and is entirely a womans choice some women can't afford to take care of a child and would rather get an abortion then make a child suffer starvation and poverty.Gays aren't evil or possesed nor are they gay because of a psychological problem they are some of the nicest people on this planet.You people don't belong in the modern world with your outdated mindset.Now please go back to the dark ages and help the inquisitors torture innocent non-catholics i'm sure you would enjoy it

Dee

 

MHFM: When people like you are fans of John Paul II, it proves our whole point about the apostate antipope.  His message was one of acceptance of falsehood, sin and evil.  He provided an empty message which rejects the Catholic faith, leads people to Hell and confirms non-Catholics like yourself on their false paths.

 

Narrow/loose interpretation of EENS

 

Just exactly what is a narrow interpretation?  And since when is extra ecclesiam nulla salus "a notion"?

 

“Just one year previous, during the course of one of his regular Thursday evening lectures, Fr. Feeney gave a talk on the notion that "outside the Church there is no salvation." A young Protestant woman in attendance was so shocked by what she heard she contacted another Jesuit, who then notified the Jesuit Provincial, Fr. John J. McEleney, S.J., who registered "serious concern" about Fr. Feeney and his narrow interpretation of <extra ecclesiam nulla salus>. --Michael J. Mazza, Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus: Father Feeney Makes a Comeback, Fidelity Magazine

 

MHFM: There is no strict or loose interpretation.  There is what the Church has once declared.  And that is that all who die without the Catholic faith are lost. 

 

Pope Pius IX, First Vatican Council, Sess. 3, Chap. 2 on Revelation, 1870, ex cathedra: “Hence, also, that understanding of its sacred dogmas must be perpetually retained, which Holy Mother Church has once declared; and there must never be a recession from that meaning under the specious name of a deeper understanding.”

 

Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, “Cantate Domino,” 1441, ex cathedra: “The Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that all those who are outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans but also Jews or heretics and schismatics, cannot share in eternal life and will go into the everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels, unless they are joined to the Church before the end of their lives; that the unity of this ecclesiastical body is of such importance that only for those who abide in it do the Church’s sacraments contribute to salvation and do fasts, almsgiving and other works of piety and practices of the Christian militia produce eternal rewards; and that nobody can be saved, no matter how much he has given away in alms and even if he has shed blood in the name of Christ, unless he has persevered in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church.”

 

Heretics who believe in salvation outside the Church like to call adherence to what the Church has once declared a “narrow” or a “strict” interpretation of the dogma.  They do this specifically because that creates the false impression that their rejection of what the dogma actually says is somehow a legitimate or true interpretation of it.  It’s a total lie.  They simply reject the dogma as it has been declared.  Thus, they lie when they say they hold it in the “proper interpretation.”  That’s just a ploy to cover up their denial of the dogma.  They know that the dogma has been declared by the Church, so they know they must come up with a way to make their rejection of it appear as somehow in conformity with the idea they reject.  And that’s how they do it.

 

What about this Mass?

 

Pax et Bonum...

I was enlightened by your website and i already found it that there was something wrong in the Catholic Church now after Vatican II... i was so sad  about the novus ordo... like the way Novus Ordo Mass is celebrated... im also a devotee of Saint Philomena, i am also sad that her Name was strike from the calendar of Saints after Vatican II... im from the City of Iligan here in the Philippines where majority of our city's population are Catholics... Tabernacles here are transfered from the center to right side of the Churches here instead of the Eucharist must be the center.

i have a question, because your site discourages attending Novus Ordo Mass... I have attended Latin Mass (Gregorian) not Tridentine before here, concelebrated by the Holy Spirit Priests(Spiritans), but  sad to say, they don't celebrated it anymore... is it ok for me to attend the kind of Mass??? it seems that it is much more solemn than the Mass spoken in Vernacular...

how can i practice Traditional Catholic Mass (Tridentine Mass) if no one is celebrating it here...??? can you help me with my problem.... thanks..

More power...


rhyan c. gomez

 

MHFM: Thanks for the e-mail.  We would point out that the problem is not in the Catholic Church, but in the Vatican II sect which is not the Catholic Church but purports to be. 

 

To your question, if you are referring to an Indult Mass (i.e. one where they also have the New Mass in the same church), then you should not go.  Also, most of those priests you are referring to were ordained in the New Rite of Ordination.  The New Rite of Ordination is invalid: Why the New Rite of Ordination is Invalid [PDF File].  So that would be another reason why one couldn’t go.  There are guidelines on our website about receiving sacraments in these times.  You should look at that section on our website.  You must not go to the New Mass.  There is no obligation to attend Mass if the Church doesn’t provide you with a fully Catholic one in your area, so you might have to stay home on Sundays.  But make sure you pray the Rosary each day, 15 decades if possible.  And there is probably a place for you to go to confession, at least.

 

New Mass different in Singapore?

 

Hi
 
if you do stop by Singapore, please visit the local Catholic Churches. Compared to what your site says, how Novus Ordo is practiced is extreme to what we do here. Our adaptation o novus ordo is very different. Much of your descriptions do not apply to us.
 
Yes, perhaps there are issues that are contentious such as apparitions. Beyond that, I want to point something out. Here in Asia, things are different. Come to anywhere in Southeast Asia, and you will find near 100% Mass attendance. Our mass rituals do not differ much from the traditional Latin Rite either (this is in particular reference to your site).
 
The point I want to make across is that do not over generalise base on what you observe. Perhaps the West have many wrong perceptions of the faith, but that does not conclude anything about the faith itself. I believe there is no conflict with novus ordo and earlier treaties. Adaptations can be awry, but that is the result of individual decision. Faith must not be confused with decision.
 
Anyway, this is no attack letter. I'm just emailig out of concern as a brother of Christ. Perhaps there is some misunderstanding as result of generalisation.
 
Regards
Joseph
 
P.S. Do not use the media as looking glass to the Churches in Asia. The Western media tends to only report extemist practices that make up a very tiny minority. Also, I would really appreciate that you can send an acknowledgment reply that you have read my email. Thanks

 

MHFM: First, we think you are exaggerating the state of affairs in Singapore.  There are no altar girls, Eucharistic ministers, “Communion” in the hand?  We doubt it.   Regardless, it doesn’t make any difference.  Even if you go to the most “reverent” Novus Ordo “Mass” possible – one which doesn’t have any of the outrageous sacrileges so common in this country – it’s still an invalid non-Catholic service.  Jesus isn’t there, as we prove here: The Liturgical Revolution: A New Mass  [PDF File].  The words of consecration have been changed!  Almost all of the priests are invalid because they were ordained in the New Rite of Ordination.  Further, it’s a Protestant service.  70% of the prayers have been gutted and the whole service has been restructured to fit a Protestant and man-centered mold, as we document in that file.  So get over it if your particular “parish” offers a less sacrilegious version of the false service; it’s still a non-Catholic service which you must avoid under pain of grave sin.  We must tell you that, if you continue to go there, you will lose your soul. 

 

The pictures of the outrageous sacrileges at the New Mass, which we expose in our file/video/book, are very revealing about the demonic fruits flowing from the whole Novus Ordo system.  They expose the wicked fruits that came from the implementation of the New Mass.  They serve to reveal the total breakdown of – and departure from – Catholic Tradition and holiness which the New Mass represents.  However, they are not necessary in proving that one cannot go to the New Mass.  They are, rather, valuable in exposing the evil spirit behind the Liturgical Revolution.

 

Sunday work-eat?

 

I found the following question and answer in my daughters catechism:

 

What work is permitted on Sunday? Answer: 4th. The buying and selling of victuals, clothing, shoes, etc., in public stores.  But shop-keepers should keep their places closed in order to distinguish Sunday from the other days of the week.

 

I was under the impression that we were not permitted to go shopping on Sundays.  Any comments?

 

What sin do those commit who make others work on Sunday? Answer: They sin just as much as if they were to work themselves, and, besides, they are responsible for the sin of those who work at their bidding.

 

Am I committing a sin if I stop at a restaurant to have lunch after Mass if the Mass location I am attending is a long distance from my home?

 

K

 

MHFM: Thanks for the question.  People should not go shopping on Sundays.  They should also not go out to eat.  The only exception to this would be if people are travelling very long distances because they have to do so.   If they are only travelling one or two hours each way, then they should just eat when they get home. 

 

Since many people who are reading this have not been taught these concepts by the Vatican II “Church,” we must point out a few other things in this regard: servile works are forbidden on Sundays; people should not do laundry on Sundays; people should not do yard work (such as mowing the lawn, etc.) on Sundays.  Exceptions to this would be work that absolutely must be done.  For example, if you must shovel out your driveway after a heavy snowfall, so that you can get to work, then you could do so on a Sunday.  People should also try to arrange with their employers that they don’t have to work on Sundays.  However, if working on Sundays is an integral part of the job you have, then you must do it.  Or if even requesting to not work on Sundays might cost you your job then you don’t have to do that.  Likewise, other work that must be done on Sundays, due to one’s occupation or state, can be done. 

 

Clement and Ignatius - New Audio on the Papacy, Section B of Part 2

 

The Early Church recognized the Bishop of Rome as the successor to St. Peter's authority - Section B of Part 2 [new 14 min. audio]

 

This section moves into the evidence that the Bishop of Rome/the Church of Rome was recognized as supreme in the primitive Christian Church (precisely because it inherited the authority of St. Peter).  This section covers the famous epistle of Clement of Rome to the Corinthians (A.D. 90-100) and the famous epistle of Ignatius of Antioch to the Romans (circa A.D. 110).  Learn what you probably didn’t know about these most famous documents of early Christianity.  These documents are some of the most important in the history of Christianity and they are regarded with great respect by essentially all students and scholars of the early Church, regardless of denomination.  Learn how they demonstrate Catholic teaching on the Papacy.  Hear the very interesting admissions about these documents from an Eastern “Orthodox” scholar, and how such admissions serve to refute the Protestant and Eastern “Orthodox” position.  (Section C of Part 2 will be posted in the future.) This is found permanently in our: Refuting Protestantism and Eastern "Orthodoxy" page.

 

Fr. Feeney

 

Dear Brothers,

Congratulations for your website, there are many valuable articles and interesting comments. However, I'm somewhat confused. You seem to support Fr. Feeney's teaching on Baptism, but I though Fr. Feeney had been condemed by Pope Pius XII. If so, isn't your position rather dangerous?

Roger Mitchinson

 

MHFM: First we need to point out that Fr. Feeney’s teaching (that no man can be saved without baptism) was not his teaching.  It’s the infallible teaching of the Catholic Church.

 

Pope Paul III, The Council of Trent, Sess. 7, Can. 5 on the Sacrament of Baptism: “If anyone says that baptism [the Sacrament] is optional, that is, not necessary for salvation (cf. Jn. 3:5): let him be anathema.”

 

Pope Paul III, The Council of Trent, Can. 2 on the Sacrament of Baptism, Sess. 7, 1547:  If anyone shall say that real and natural water is not necessary for baptism, and on that account those words of Our Lord Jesus Christ: ‘Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Spirit’ [John 3:5], are distorted into some sort of metaphor: let him be anathema.”

 

Pope Eugene IV, The Council of Florence, “Exultate Deo,” Nov. 22, 1439:  “Holy baptism, which is the gateway to the spiritual life, holds the first place among all the sacraments; through it we are made members of Christ and of the body of the Church.  And since death entered the universe through the first man, ‘unless we are born again of water and the Spirit, we cannot,’ as the Truth says, ‘enter into the kingdom of heaven’ [John 3:5].  The matter of this sacrament is real and natural water.”

 

So those who happen to agree with him on that point (that no one can be saved without the Sacrament of Baptism), as we do, are agreeing with the infallible teaching of the Catholic Church.  Regarding your question about his position being condemned, this is addressed in our book: Outside the Catholic Church There is Absolutely No Salvation [PDF FILE].  We would strongly encourage you to look carefully at those sections which deal with Fr. Feeney and Protocol 122/49.  The true position, which Fr. Feeney espoused, was condemned by a non-infallible document written by a cardinal of the Holy Office during the reign of Pope Pius XII.  As we point out in the book, the heresy of salvation outside the Church, which was expressed at Vatican II and subsequently adopted by the Vatican II sect in brazen fashion, began to be held by priests in the decades prior to Vatican II.  The decay of faith, which led to this situation of the Great Apostasy we’re in, began with much of the clergy in the years before Vatican II.  So the fact that a non-infallible document during the reign of Pius XII condemned the true position simply further reveals that this Great Apostasy began before Vatican II.  Such fallible documents must be dismissed and completely rejected when they contradict the infallible dogmatic teaching, as the document against Feeney did.

 

Spiritual over physical

 

MHFM: Here’s an interesting quote which illustrates how the Catholic Church, always faithful to the teaching of Jesus Christ (Mt. 10:28), places the health of the soul over the health of the body.

 

“The priests of the Society [the Jesuits] observed with sorrow that many of those whom they visited on sick-beds departed life without the Church’s means of grace; [St.] Ignatius thereupon remembered the ordinance of Innocent III, ratified by the twelfth General Council, the tenor of which was that the aid of the physician of the soul should be invoked before that of the physician of the body.  He [St. Ignatius] earnestly recommended the observance of these enactments with this alleviation, that on the first and second day of illness a doctor should be allowed to attend the patient, but not again on the third and fourth day, unless latter [the patient] had in the interval made his confession.  All the theologians and canonists of the Penitentiaria signified their approval in writing.  The Pope [Paul III] was much please with the proposal; about Epiphany in the year 1544 it began to be put into execution.” (Dr. Ludwig Pastor, History of the Popes, Vol. 12, p. 44.)

 

V-2 monastery teaches Hinduism

 

Dear Sirs,

Am learning about Christianity. Went through your site with great interest.  There is a Benedictine monastry in South India in a village called Thannirpalli, which is near Trichy. There they were teaching the Hindu idea, namely, 'I am God, and you are God.' What do you say about this?  Secondly, what is the truth about the shroud of Turin?

Please write to me.

Ajeet Goel.

 

MHFM: Thanks for the e-mail.  To your first question, the idea that man is God is not Catholic doctrine.  It’s Antichrist doctrine.  It’s condemned heresy.  There is only one God, the Most Holy Trinity (Father, Son and Holy Ghost).  The idea that man is God is the lie that Satan told Eve in the Garden (Genesis 3:5).  So that “monastery” is not a Catholic one; it’s part of the heretical Vatican II sect which our website exposes.  Hinduism is a false religion. 

 

To your question about the Shroud of Turin, we respond that it’s definitely the authentic burial cloth of Jesus Christ.  The image is miraculous.  Please watch our video Creation and Miracles, Past and Present here for the facts on it.  We also sell another DVD called Jesus and the Shroud of Turin, the best film on the miraculous shroud.  The Shroud of Turin is another proof of the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus Christ.  We’re truly glad to hear about your interest and we pray that you follow through with it.  It’s critical for you to continue your investigation, come to accept Jesus Christ, and enter His one true Church.  This is the most important thing in your entire life because it’s necessary for salvation. 

 

Since you asked about Hinduism and the teaching that man is God, there is another point worth mentioning.  Sometime back we posted the following to show how the satanic lie that man is God rests deep in the heart of Hinduism’s “holy books”.  Further, it shows how these most ancient texts of Hinduism essentially represent the Devil’s version of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.

---

Sacred Scripture is clear that the gods of these false religions are devils (Ps. 95:5; 1 Cor. 10:20).  Since we’re talking about Hinduism and the area around India, there is an interesting story which confirms the truth of Sacred Scripture about the satanic nature of Hinduism.  Fr. Roberto de Nobili was a Jesuit missionary to India in the 1600’s.  In attempting to bring Christianity into the interior of India, he came face to face with the wicked Caste System.  It was difficult for Nobili to even communicate with the members of the “higher” castes until he adapted his ways to make himself appear not to belong to a lower caste; for the high caste members wouldn’t respect him and would shun him.  The Brahmins were the spiritual leaders of the false Hindu religion.  They actually maintained (or purported to maintain) a monastic-style of existence.  They were among the high caste members of Hindu society, and only they knew the language in which the Hindu “holy books,” the Vedas, were written.  This knowledge gave them much influence over the people.  The Vedas constituted the most ancient collection of Hindu scriptures.  The esoteric language in which they were written is called Sanskrit. 

 

Through a series of actions, including things which were considered by some to be unacceptable compromises, Nobili gained the confidence of one higher-caste Hindu and became the first European to learn the esoteric language, Sanskrit.  This enabled him to read their “holy books,” the Vedas.  In reading these Nobili discovered that the central truth of the “holy books” – and thus the deepest “truth” hidden at the heart of Hinduism, resting beneath its innumerable idolatries and ridiculous myths – is that each man is God.  We will quote a passage from the biography of Nobili to demonstrate the point.  The passage introduces, and then quotes, a teaching-story from the Vedas about a father addressing his son, who is named Svetaketu:

 

“The religion of the Vedas had been developed… into a system called the Vedanta… The central doctrine of the higher truth is summed up in the formula ‘That art Thou,’ explained as follows in the Chandogya Upanisad…[It reads]: … ‘Bring hither a fig from there.’  ‘Here it is, sir.’  ‘Divide it.’  ‘It is divided, sir.’  ‘What do you see there?’ ‘These rather fine seeds, sir.’ ‘Of these, please, divide one.’  ‘It is divided, sir.’  ‘What do you see there?’ ‘Nothing at all, sir.’  ‘Then he said to him, ‘Truly, my dear, that finest essence which you do not perceive – truly, my dear, from that finest essence this great sacred fig tree thus arises.  Believe me, my dear,’ said he, ‘ that which is the finest essence – this whole world has that as its self.  That is Reality.  That is Atman.  That art thou, Svetaketu.’… Then he said to him: ‘That salt you placed in the water last evening – please bring it hither.’  ‘Then he grasped for it, but did not find it, as it was completely dissolved. ‘Please take a sip of it from this end,’ said he.  ‘How is it?’  ‘Salt.’ ‘Take a sip of it from the middle,’ said he. ‘How is it?’ ‘Salt.’ ‘Set it aside.  Then come unto me’… Then he said to him: ‘Truly, indeed, you do not perceive Being here.  Truly, indeed, it is here.  That which is the finest essence – this whole world has that as its self.  That is Reality.  That is Atman.  That art thou, Svetaketu.’  In other words, Thou, the individual soul, art God, contained within Him in absolute absorption.” (Vincent Cronin, A Pearl to India: The Life of Roberto de Nobili, E.P. Dutton & Co., 1959, pp. 92-93) 

 

So, at the core of Hinduism’s most ancient texts – some of the most ancient expressions of religious thought known to man – is the satanic lie that man is God.  It’s also very interesting that the story above contains a prominent reference to the “sacred fig tree.”  Some Biblical scholars believe that the original tree of the knowledge of good and evil, which God forbade Adam and Eve to eat from, was a fig tree.  Satan promised Eve that they would become “as Gods” if they ate from it (Gen. 3:5).  It’s almost as if this ancient Hindu text, in inculcating the satanic lie at the heart of its religion (that man is God), took it directly from the serpent in the Garden who lied about the tree!  That’s why Hinduism is idolatrous; that’s why the cultures which are infested with it are evil and dominated by something as heinous as the Caste System.  It’s because Satan is ultimately behind it all.  This simply demonstrates once again that the gods of the heathens (Ps. 95:5; 1Cor. 10:20) are truly lying devils, and they’ve been lying to man from the beginning.  Keep in mind that Hinduism is a religion praised by the Vatican II sect.

 

Vatican II document, Nostra aetate # 2: “Thus in Hinduism the divine mystery is explored and propounded with an inexhaustible wealth of myths and penetrating philosophical investigations, and liberation is sought from the distresses of our state either through various forms of ascetical life or deep meditation or taking refuge in God with loving confidence.”

 

Likes info in Nigeria

 

Hello people of God,

 

I greet you all in the name of our lord Jesus Christ. My name is Anthony Ogbonmwan, I am the president of the Altar Servers association… Edo State Nigeria.  I must say that I am really and very happy and impress with what I have seen in the most holy family monastery web site I started visiting this web site this month and I have been able to see things I mean things, informations I have never known of. I have been looking for how I can get life of saints, Catholic calendar and the history of the Catholic Church but I have not been able to get it but when I visited the site I was able to see the Calendar and many other informations...

 

I pray that almighty God continue to strengthen, guild and protect you, may he give you the zeal to work for him. And as you continue to do the good work you have started may he reward you in a hundred folds and may his mercy shine upon you and may he continue to bless you till the end. Through Christ Our Lord. Amen… Keep on the good work you have started and may almighty God continue to bless you through Christ Our Lord. Amen.

 

No donations/wills to heretics - interesting quote

 

MHFM: In our material we have frequently pointed out that Catholics should neither will things nor give gifts/donations to those who are heretics or non-Catholics.  This would include those who profess to be traditional Catholics, but don’t hold the correct positions.  Well, here are some interesting canons we’ve recently come across in study.  They come from the regional councils in Africa around the year 419 A.D.  They inculcate the same ancient Christian concept:

 

Canons of the African Code, 419 A.D., Canon 22: “And that to those who are not Catholic Christians, even if they be blood relations, neither bishops nor clergymen shall give anything at all by way of donation of their possessions.”

 

Canons of the African Code, 419 A.D., Canon 81: “It was ordained that if any bishop should prefer to his Church strangers to blood relationship with him, or his heretical relatives, or pagans as his heirs, he shall be anathematized even after his death…”

 

Freemason

 

Dear sir,

I did watch some videos.  It’s a pity that there is a lot of propaganda for segregation.  You know what that means; apartheid and war.  We as Freemasons are building bridges, and looking for the things people have in common.  Not any dogma that will separate human beings from each other.  I can not understand why this fundamentalist Christianity is supporting, and creating, fear.   We must work together to make harmony in this world, not segregation/ war, as you are suggesting.  Wake up, globalize and live in peace with all dogmas there are  and don’t try to be right.  Therefore you will make things wrong.

Be in harmony. The world shall be as one.  Have a nice day, and nice dreams,

Theo
the Netherlands

 

MHFM: We post this as an interesting confirmation of the fact that Freemasons accept the wicked idea that all dogmas are true.

 

Found site, converted

 

Dear Brothers,

 

I wanted to tell your website visitors… how the Lord led me out of a complete spiritual fog back to reality. The summary is as follows.  I was confirmed in the Vatican I Church in the early 1960s on Long Island, New York. At that time the Catholic Church was very clear in its teaching about Who God is, Who Jesus Christ is, that God is Holy and that we are not. And that Jesus Christ died a death of atonement for us, a death that put an end to the animal sacrifices that mankind had been making to atone for sin. It was clear that all people needed to repent of their sins against God and be baptized in the one Catholic Church and submit to Church teaching in order to have their sins forgiven and get right and stay right with God.  By the late 1960s everything was changing rapidly. Things that used to seem clear were becoming cloudy. Even the Church's teaching was becoming clouded by the Vatican II implementation at the parish level and many of us were leaving the Church for this reason and for many other reasons… I claim no innocence here at all. I was getting caught up in the entire drift of the age, the drift from absolute truth to relativism. And it was tearing up our society and the world. It's only getting worse today.

 

In 1972 I experienced a personal revival of my faith in God, but I did not know where to go to find others with what seemed to be genuine faith. By that time I was convinced that there was something missing in the Catholic Church but I didn't know what it was. The folk masses seemed contrived to me. I ended up within the Protestant Evangelical stream but knew right away that I did not belong there either. So I was adrift from about 1972 until recently, exploring this, that and the other thing, and never really understanding where God's true Church is. I simply put up with the ambiguity.  Until recently.

 

During the past few years I noted that something terribly wrong was happening in America and all around the world. This whole "new world order" movement and globalization were beginning to stink. First it was the government's dogmatic explanation for the 9/11 incident within only three hours of its occurrence. I'm sorry, you do not investigate and solve a mystery of that magnitude in three hours. Something was fishy right there.  Then it was the weapons of mass destruction and the whole hysteria created by the mainstream media that led the American people into a totally unjustified assault on a nation that represented about as much of a threat as Cuba, Venezuela, or even Israel. The weapons of mass destruction turned out to be weapons of mass deception.

 

Then it was all the cover-ups for 9/11 and the Iraq debacle. And the torture. And the demolition of the United States Constitution and the Bill of Rights to protect us from terrorists that nobody could even see. And the constant spying on every communication of every citizen, looking for "the terrorists." But more than this I was disappointed by the Roman Catholic Church's response to all this.  They were silent.  How could this be? I asked. Was there no statement on torture? No recitation of just war theory? On government lying to its own people. No statement on the emerging New World Order under Lucifer? What was going on! Perhaps it was the pedophile scandal that had shut the clergy up; perhaps the clergy were saying "We won't bother you if you won't bother us." But, finally, I could take it no longer.

 

I began to pray earnestly, "Lord, where is your Church? Where are the real Catholics?"  Within days I woke up with "mostholyfamilymonastery.com" on my mind. I had heard [of the website]… but now it was time to have a good long look at the website and see if there might be some clues as to whatever happened to the Roman Catholic Church that I grew up in during the 50s and early 60s.  Well you know the rest. You Brothers have done a splendid job investigating what happened to the Church. The true Church is still alive, but is not assembling within the Catholic infrastructure like it used to, because almost that entire infrastructure has been hijacked by this blasphemous Vatican II sect and its adherents. You have documented numerous incidents of in-your-face papal heresy and Vatican II teachings that also qualify as heresy. The Vatican II "Church" is simply not the Roman Catholic Church of tradition. It is no doubt a radical departure from the Gospel of Our Lord Jesus Christ. And it is deceiving many, many people into following a Gospel of Man in the Church of Man. This is Antichrist. This new "church" is quite possibly a precursor to a coming new World Religion as part of the New World Order that many global leaders talk about. And now it has become clear to me that the divide in America and the whole world today is not Liberal vs. Conservative, or Civilization vs. Terror, as our mainstream media would have us believe. It is authentic Catholic Church vs. Everything Else. It's not Left vs. Right, it's Inside-the-true-Catholic-Church vs. Outside-the-true-Catholic-Church. But Lucifer has most people too busy fighting each other so that they don't realize that they should be taking up the Cross of Christ and fighting Lucifer. "...upon this rock I will build My church; and the gates of Hades shall not overpower it," said Our Lord. Let us put on the whole armor of God and demolish Lucifer's strongholds and invoke the coming of Our Lord with great power and glory!

Blessings in Our Lord,

 

Rob

 

Novus Ordo seminarian

 

Hello, my name is Anane Joseph, am a seminarian at Pope John Paul II Major Seminary, in Lomé, TOGO, am in my third year philosophy and a Ghanian. I was much grateful when i saw the informations on the internat, defending the Catholic faith, from all forms of heresies. May God richly bless you and the Virgin Mother continues to interceed on your behalf. I would like to use this opprtunity to ask for a favor from you, that is, some documents that can help me in my priesthood formation. Counting on your cooperation.

 

 Anane Joseph.

 

MHFM: Thanks for the interest, Anane.  The documents on our website are all very important, but you must get out of the Novus Ordo seminary.  At that seminary you will be trained to accept heretics (such as John Paul II).  You will also be trained to offer an invalid New Mass and accept the heretical Second Vatican Council. You must get out of that seminary.  It’s not Catholic.  These files (among others) show why:

 

John Paul II (manifest heretic who claimed to be pope 1978-2005)

Vatican II - false council

The Invalid New Mass

The New Rite of Ordination

 

A True Relationship

 

Sub. A True Relationship

 

I happened to come across your website on the new catholic church.  It all seemed like so much information and overwhelming.  But I know Christ talks about the false churches in the end days.  I know you say you have to be true catholic to go to heaven but I don't understand if I really love the Lord, why would I be sent to hell. Honestly, I have fallen away from the Lord.  I lost my baby son over a year ago and have had a really hard time excepting this.   I know there is more to God than just spitting out prayers and wishes but I cannot find His presence anymore.  It has been very lonely without Him.  I have seeked guidance from other churches to have no response or council whatsoever.  I am lost.  If you could send me some more information on how to start a real relationship with God, I would be eternally grateful.

 

Very respectfully,

Mrs. Frederick

 

MHFM: Thanks for the e-mail.  You cannot really love the Lord unless you accept His one true faith (Heb. 11:6).  So those who don’t accept His one true Catholic faith, yet think they love the Lord, will be sent to Hell.  God allowed your child to die; you must resign yourself to what He has allowed.  All the guidance you need is found in the traditional Catholic faith.  In addition to the other material on our website, the books we offer on lives of the saints are extremely important.  In the history of the Church and in the lives of the saints one will find all the keys and facets to a true relationship with God.  In reading them, one will find in great depth and richness the profound holiness which exists only in the traditional Catholic Church. 

 

V-2 homosexual evil


I found your radio program interesting concerning the N.O. seminaries and the homosexual activities that are promoted within.  Though not new or surprising to me, I would think the liberal N.O. mess goers would realize something evil is occurring within the VII church, when nothing is done to these N.O. priests after being convicted of pedophilia…


God Bless you all,
T.M.

 

MHFM: Yes, one would think that the scandals which are rampant in the Vatican II sect would cause people to immediately connect with the truth of material such as ours, which exposes the Vatican II sect.  Unfortunately it doesn’t always work that way, since so many people are of bad will.

 

25 hours reading

 

Since I “accidently” discovered your website I have spent at least 25 hours reading. I was born and raised Catholic. Went to Catholic schools. Later in life I was very disappointed that I learned next to nothing about Jesus Christ our Savior. I came back to… a Bible study with men who are Baptists.  I very much enjoy my Bible study group and our discussions about scripture. Over the years I have lost my respect for the Catholic Church. I usually go to the Baptist service after Bible study. I have never been comfortable in a Baptist Church or Church of Christ but for a while it seemed as though I couldn’t do better. I miss the Roman Catholic Church but if it’s all Vat2 what can I do?

 

Matthew Macheca

St. Louis, MO

 

MHFM: We’re really glad to hear about your interest.  You ask what you can do.  Well, you’ve probably discovered that the Vatican II sect is not the Catholic Church.  So you need to convert to the true (traditional) Catholic faith.  That’s the one and only faith of Jesus Christ and it’s necessary for salvation.  First, you need to stop going to the Baptist church.  Like the other Protestant sects, it’s not truly Christian.  Second, we would recommend listening to the talks in this file: Refuting Protestantism and Eastern "Orthodoxy" * Audio Programs, as well as watching our videos: WATCH OUR DVDS ONLINE FOR FREE and obtaining our DVD special.  They further demonstrate that the Protestant sects, such as the Baptist sect, reject the true teaching of the Bible.  We also strongly encourage you to obtain a rosary and begin to pray it.  We have a How to Pray the Rosary file on our website.  We also offer a Penny Catechism; it explains the basics of the Catholic faith.  We also have a section on our mainpage – which is in red about ¾ of the way down the list of links – which explains the steps one must take to convert to the Catholic faith.  Anyone can follow them and everyone should.

 

Insane?

 

How sad.    You deny the authority of the magisterium and its teachings on the infallibility of the Bishop of Rome (also called the Pope or Holy Father), as proclaimed

by Vatican Council I.  Yet you claim yourselves to be infallible and appoint yourselves as judge of God's Church and His appointed successor who does indeed sit on the throne of Peter.  You show very little understanding of the true theology of the Second Vatican Council's teachings, and deny all the good that has come from it, even in the midst of the confusion that followed the changes after 400 years without a council.   You talk about the beginning of the Church and speak of "having Jesus and Paul".  It is no wonder that you do not even mention Peter, whom Jesus Himself appointed as The Rock upon which His Church is built. Instead, you would rip the keys that Jesus assigned to Peter and His successor in Rome, and take them into your own hands, lock the doors of Truth and substitue your own prideful teachings.  As I said, you believe that you alone are infallible and you assume that not from God's appointment of you as chief teacher and judge, but by your own attempts to take that authority unto yourself.  You set you self in opposition to Jesus Christ Himself and His Will.   How sad.

 

Elizabeth

 

MHFM: Are you insane?  We quote popes all the time.  Further, we prove the points we make against the Vatican II sect by quoting dogmas which have been defined by popes.  We also have entire talks proving the office of the Papacy from Scripture, in order to refute Protestants and the “Orthodox.”  Yet you say that we “do not even mention Peter, whom Jesus appointed as the rock.”  So you attack our website with completely false and ignorant nonsense.  Your false and ignorant statements show that you lack almost all knowledge of the contents of the website you are attacking.  Your e-mail therefore serves as another good example of the horrible quality of argument which is typically made by defenders of the Vatican II sect.  You need to wake up and take a deep and honest look at the facts.  The facts we present prove what we’re saying from the teachings of the Catholic Church.  Vatican II and Benedict XVI trash the Papacy; that's why they praise the "Orthodox" schismatics all the time.

 

UFOs are Demons

 

MHFM: In the future we will have an article which will show that UFOs are demons.

 

Asia?

 

HI, I'm a Filipino, and you probably know by now that Filipinos are totally devout Catholics. My question is, has the influence Novus Ordo Mass reach Philippines,or any part of Asia?

 

m…

MHFM: Yes, the Novus Ordo has been implemented all over the world, including in Asia.  "… all nations have drunk of the wine of the wrath of her fornication; and the kings of the earth have committed fornication with her” (Apocalypse 18:3).

You need the New Catechism

 

I am a devoted catholic and I find your web site offensive.  You have taken the truth and twisted it with half lies.  May God have mercy on you for this and I will pray for your forgiveness.  You need to read the Catechism of the Catholic Church to know what the Catholic Church really teaches.  You should not present yourself as a monestary with teaching like you are displaying.  This is heretical.  You need to look at the divinity of the church that was established by Jesus Christ himself.  Put aside your human biases and begin to search out the truth.  May God guide you.

Fred Janofski
Devoted to Jesus Christ.

MHFM: It’s precisely because we are familiar with the New Catechism that we know what we’re saying about the Vatican II “Church” is true.  Among other heresies, the New Catechism teaches that Holy Communion, etc. may lawfully be given to non-Catholics.  That is totally heretical.

John Paul II, Catechism of the Catholic Church (#  1401): “… Catholic ministers may give the sacraments of Eucharist, Penance, and Anointing of the Sick to other Christians not in full communion with the Catholic Church…”

You need to look at yourself closely and come to the realization that you don’t know what’s going on, that you don’t understand the Catholic faith, and that you are not looking at this honestly.

Avoid?

 

Dear Brothers,
 
Thank you for your web site, materials and all of your advice. I do have one more question - I trust in your answers and I believe this is a matter that can effect my salvation. I grew up in a very emotionally abusive home, is it a sin to distance myself from my sister who is "addicted" to conflict and causes me to sin the sin of anger. She constantly creates chaos with her attitude and her verbal and written attacks. She attacked me so viciously today I told her never to call or contact me again. Is that a sin? As hard as I might try - she will attack me again, I just want to live in peace. Is that a sin?
 
I was very mad at her today, now I am not. I will pray for her but I no longer want contact. Thank you for your help.
 
May GOD Bless you
Gene

 

MHFM: Certainly there is no sin in cutting off contact with her, especially if she’s heretical in some area.  Considering her activity, we assume that she’s not a true Catholic.  But rather than saying that you never want to talk to her again, you might want to word it in a slightly different manner.  You might want to say: “do not call me anymore, until you change your ways and convert to the traditional Catholic faith” (assuming that she’s not a traditional Catholic).  But based on what you have said, we agree that you should cut off contact with her.

 

New audio on Papacy, Part 2

 

The Early Church recognized the Bishop of Rome as the successor to St. Peter's authority - Section A of Part 2 [new 14 min. audio]

 

Was Peter ever in Rome?  If so, how come the Bible doesn’t say so?  Even if Jesus gave great authority to Peter, what does that have to do with Rome?  Didn’t St. Paul rebuke St. Peter in Galatians 2:11?  Where does the term Catholic Church come from anyway?”  These are just some of the questions that are frequently brought forward by non-Catholics who object to Catholic teaching on the Papacy.  In this audio you will learn the answers to these questions and these objections.  This audio is section A of Part 2 of a larger audio presentation proving the Catholic doctrine on the Papacy from the Bible and the early Church.   Part 1 (51 min. audio) proved from the New Testament that Jesus made St. Peter the first pope.  This section shows that the offices of the original bishops and the office of St. Peter (the Papacy) were instituted to continue with successors.  They were founded by Jesus to continue through the history of the Church after the original apostles and Peter had died.  This section demonstrates that St. Peter was in Rome and was its first bishop; it demonstrates that apostolic and papal succession come from the teaching of the Bible; it discusses the origin of the term “Catholic Church,” Gal. 2:11 and more.   The next section (Section B of Part 2), which will be posted in the near future, will give examples of how the early Church recognized the Bishop of Rome to have the authority of St. Peter. 

 

This is found permanently in our: Refuting Protestantism and Eastern "Orthodoxy" page.

 

Repulsed then interested

 

Dear Brother Michael Dimond,

 

I recently purchased the set of DVD’s; Creation and Miracles, Why John Paul II Cannot be the Pope and Communists and Freemasonic Infiltration of the Catholic Church.

After viewing each DVD, I have so many questions. I can guess that it is likely that you have prepared answers to the most commonly asked questions for those who have viewed your DVD’s.

 

I am feeling so many different emotions after viewing the DVD’s. I recall that my first reaction on visiting your website, (to purchase the Padre Pio booklets), was repulsion at the information on your home page as I had great respect and love for Pope John Paul II, as well as my Church. After all, the Catholic Church is my Church in whom I place my faith, my hope, my trust and my love. But, despite my repulsion to the things on your homepage, something led me to order the DVD’s. Now that I have viewed them, I do not know what to do, as it appears that you have done much in depth study and obviously feel obligated to inform all Catholics what you believe you have discovered. I am not discounting any of the information contained in the DVD’s, I am just so confused. My instincts tell me that turning to Jesus’ own words in the scriptures, and to the early Church Fathers is the most logical place to turn for the answers, which seems to be exactly what you have done. I am not an educated person, and am not confident in my abilities to fully understand and comprehend the scriptures and the doctrines as set forth by the early Church. I do know that Satan is the great deceiver, and right now I am torn between wanting to trust and believe in the Church and the Pope, and fearful that you are absolutely correct.

 

If I place my trust, my eternal salvation in what you say, that you are correct, then what should I and my husband and family be doing? Is there something/anything we can do to help prove/remove a false Pope? What should we be praying for? If our Church has the ‘new mass,’ should we even be attending and receiving the Eucharist? If no, where do we go if there is not a Church that does consecrate the Eucharist and teach/preach in the correct way? Should we only be receiving the Eucharist from a pre-Vatican II Priest, and on the tongue? What if the Priest was ordained after Vatican II? Are the sacraments he has administered invalid? Even confessions are invalid and I need to re-confess them? What about new Catholics just coming into the Church? I teach RCIC at our Parish, and my husband just went through RCIA.

 

My husband has said that we should go and talk to our Parish Priest about all of this, but I am afraid that if the Priest is deluded, that his advice may not be the correct advice. I am so frightened for the salvation of souls, especially those who are dearest to me. I am so confused and frightened, please help, and please pray for me and my family.

 

I await your reply.

 

Your Sister in Christ,

Karen, a woman crying in the desert

 

MHFM: We often get the questions: how does one know whom to follow or what to believe?  How do we know that what you are saying is true?  The answer to both questions is that you must judge everything by the standard of the Magisterium.  That’s why it’s important to look at this file and to understand the terms in it: The Glossary of Terms and Principles [PDF].  The Magisterium is the teaching authority of the Catholic Church.  The teaching of the Magisterium is infallible.  The teaching of the Magisterium is found in the dogmatic pronouncements and the infallible teachings of the past popes.  Thus, you know that what we’re saying is true because it’s based on the past infallible teachings of the Catholic Church.  So those who reject what we say on these matters are not rejecting us, but the infallible teachings of the Church upon which our positions are based.

 

Second, you must stop going to the New Mass.  It’s not valid.  You must get out of there under pain of mortal sin.  When you’re convinced of that and of all the other positions, then we can help you with options for receiving the sacraments.  But first one must be totally convinced of the traditional Catholic faith.  Also, it’s pointless to meet with the priest of the Novus Ordo church.  You should recommend the website and material to him, but he will almost certainly reject what you have to say.  In a personal meeting with him you might be confused by his false arguments.  One who really believes in the Church should see the truth of the material we have presented, as well as the falsity of the Vatican II sect. 

 

In Depth

 

Just finished perusing the web-site for about four hours.  It is one of the most in-depth informational sites I've seen covering the controversial vaticanII abortion. It's impossible to argue with the truth if you are honest with oneself.  I was born in 1947 and blessed with 12 years of true Catholic education (taught by IHM's). I remember when one went to a quiet church and knelt and prayed humbly before a "just,merciful,and loving GOD". I remember when there were kneelers,and railings to the altar, and priests and altar boys;when you received the HOLY EUCHARIST kneeling and on your tongue. I remember that once receiving JESUS you returned to the pew and knelt and prayed to HIM for forgiveness. I remember the reverence that one had upon just entering the church.  After vaticanII abortion we were told that things have to change with the HOLY SACRIFICE OF THE MASS. They, in their infinite wisdom, would change the name to ;get this "the celebration of the mass". Anyone who knows the real MASS and reveres this most holy of traditions knows that it is not a celebration. If I want to attend a celebration I'll go to a party or a wedding reception or a parade,etc.  JESUS instituted the MASS so that we can be in union with HIM and it is no laughing and pleasurable matter. It is a very serious and joyful memory of what JESUS accomplishes during HIS life on earth.  Ever since the 70's I have been wondering, discussing and arguing with people about how inhumane the church changed everything about the mass. …Especially when it got soooooooo bad it appeared as though they were trying to tell us that we were god and we were to embrace each other during mass and hold hands,etc.  I kinda laughed when one woman asked if I was a catholic because I would not hold her hand during the "Our Father". I asked her if she thought her "Our Father" was more acceptable to GOD than my "OUR FATHER" because she was holding hands.She just rolled her eyes in disgust. But this is just one example of the hypocrisy that the church is teaching.  I could go on and on but I had better stop here before you get bored. I am sure this isn't the first you've heard from guys like me.  Anyway, please keep up the fantastic work (Truth), cause I will be visiting the web-site again;  May GOD BLESS YOU and YOUR LOVED ONES.  

 

Thanks,

David Barker

 

Heresy is Bad

 

In studying the What Happened book, it is really beginning to sink in my brain just how bad heresy is.  Sorry, I mean, I know it's bad and that's why the popes have always condemned it as they have, but what I wasn't getting before was how attached to it some people are.  How they choose heresy because it serves their own selfish desires even though they know it's absolutely forbidden. (Like any sin, I suppose).  But to know the truth and reject it, and promote heresy . . . it just is not conceivable for me.  It truly seems hateful.  Almost like there's nothing more hateful than heresy. Because it drags so many down who are weak.  Brother, this scares me to be so close to people who really might know better, but who are willingly promoting lies in order to serve some other purpose.  I see now why you say some of the things you say and how quick you are to see through people by applying the test of truth.  Thanks be to God for His saving grace on such a poor sinner.  How I came to be so loved by Him is something He alone knows the answer to.  May Our Lady keep us under her continual protection on our journey back to Heaven, our true home.  Please commend me to the Most Holy Family, Brothers.

 

S…

 

Great quote

 

Council of Laodicea, 343-381, Canon 34:  No Christian shall forsake the martyrs of Christ, and turn to false martyrs, that is, to those of the heretics, or those who formerly were heretics; for they are aliens from God.  Let those, therefore, who go after them, be anathema.”

 

MHFM: This is a great quote.  Even though the Council of Laodicea is a regional (not dogmatic) council – and thus this canon might lack the precision of an infallible dogmatic canon – this shows what the early Church would have thought of John Paul II, Paul VI and the Vatican II sect.  The early Church would have rejected as utterly heretical all those who promote the “non-Catholic saints and martyrs” heresy.

 

John Paul II, Ut Unum Sint (# 1), May 25, 1995: “The courageous witness of so many martyrs of our century, including members of Churches and Ecclesial Communities not in full communion with the Catholic Church, gives new vigor to the Council’s call and reminds us of our duty to listen to and put into practice its exhortation.”

 

John Paul II, Ut Unum Sint (# 83), May 25, 1995: “All Christian Communities know that, thanks to the power given by the Spirit, obeying that will and overcoming those obstacles are not beyond their reach.  All of them in fact have martyrs for the Christian faith.”

 

John Paul II, Ut Unum Sint (# 84), May 25, 1995, Speaking of non-Catholic “Churches”: “Albeit in an invisible way, the communion between our Communities, even if still incomplete, is truly and solidly grounded in the full communion of the saints - those who, at end of a life faithful to grace, are in communion with Christ in glory.  These saints come from all the Churches and Ecclesial Communities WHICH GAVE THEM ENTRANCE INTO THE COMMUNION OF SALVATION.”

 

John Paul II, Tertio Millennio Adveniente (# 37), Nov. 10, 1994: “The witness to Christ borne even to the shedding of blood has become a common inheritance of Catholics, Orthodox, Anglicans and Protestants, as Pope Paul VI pointed out in his Homily for the Canonization of the Ugandan Martyrs.”

 

For many other statements from John Paul II in which he taught this heresy, consult: The Heresies of John Paul II - a comprehensive presentation [PDF].  This file is from our 658-page book, The Truth about What Really Happened to the Catholic Church after Vatican II.

 

John Paul II and the Rosary

 

Dear Brother Diamond,

 

Hello from Québec.  My name is Pat and I'm 40 a single mother of 2 adolescents.

I am a frequent visitor of your web site and once I start reading I just can't like put the book down.  Thank you so much for all the information. 

 

I can see how so many souls you are helping getting on their road to salvation.  This is truly what a disciple of Christ should be doing, fulfiling the promises we took on our confirmation.  This takes alot of courage and wisdom  through the help of God's grace.  Keep it up.  All my life I have known only the Vatican 2 church. I always went to church on Sunday with my family, most of the times with my father.  I have always been drawn to Jesus and the Church most of my life. 

 

I want to get to the point of my writing to you, It has been since October 2005,  that I discovered the truth of why the changes in the Church.  I remember when I was little my father (passed on) asking why all of the sudden communion in the hand. ( My first communion I won't forget it was on my tongue.)  Of course we didn't understand it but went along with it anyways.  I discovered that the Pope I adored and loved was a fake and deceived us all.  You guessed it...John Paul 2 strikes again.  I felt so sad and so full of agony I cried and cried..... Something confuses me about John Paul 2.    What about his devotion Mary and  the Rosary and that event at his shooting when he declared that the Virgin of Fatima saved his life.   Can you try to clear this for me.  I never could find an explanation.

 

I believe all the truths of the True Church - the Catholic Church.  I don't attend the Novus Ordo mess anymore. I tried to tell the truth to my mother and she refuted me several times....we quarelled...she is a semi-traditional catholic. Not in communion with all the truths.  Whether she is stubborn, or the truth is too hard to accept.  I also tried to to warn an adventist I was dating for a few years filled with lots of heartache and division.  I get frustrated because no one seems to listen !!  It's been really difficult and heartbreaking.  You end up feeling lonely and depressed.  Please can you give me some words of encouragement.  Of course I offer it up to Jesus as a sacrifice and my heart feels better.  I have told my 2 adolescents all the truth thank God at least one of them has more faith than the other.  

 

I have been reading about some people seeing visions that might come from hell.   I have encountered people talking to me on buses in the street like they know me.

I always thought angels were talking to me.  Maybe they were not from heaven at all.  I ponder on this now because this happened before I found the truth of the counterfeit catholic church and stopped going to the novus ordo and so on... It's incredible these days we have to be so careful, because when the Devil sees souls called by God, he tries everything to destroy their path which will lead them to Him.  It's really scary.   Hell must be getting too full  !

 

My faith is stronger than before. Lastly, I thought I could share this experience I had with a bad willed priest who refused me communion on the tongue.  He said to me to open my hands and take communion in my hands.  I refused and returned to my seat quietly.  After communion was over, he faced the people and said that communion on the tongue won't be tolerated anymore because of diseases that may be contracted.  I was so angry that I got up and left the church immediately without saying a word..Everyone looked at me.  What a disgrace.!   I hope it woke up some people to stop going to the false mass once and for all.  Since that day I never came back.  I don't have the luck of having a true priest or true mass to attend to but I do pray the mass, pray my rosary, study the dogmas of the faith and morals, the Baltimore Catechism, meditate on the mass at home, and I fast on days of obligation as much as I can.  I feel free and so much better knowing all the truths.

 

Hope to hear from you, whether on your site or in my e-mail inbox and thank you.  

 

God bless,

 

Pat  

        

MHFM: Thanks for the e-mail and the interest.  Regarding John Paul II, it’s a misconception that he frequently promoted the Rosary.  We are extremely familiar with his writings.  Based on research of all of his encyclicals and every published speech he gave since his election as antipope in 1978, we can say that he basically never told people to pray the Rosary.  There is one picture of him walking with a Rosary, which is promoted again and again.  The promotion of this picture, over and over, was a deception of the Devil.  He basically never encouraged people to pray the Rosary.  Also, the entire thing about how “Our Lady” saved him on May 13, 1981 was a huge part of the spiritual deception.  We are warned in 2 Thess. 2 and Matthew 24 about a major spiritual deception in the last days which includes false signs.  That entire incident was a major part of the spiritual deception that built up the Counter Church and Antichrist in the Vatican, which he represented.  So while the Devil had people believe that Our Lady saved him on the very anniversary of Fatima, the Devil had the very same heretic burying Fatima.  For it was none other than John Paul II who released the phony version of the Third Secret and defrauded the world of the true one.  He took the Vatican II sect to new levels of apostasy and fully developed its worship of man in the place of God.  It very well might be the case that the entire event of his shooting on May 13, 1981 has to do with Apocalypse 13:3.  John Paul II had no devotion to Mary.  We prove that he knowingly preached the Doctrine of the Antichrist in the second article in this file: John Paul II (manifest heretic who claimed to be pope 1978-2005).

 

It’s important for people to understand the significance of what John Paul II preached.  Then they can begin to realize that John Paul II was not only extremely evil, but that he knew he was extremely evil.  However, he did do a few things – and the Devil made sure that he did – to make himself appealing to “conservatives” who really didn’t know what he was doing or what the Church teaches. 

 

Also, it should be noted that the Baltimore Catechism contains heresy against the dogma Outside the Church There is No Salvation, as our book on that topic shows.

 

Big Help

 

Hello Brothers

 

I actively visit your web site to nourish my soul and to try and keep informed. I've ordered your videos in the past as well.

 

I live in a hamlet called Oregon House…I do say my rosary daily and other than your web site I have no support group. You are a big help but not to fear, I will keep the Faith.

 

Sincerly

John Garcia

 

---

You have enlightened me to the ways of God. If there were only some way you could reach the starving village children in some godless country and educate them about the loving ways of the Lord, the world would be a much better place. And all the homosexuals running rampant, and the Muslims, if there were only some way you could spread your message far and wide, God would illuminate all those souls who dare follow any other path than that of the Catholic religion. Thank you, you have illuminated my soul, never again will I ever doubt in the Lord.

Bl…

 

Petros/Petra

 

…I believe that we should look at all scripture and realize that Christ spoke of petros and petra (Greek form of male and neuter gender). Peter was complimented for being solid as a rock but if we look at the Greek writings the neuter gender is implied meaning Peter, solid as a rock and on a "foundation" solid as a rock the "My Church will be built". It does not say in any text that Peter was elevated above the other Disciples or imply any other meaning….

 

MHFM: What you have stated couldn’t be more false.  You need to listen to this: The Bible teaches that Jesus made St. Peter the first pope [51 min. audio].  It covers all these points and completely refutes what you’ve said.

 

John Paul II, man of false peace

 

Hi Bro Michael and Bro Peter,

I stumbled on your site by chance and I must confess that you have a well researched site. It was very interesting and I appreciate it. I will save it as a favourite and visit from time to time to get more information. But I totally disagree with you 2 over calling Pope John Paul II an antipope. He may have made some mistakes in his approach to other religions and beliefs by being subtle and compromising but what would he have done if he was to preach peace. the world is filled with so many false prophets and viloence is everywhere. Should the Pope of the Holy Catholic Church be seen as fuelling crisis in the world?  He must set example by extending a peaceful hand to them and by so doing, many religions who have not heard of Christ finally heard the goodnews. If he had done otherwise, maybe he would not have been accepted and the good news would not be shared with these people of
other beliefs.

As our Lord Jesus Christ did, he mingled with the prostitutes, tax collectors and sinners and he was greatly condemned by the pharasees and scribes but it was for these that Christ came. The importance that these other religion give to the church may convert some people there or at least make them to want to understand the nature of the pope and
Christianity in general. I want you guys to pray to the good Lord to strengthen his church. I will also pray too. God has said he would be with his church to the end of time and I firmly believe. Let us pray for there is great darkness and wickedness upon the land and only God know those who would be saved.

Regards,

Nosa

 

MHFM: It’s the job of every Catholic, and especially a pope, not to inculcate false ideas of peace that are palatable to the world, but to preach and defend the Catholic faith.  The Catholic faith is exactly what John Paul II denied by his endorsement of false religions and his promotion of heresies, as proven here: The Heresies of John Paul II - a comprehensive presentation [PDF file].  So for you to imply that he was excused for not promoting the true Catholic faith because he was trying to promote some kind of peace is to reject the Gospel and the Catholic faith.  Jesus said He came not to bring peace (Mt. 10) – meaning that His truths will divide people.  John Paul II was definitely an antipope.  We have proven that.  He was not a Catholic, but a total heretic.

 

Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, Sess. 8, Nov. 22, 1439, ex cathedra: “Whoever wishes to be saved, needs above all to hold the Catholic faith; unless each one preserves this whole and inviolate, he will without a doubt perish in eternity.”

Jamaica

 

Hi, I have been a Catholic for my life, I had joined the St.Benedicts monastery here in Jamaica and later left due to sexual misconduct on the part of our superior and others. Whilst there, i loved the order. Since then i am trying to get back a full taste for serving God through this way of life. I am now married with three wonderful children, but whole heartly want to serve my God through vocation life as a Catholic priest.  Thank you for a reply and God bless you

 

MHFM: Thanks for the interest.  Since you have chosen to get married, you may not become a priest.  You should focus on learning, practicing and spreading the traditional Catholic faith in your present vocation.  What people need to know to do this is presented on our website.

 

Down the heretics

 

Dear brothers and sisters

 

I was happy to visit your web site, now my eyes are open , I was losing my faith until I read your articles,

 

Vive la Catholicish, down the heretics.

praise the Lord,

Bour del Eau

2nd edition of Why the New Mass and New Rite of Ordination are Invalid

 

MHFM: There is a second edition of our video Why the New Mass and New Rite of Ordination are Invalid, which you can watch online here: Watch the 2nd Edition.  The second edition has new pictures and a classical music soundtrack.  It is found permanently on the: WATCH OUR DVDS ONLINE FOR FREE page.

 

Judas in Hell?

 

Dear Brothers,

 

The principal of our 'Catholic' school told the students yesterday that we cannot condemn anyone to Hell and that the Church doesn't even say that Judas is in Hell.

The children had sacrificed some of their own toys which they thought were displeasing to God and used them for a Lenten display depicting Heaven, Purgatory and Hell.  She removed the toys from the Hell section before announcing to the students that some people like 'Harry Potter' and 'Darth Vader' and 'Pokemon' et al.  These toys have 'names' so therefore we can't condemn them to Hell.  The children were very hurt and confused by this action of hers.

 

Do you have any quotes that prove her wrong on her assumption that Judas is not considered as condemned to Hell by the Church?

I know Our Lord said it would be better for him (Judas) if he had never been born.

 

 

A concerned teacher

 

MHFM: Thanks for the question.  What the principal said is Modernism.  Catholics recognize that all those who die as non-Catholics go to Hell.  The great St. Francis Xavier shows how a Catholic must affirm that all those who die outside the Church are definitely lost, as he does in regard to a pagan privateer who died on a ship on which he was traveling.

 

St. Francis Xavier, Nov. 5, 1549: “The corsair who commanded our vessel died here at Cagoxima.  He did his work for us, on the whole, as we wished… He himself chose to die in his own superstitions; he did not even leave us the power of rewarding him by that kindness which we can after death do to other friends who die in the profession of the Christian faith, in commending their souls to God, since the poor fellow by his own hand cast his soul into hell, where there is no redemption.” (as quoted in our book Outside the Catholic Church There is Absolutely No Salvation, section 17)

 

In regard to Judas, one can demonstrate that he is in Hell from these points below and the quote from St. Alphonsus.  They are also found in our book The Truth about What Really Happened to the Catholic Church after Vatican II, in the section on Benedict XVI.  They were brought up to refute one of Benedict XVI’s heresies in this regard.

 

If Judas is not in Hell, then Our Lord’s words in Matthew 26:24 (quoted below) would be false.

 

"Woe to that man by whom the Son of man shall be betrayed: it were better for him, if that man had not been born" (Matthew 26:24).

 

If Judas didn’t go to Hell, then he went to Purgatory or Heaven.  In that case, Our Lord (the all knowing God) could not have said that it is better for Judas not to have been born.  That’s very clear and very simple.  Our Lord also says that Judas is “lost” and calls him the “son of perdition,” which means “the son of damnation.”  Judas also ended his life with the mortal sin of suicide.

 

John 17:12- "None of them is lost, but the son of perdition, that the scripture may be fulfilled.”

 

The Catholic Church has always held that Judas went to Hell, based on the clear words of Our Lord. 

 

St. Alphonsus, Preparation For Death, p. 127: “Poor Judas! Above seventeen hundred years have elapsed since he has been in Hell, and his Hell is still only beginning.[15]

 

New entry in file on receiving sacraments from non-sedevacantists

 

MHFM: There is a new entry in the following section of our website:

 

The Question of whether one may receive Sacraments in these difficult times

*refuting schismatic views in this area

 

The new entry concerns this issue: Some argue that the divine law forbids Catholics from ever attending the Mass of one they know to be a heretic – completely wrong and refuted by St. Thomas and the Fourth Lateran Council.  We have discussed the quotation from St. Thomas Aquinas on this point before, but this new entry shows how the Fourth Lateran Council confirms the true position we have enunciated and refutes schismatic errors.

 

Note: this section of our website deals with finer points and issues which concern those who are more familiar with the traditional faith.  Those who are new to the traditional Catholic faith might not find delving into these questions beneficial at this time; for this file concerns the specific target audience who are concerned with this specific question.

This file is found permanently in the “Where to Attend Mass” section of our website.  It will be updated on occasion, when time permits and additional points come up.

 

Sri Lanka

 

Dear Brother Michael Dimond,

 

My name is Randika Peiris.. I am 23 years old and I live in Sri Lanka I viewed your web site. I t was very interesting. Actually we as Christians gained a lot of trust and faith in Roman Catholic and got an idea about the present situation of Roman Catholicism. To be specific we were informed about the effects of the change of Latin mass from your web site..  There are many people in Sri Lanka who like to watch the DVDs which are published in your web site but unfortunately they are unable to afford these due to financial difficulties.  However the youth in Sri Lanka are willing to know more about the present situation of Roman Chotholic.There fore would I would appreciate if you could send original DVD copies free of charge so I will be able to distribute among the Roman Chatholics in Sri Lanka as the DVDs which are available on the web site is not very clear.   Further I am trying to publicise your DVDs in the national television in Sri Lanka..(Specially the DVD – Miracles and creations)  Your cooperation with regard this is greatly appreciated.

 

Thank You

May God Bless You!

 

Scapular and burial

 

Dear Brother Michael and Brother Peter

In circumstances where the Faithful cannot find a validly ordained priest to bless the Brown Scapular and enrol them for the privileges of this sacramental, should it nonetheless be worn without being blessed and would the wearer still obtain the promises made by Our Lady if worn with devotion?

I would also be very grateful for your advice on what Catholics should do concerning arrangements for the sacrament of Extreme Unction and especially a Catholic funeral where there are no validly ordained priests available or where the priests cannot be approached due to their being notorious and imposing in their heresies (eg the SSPX on salvation outside the Catholic Church). Should the deceased be buried without ceremony and a presiding priest if none can be found, and with only private prayers being said by the bereaved? This is a situation which sadly might confront many Faithful in these times of apostasy and I would appreciate any advice you have to give on what a Catholic should do in these circumstances.

I fully support your defense of the Catholic Faith in an uncompromising and consistent way. Please continue this vital work to save souls and be a witness for the truth.

Best wishes

Gerard

 

MHFM: To your first question, yes; you should wear the scapular even if it cannot be blessed.  The answer to your second question is yes as well. 

 

Baptism of Desire

 

Hello Brothers.

 

I have your book, "Outside the Church There is No Salvation" and it is VERY GOOD!   I have one question, though.  I was told that an earlier Pope issued a statement on the Baptism of Desire, which led many to believe that he was confirming its truth.  I understand that there was some misunderstanding with this, and I would really like to know exactly what it was that the Pope said and why it did not mean that the Baptism of Desire is a truth to be believed by the Church.  I tried to find it in the book, but I'm not seeing this.  Can you help?

 

Thank you and God bless your holy work!

 

Carol Walker

 

MHFM: The things that you are looking for are addressed in section 17 of: Outside the Catholic Church There is Absolutely No Salvation [PDF FILE].  Baptism of desire advocates like to quote a letter which is alleged to be from Pope Innocent II, but the date of the letter is unknown and the author is unknown.  Even if it was Innocent II, it doesn’t meet the requirements to be infallible; but it’s not even clear who wrote it.  The letter also speaks about a “priest” who was unbaptized, which is a contradiction; for no one can be a priest without baptism.  Certainly it’s not infallible, and whether a pope even wrote it is doubtful. 

 

The other statement is a letter from Pope Innocent III.  That letter also doesn’t meet the requirements for an infallible pronouncement.  In fact, it’s on the same level as another letter which Pope Innocent III wrote which is entitled Ex parte tua.  In Ex parte tua, the same Innocent III taught that original sin was remitted by the mystery of circumcision, which was contradicted by the Council of Trent.  But all those points are covered in the book, in section 17.  The point here is that nothing infallible teaches baptism of desire.

 

EWTN heresies

 

Dear Brothers,

 

I'm not sure if you caught this or not --- but EWTN has a weekly show by a Maronite Jesuit in Mitch Pacwa. During his show… there were numerous heresies being thrown around by Pacwa; e.g. that God uses other churches as sources for salvation, praising Protestant preaching, how the Orthodox sects are "true Churches," that Protestants have the gift of faith, etc. all mainly based on the documents of Vatican II. It was sickening. How anyone can support this network financially and be called Catholic is beyond me.


God Bless,

Fergus

 

MHFM: Thanks for the update.  We also have a file on EWTN: EWTN and the Charismatic Movement [PDF File.]

 

Guadalupe?

 

DEAR BROTHERS,


WHAT IS YOUR TAKE ON OUR LADY OF GUADULUPE ?

 

YENC

 

MHFM: It’s a series of authentic appearances of Our Lady to Juan Diego in 1531, which resulted in the conversion of millions to the Catholic faith.  The image of Our Lady of Guadalupe’s appearance, with all of its miraculous features, can still be seen in Mexico today.  The appearance of Our Lady of Guadalupe is one of the greatest things in history.  It’s also discussed in our video Creation and Miracles, Past and Present: WATCH OUR DVDS ONLINE FOR FREE.

 

Justified by faith alone?

 

If Jesus died for the sins of the whole world, and someone accepts Christ as their righteousness, and thus are justified by faith and at peace, why would it be true that only Catholics can be saved? 

 

TC…

 

MHFM: Not everyone who thinks or holds Christ to be their righteousness is justified, as shown here: Justification by Faith Alone refuted and the Catholic teaching on Justification proved by the Protestant Bible [1 hr. 30 min. audio].  You must believe in everything He teaches, which includes accepting His Catholic Church founded upon Peter (Mt. 16:18; Mt. 18:17) and the rest of the Catholic dogmas.

 

The Stripping of the Altars

 

MHFM: We’ve pointed out that the post-Vatican II liturgical revolution parallels what happened to the Mass in 16th century Protestant England.  Here’s a quote from one Roger Edgeworth, who lived during the time, which might be of interest to those who are new to these facts.  It comes from around 1550.  This quote and the one below it show how closely the post-Vatican II liturgical revolution, with its replacement of altars with tables, follows what happened in Protestant England:

 

[NOTE: THIS QUOTE IS IN OLD ENGLISH]: “… no man should see what the priest did, nor here what he said.  Then this way pleased not and the aulters [i.e. altars] were pulled dowyne and the tables set up and all the observaunce saide in Englyshe and that openly that all men mighte here and see…” (quoted in Eamon Duffy, The Stripping of the Altars, Yale University Press, 1992, p. 471.)

 

Here’s another quote:

 

“Hooper’s Interrogatories and Injunctions for Gloucester and Worcester, drawn up in 1551, were even more extreme, requiring the ripping out of any steps or partitions where altars had been, the celebration of communion anywhere except where Mass had been sung, forbidding the ‘decking or appareling’ of tables ‘behind or before’ as if they were altars, and any variation of tone or pitch or voice or posture of body, by ministers or people, which might be reminiscent of the Mass.” (Ibid., p. 472.)

                                                                                                                                            

Desperate search

 

Subject: Lost

 

As I surf through your web site and read some of your articles as there are so many of them, I find myself agreeing with your beliefs.  I am not the devout catholic that I should be.  I do attend mass on a regular basis, but most of the time I leave church with an emptiness and feeling worse than when I walked in as I find myself being critical of what our churches have become, a mockery.  I am in desperate search of truth, knowledge and above all, a true place where I can worship Jesus.  I must confess that I have been very skeptic of our Popes… I live in McAllen, Texas. Is there a true church of God in my area that you know of?

 

Led to Site


You guys are really good and brilliant at what you are doing, figuring all of this stuff out and publishing these articles and videos.  I am a convert to the Catholic faith from a Protestant denomination, all of my life from the time I was little I always had a desire to be a Catholic,a desire which would not leave me it was just always there(a part of me),and unlike alot of Protestants I never had a problem whatsoever with Blessed Mother Mary, matter of fact I always felt drawn to her and thought she is very beautiful(in her statues and images)even though I did not know her like Catholics do,and I was always thinking to myself(while growing up going to this Protestant church)why don't we have Mary?and I could never understand (and I still don't)why so many people always have a problem with Mary,how can you not love,accept,respect and embrace a Lady like her?(I'll never understand)

       So I went through this whole RCIA thing and joined the Church (on Mar,26,05 I was confirmed), or atl east I thought I had joined the Catholic Church until after my own negative experiences that I started getting since joining and being led to your website (after repeatedly bringing my complaints about everything to the Lord in prayers, I asked Him what in the world is going on in the Church?) because I wanted to be a sincere and devout Catholic but it seems there is just nothing but trouble and frustration waiting for people like this in the church(what I now know is Vatican II church/religion through you)now I don't know what to do or think anymore!  Now I don't even know if I am really a Catholic since you write everything is invalid (I was Confirmed in the Vatican II church and Baptised as a baby in the Protestant denomination by a clergyman,and I know what you say about Protestants based on the Catholic teaching) so am I a Catholic or not?(that was my sincere intention,to join the real true Catholic Church and Faith)and then what are we to do these days with all of this mess going on and we want to join the real true faith?

   Here are my negative accounts:(ever since becoming Catholic or so I thought,I have nothing but problems with the Priests and I have to admit I don't like the Priests,they are not good and not holy, they behave more like everyday men then like Priests,I think they are brute and not like a godly gentlemen that I expected ) I was told by a Priest not to even think about the Devil or worry about him,after going to talk to him about my concerns that I was being afflicted in my life,as if not thinking about the Devil/Demons is going to make him /them go away.(I remember thinking the Devil must already have him) another time and another Priest he told me"don't worry about hellfire"during a confession. Another Priest right before confession when I was trying to ask and get a answer to a religious question basically started to verbally assault me(attack!) in the confessional,I was so upset I started crying right in there in front of him and all the way home and I had to walk quite a way home that day and I almost could've got ran over by cars at the traffic light because of being so besides myself and all the tears…

 

I thought we are supposed to admonish the sinner but in the VaticanII church/religion they don't hold to that anymore, it doesn't work, all you will hear is"don't judge me""your judging me""are you Judging me?""who are you to Judge""  … Well I eventually found your website somehow. Let me tell you I never attended that Mass at that church again because I did not want to see that Priest no more!(spreading falsehood) And you are right a lot of those people on EWTN are heretics, on EWTN you here about this Universal Salvation stuff alot on their shows (especially that Fr.Groeschel)… I haven't read very many of your articles yet but eventually will get around to reading them all a few times over I hope. Yesterday I read the one on Bernardine and I have to say the changes to that cathedral are absolutely disgusting! What is supposed to be the crucifix to me looks like a man in a grave buried without a coffin(it's as if you have just opened up someones grave and your standing there looking down into it and onto the exposed corpse of a man buried in that position without a coffin, that is what it looked like to me right away and not like a crucifix at all!) Also no nails,nail marks,wounds,and no feet over each other.matter of fact also no cross to hold him behind him,this is not a crucifix and it's also no resurection,it's a man in a grave because the framing looks like earth,the earth around a grave.(chilling)and the tabernacle thing(gruesome) and the Demon faces in the marble slabs (horrifying and horrendous!,and I really wonder how they got those faces in those marble slabs,I wonder if getting those faces in there involved using some kind of supernatural means/power and not just human........makes you think!) and people that go to that cathedral or belonged to it when those renovations were done weren't noticing and wondering about that stuff?, it's really yuck! Maybe those Marble slabs have real Demons trapped in them somehow(put in there by sorcery)and that's why and how those faces got in there like that,and only if and when they break those Demons that are trapped in them will be released and come out!(sounds crazy,but you never know........) maybe they will fall down from those cathedral walls one day! 

     Anyways let me bring this e-mail to an end, it's a long e-mail I know and I really hope you will be able to read it alright, I just had a lot to say! And please pray for me and keep me in your prayers at the monastery please... Thank You, take care,and God Bless You!

 Sincerely,

           Jan                                                                                                

 

Infiltration

 

Subject: With reference to your item on the infiltration of the Church.

 

Last year I read an article stating that "in the mid 1980's, 1850 homosexual men were recruited by a wing of the communist party to enter the seminaries of the Church." Have you heard of this?

 

Robert Lockwood.

 

MHFM: We haven’t heard of that particular example.  The Novus Ordo seminaries certainly provide the atmosphere of effeminacy and indifferentism that homosexuals are looking for, which is why they flock there, as shown here: The Seminaries of the Vatican II sect are unspeakable cesspools of homosexuality and heresy [PDF File].

 

Now practicing

 

My friend was a non-practicing Catholic and now is a practicing Catholic after watching your DVDs.

 

Julie Austin,

Adelaide, South Australia

 

Unbaptized Saints?

 

The more we listen to your site the more we want your book.

 

We heard a sermon by Bishop Dolan, not the one you critique on your site, where he mentions “canonized saints” (New Testament) not baptized with water.  Saints Rogation and Donation or something?... If there were a non-water-baptized saint canonized after water baptism was instituted by a valid and legal pope that would seal the case for BOD for me.

 

John Gregory

Front Royal VA

 

MHFM: No, there’s no proof that any saint wasn’t baptized.  Our book (which you can get with another book and DVDs for only $10.00) answers the objections and covers the facts on this point.  There is no proof that St. Rogatian wasn’t baptized.  That’s the editorialization of Fr. Butler (of Butler’s Lives of the Saints) and nothing more.  Even in the story he gives, there are many scenarios where Rogatian could have been baptized.  But the key point about this issue is this: the first infallible definition stating that the elect see the Beatific Vision immediately after death was from Pope Benedict XII in Benedictus Deus in 1336.  It is interesting to examine what he infallibly declared about the saints and martyrs who went to Heaven.

 

Pope Benedict XII, Benedictus Deus, 1336, ex cathedra, on the souls of the just receiving the Beatific Vision: “By this edict which will prevail forever, with apostolic authority we declare… the holy apostles, the martyrs, the confessors, virgins, and the other faithful who died after the holy baptism of Christ had been received by them, in whom there was nothing to be purged… and the souls of children departing before the use of free will, reborn and baptized in the same baptism of Christ, when all have been baptized… have been, are, and will be in heaven…” (Denzinger 530)

 

In defining that the elect (including the martyrs) in whom nothing is to be purged are in Heaven, Pope Benedict XII mentions three times that they have been baptized.  Obviously, no apostle, martyr, confessor or virgin could receive the Beatific Vision without having received Baptism, according to this infallible dogmatic definition.  If there were martyrs in Heaven who had not been baptized, they would have been mentioned in this infallible dogmatic definition.  But not only are they not mentioned, it’s expressly mentioned that all “apostles, martyrs, virgins,” etc. in Heaven have been baptized. 

 

Likes Papacy Audio

 

I just wanted to tell you that I finally listened to your audio on "The Bible teaches that Jesus made St. Peter the first pope".  I kept putting it off, because I thought it was something I already knew.  Although I truly believed Jesus made Peter the first pope, I actually never knew why I believed it. 
 
I was able to listen to it when my kids were sleeping, and it was the most wonderful lesson on how the Bible teaches that Jesus made St. Peter the first pope.  No, it wasn't just wonderful, it was beautiful.  I told my sisters to listen to it right away....because it was worth every minute.
 
So, thank you for putting together an outstanding audio.  I am still contemplating all of the beautiful imagery.  I cannot even imagine all of the time and studying you put into that.  May God reward you for a job well done.
 
Teri Thurman

 

The Bible teaches that Jesus made St. Peter the first pope [51 min. audio]

 

New perspective

 

After having received your DVD videos, tapes, and books just over a week ago, it is my purpose in writing to thank you for the large volume of information you have forwarded me.  I commend you for your obvious deep research on the subjects included.  This information has changed my entire perspective of my Christian beliefs... It is with my best wishes that I write and do include you in my prayers.

 

Owen Evers

St. Paul, MN.

 

In India

 

May God bless you abundantly.  I appreciate your service in India as well as over the globe.  We are all praying for your good health...

 

V. Yedukondalu

Kuppanapudi, Akividu, India

 

Life worth living?

 

In one of your videos, you decry Buddhism for believing that life isn't worth living.  By your estimation, what does or would make life worth living?  Many Protestants believe that Christ means to save all who profess His name and accept His offer for salvation.  But Catholics don't believe Christ came to save even all these.  So, if one seeks to be saved by Christ, but, for whatever reason, may not be, what would make that individual's life worth living?

 

Spencer Jeffrey Harper

 

MHFM: Catholics believe that Christ came to save all men (1 Tim. 2:4), but not all will be saved (Mt. 7:13).  Life is worth living precisely because only through living a good and Catholic life can one have salvation.  It profits man nothing if he gains the whole world and loses his eternal soul (Mt. 16:26).  If a person will go to Heaven or Hell based on what he does in life, of course it’s worth it for him to live and do what he should to have salvation!  It’s not like he will do what’s right and lose salvation “for whatever reason.”  No, a person will lose salvation if he is outside the true Church or if he dies in the state of mortal sin.

 

Studying scriptures

 

I asked Jesus to teach me how to live as He would have it.  I have since come to know and understand several things in my heart.  I know that I need to seek Him in His Word in addition to praying the Rosary, going to Confession and attending the Tridentine Mass.  I have never studied His Word before in any diligent way and seek some guidance on how to study the bible.  Could you recommend a book or instructional course for learning how to study the scriptures?

 

Also, how would one find / choose a spiritual director?

 

James

Memphis, TN

 

MHFM: It’s important to have a Catholic Bible.  But it’s equally important to understand the Bible’s actual teaching.  That requires an understanding of the teaching of the Church.  That’s covered in our material, and in a source book for traditional dogmatic teachings such as Denzinger.  This is a good book to have.

 

Grateful

 

Dear Sirs:

 

For the past several days I have been totally fascinated by reading your position(s) regarding Catholicism.  As a result I am very much in agreement with your findings and wish to find out how it would be possible for me to find an acceptable Roman Catholic church located close enough to me for me to attend weekly mass. I have already ordered several of your pieces from the monastery store for my further edification, and am grateful to have learned of your monastery and it's mission on the internet.

 

Yours truly,

 

Richard B.

 

Converting?

 

I was married in a protestant church. I was a catholic but ever since vatican2 i have been confused still no reason for me to leave. Can i still go to confession.

 

Thomas

 

MHFM: You would need to convert (return) to the traditional Catholic faith first.  You would need to accept the traditional Catholic faith with all of its dogmas, and then make the profession for converts from the Council of Trent (which is on our website).  See the section, “The Steps to convert to the traditional Catholic faith (and for those people leaving the New Mass),” on our list of links.  It’s in red about ¾ of the way down the list of links.  After one converts and accepts the fullness of the Catholic faith, then he or she can go to confession.  You should start to pray the Rosary each day as well. 

 

Refreshing

 

Dear Brothers,

 

I ran across your web site… How utterly refreshing it is to see the truth being promulgated…  I CANNOT attend a vatican 2 dog and pony show any longer and will not.  I attended the seminary from 1987 to 1990.  The stories are absolutely true about the rampant homosexuality it is one of the reason I left, and I am glad that I did.  There is much work to be done in the salvation of souls!…

 

Robert Iacomacci

Donalds South Carolina

 

New section on Receiving sacraments from non-sedevacantists

 

MHFM: Below is a new section of our website which refutes a certain schismatic position.  These are just some new points and thoughts which shed light on this issue. This schismatic position asserts that it’s mortally sinful or heretical in every case to receive sacraments from priests who hold to heretical positions or are non-sedevacantists, even if one doesn’t support that priest.  This section of our website will be updated on occasion, when time permits and additional points come up.

 

The Question of whether one may receive Sacraments in these difficult times

*refuting schismatic views in this area

 

Note: this section of our website deals with finer points and issues which concern those who are more familiar with the traditional faith.  Those who are new to the traditional Catholic faith might not find delving into these questions beneficial at this time; for this file concerns the specific target audience who are concerned with this specific question.  Also, for those who are interested in this issue, don’t miss the second entry of this section concerning the quote from the book: The Rise and Growth of the Anglican Schism.  It contains a quote which is important in refuting the schismatic view described above.

 

Pro-abortion Alumnus

 

Dear Dimond Brothers:

 

I read the most recent article featured in your News and Commentary section entitled, “Catholic University Extols Pro-Abortion Alumnus Nancy Pelosi”.  It is interesting to note that Pelosi publicly identifies herself as a Catholic.  However, if you look at her public voting record and family history, it becomes apparent that she is not what she claims to be.

 

Pelosi is 100% behind protecting the Jewish abortion industry, restricting gun ownership, and is an advocate for immigration.  Her children married Jewish spouses.  Pelosi’s husband, also a Jew, is a New York investment banker turned San Francisco real estate developer.  Pelosi’s father, former mayor of Baltimore, came from a family of Argentine Jews.  She is 100% behind Israel, and stated, “The creation of the State of Israel is one of the miracles of the twentieth century”.

 

Pelosi is most likely a crypto-Jew posing as a devout Catholic.  The fact that she claims to be Catholic and supports abortion is perfectly in line (as you pointed out in your article on John Kerry – also Jewish) with the teaching of the novus ordo “church”.  How anyone can remain in the novus ordo “church” and be in communion with these beasts-who-claim-to-be-Christians is beyond me.

 

-John.

 

Testimonials

 

Bro. Michael Dimond,

 

Tonight I was searching through my computer and happened to come across your very well and professionally documented articles...  Thank you and God bless from me and my family in Ireland.

 

Brian Mc Aviaue

 -------

Thanks for the in depth wealth of information.

 

Allen Metzger

Cedar Springs, MI.

 ----------

We have been Traditionalists since 1975.  We thank you for this commitment to tradition.  No where else can we find this kind of education for our time.  We use your DVDs to educate our 11 children and grandchildren in the Catholic faith.  God bless you.

 

Charles Blake

Olathe, KS.

 -----

Dear Brothers,

 

You said that that you have taken a lot of flack over your chapter about the conversion of Russia.  I was prompted to look up in the dictionary the words "destruction" and "annihilation".  I must say it changed my opinion.  I do now believe that you are correct.  My friend insisted that "the annihilation of nations" means the complete destruction like in Sodom and Gemorrah.  So checking that story in the Bible the word destroy and not annihilate was used over and over.  Destroy - to demolish - bring to ruin while annihilate - to destroy the identity of.  So destroy is the correct word for Sodom and Gommorah.  The word annihilate would correctly identify what you describe as to the Baltic states...  I can't thank you enough for helping me in your publications through the maze of so called Traditional groups etc - to know the truth so as to avoid the snares.  You have so armed me that now I can read through their materials and immediately see their errors.  Of course my eyes would be blinded even to your info if it was not for Our Blessed Mother Mary and Her Most Holy Rosary.

 

Kris Peterson

California

 

MHFM: Thanks.  This reader is referring to a section about the actual meaning of Our Lady of Fatima’s words that “various nations will be annihilated,” which is found in this article: The Whole Truth about the Consecration and Conversion of Russia and the Impostor Sr. Lucy.

 

Our Beliefs

 

Hello
 
You certainly have some interesting perspectives on your website! I mainly read some material on the sexual scandal and apostasy. Whilst I am not familiar with the detail, a lot of what was said seem to probably ring true, albeit quite unbelievable that it actually happened. A personal experience certainly lent credibility to your information: - about two years ago I was totally 'gobsmacked' to hear a Catholic Priest (a family friend) say that "God was bigger than that". This was in relation to my question to him regarding the level of distress that he felt about someone close to him becoming a buddhist nun and also being a lesbian. In light of your material I should not have wasted any emotional stress and been totally unsurprised!
 
Whilst I am fully in line with your thinking about endorsement of other religions, I totally disagree with your perspective on Protestant (non Catholic) faiths. I am neither a fan of the Catholic church (I grew up in the Catholic system which sent me off to be an agnostic (athesist?) for more than a decade), nor many of the large Protestant churches. However I do not see why you take exception to any true Christian faith that believes in the Bible and the Lord Jesus Christ but not Catholic dogma. I am curious how you can find scriptural support for the notion that acceptance of the Papacy is conditional to salvation? Likewise, any scriptual endorsement as opposed to condemnation for what I would call a 'dangerous' level of adoration of Mary, Jesus' mother; nothwithstanding that she is clearly 'chosen' and blessed amongst women - I would not argue with that, nor about the supernatural and unique immaculate conception. Note however that in line with protestant thinking, I also believe that scripture indicates a normal marital relationship subsequent to  the birth of Our Saviour.  These issues and others in Catholic dogma truly have perplexed me for some time. So if you have the time please reply and enlighten me.
 
Thanks
 
Yours in Christ

 

Sp…

 

MHFM: You write: “I am curious how you can find scriptural support for the notion that acceptance of the Papacy is conditional to salvation?  It’s covered in this audio: The Bible teaches that Jesus made St. Peter the first pope [new 51 min. audio].  Since Christ set up His one Church upon Peter, one cannot belong to the one Church of Christ without accepting the Papacy.  Regarding the other points you ask about, Protestants are not Bible-believing Christians. Protestants rejects the clear truth of the Bible on the Papacy (Mt. 16:18-20; John 21-15-17), on the Eucharist (John 6), on Confession (Jn. 20:23), on the necessity of Baptism (John 3:5) and much more.  In order to make room for their man-made religion, the Protestants also kicked seven books they didn't like out of Christian Bible – books which had been accepted by the Christian Church for over a millennium.  It’s precisely because Protestantism is not true and biblical Christianity that those who adhere to it cannot be saved.  You need to look that the information in our Refuting Protestantism and Eastern "Orthodoxy" section.

 

Papal Infallibility, late?

 

Dear Bros,

 

I am a fellow sedevacantist, and believe in the one true Catholic religion, apart from the phony N.O., but I have a question that's been bugging me which I'd like an answer to. If I'm not mistaken, wasn't the notion of papal infallibility not "invented" (for lack of a better word) until the late 1800's? If this is so, it seems odd to me that God would have His church go so long before coming up with such a doctrine which seems should have been created towards the beginning of the church. Now it's possible that I'm reading too much into this, or maybe I just don't have my facts straight, but please humor me for a moment. Doesn't it seem awfully convenient for the church to come up with this doctrine at a time when Protestantism was young and the Reformation was in its infancy? It seems like a convenient doctrine to come up with at the spur of the moment to keep people from leaving the church rather than a doctrine inspired by God. Again, I don't doubt the validity of the doctrine, but the timing is questionable it would seem. Your comments, please. Thanks, and keep up the good work.

 

Ds…

 

MHFM: As this audio shows, The Bible teaches that Jesus made St. Peter the first pope [new 51 min. audio], papal infallibility comes right from Luke 22.  It also flows logically from papal primacy.  In other words, there would have been no point for Jesus to institute the papacy (which He clearly did, as proven in that audio), in which one person is given authority over the Church, if Jesus would have allowed that one person to teach error when teaching to the universal Church in a binding fashion; for then the entire Church could be led into error.  So besides Luke 22 and the full import of the power to bind on Earth what is bound in Heaven, which is given to St. Peter in Mt. 16, Papal Infallibility flows logically from the authority over the flock (Jn. 21:15-17) which Jesus gave to St. Peter. 

 

Papal Infallibility wasn’t formally defined until 1870, but it was believed long before that.  You can see the concept in the early Church.  You can see it in the teaching that the Chair of Rome is undefiled:

 

Pope St. Gelasius I, epistle 42, or Decretal de recipiendis et non recipiendis libris, 495: “Accordingly, the see of Peter the Apostle of the Church of Rome is first, having neither spot, nor wrinkle, nor anything of this kind (Eph. 5:27).” (Denz. 163)

 

Notice that Vatican I, in expressing the truth of papal infallibility, said the same thing:

 

Pope Pius IX, Vatican Council I, 1870, ex cathedra:
SO, THIS GIFT OF TRUTH AND A NEVER FAILING FAITH WAS DIVINELY CONFERRED UPON PETER AND HIS SUCCESSORS IN THIS CHAIR” (Denz. 1863)

 

John Paul II and Vatican II

 

Hi

 

I just read your materials on Vatican II and was a bit suprised at you conclusions, though I agree. Why did Pope John Paul II not address the non-catholic issues of Vatican II?

Why did he fail to condemn and correct the error?  Being infallible, Pope John Paul VI, as has been declared by the Catholic Church leadership, how could he deviate from the truth of Catholicism?  Being infallible, why did't Pope John Paul make the truth known about Vatican II to the millions and millions of Catholics who adhere to the Vatican II doctrines, new mass and heretical teachings?  I hope you can provide some insight.

 

Joel

 

MHFM: John Paul II didn’t address the non-Catholic issues of Vatican II because he was in full agreement with its heresies.  He was involved with writing The Heresies in Vatican II [PDF File].  John Paul II was a manifest heretic at Vatican II and prior to his “election” in 1978.  Thus, he never validly assumed the office of the Papacy.  He never had protection in his official teaching because he was an antipope, not a true pope.  You need to read this file: The Heresies of John Paul II [PDF file].

 

Sister Lucia

 

Sister Lucia (1907-2005), one of the three seers at Fatima who conversed with the Blessed Virgin Mary many times throughout her life accepted the Vatican II Popes as true successors of Saint Peter.

I hope that this information helps you to grow closer to Our Lord and Our Lady.

Sincerely in +JMJ,

Roger

 

MHFM: As shown in The Whole Truth about the Consecration and Conversion of Russia and the Impostor Sr. Lucy, the post-Vatican II “Sister Lucia” was not the real one.  The aforementioned file provides the facts to substantiate that claim, but really it’s just common sense.  For instance, the post-Vatican II “Sister Lucia” fully endorsed the completely phony version of the Third Secret of Fatima which was released in 2000.  Anyone who knows anything about the issue knows that that “Third Secret,” which was given to the world in the year 2000, could not have been the real one.  Thus, the fact that the post-Vatican II “Sister Lucia” fully endorsed it as authentic proves, by itself, that she was not the real Sister Lucia.  And that’s in addition to all the other evidence.

 

Another NO “baptism”

 

Dear MHFM

 

Re: NO baptism.  I saw such a baptism about 1994.  It has bothered me ever since. 

 

It happened at the San Luis Rey Mission parish Hall where they were having "Mass".  This man "priest"  dressed like St. Francis but wearing large gold rings on his fingers, entered the church and picked up a naked baby and dunked it ceremoniously into the baptismal font or whatever.  When he lifted the "baptized" baby up, it wasn't even wet.  If he had immersed it so its head was wet, it would be dripping and its hair wet, but it wasn't. 

 

Such a horror.  It's as if the devil is insulting the sacrament by having children falsely baptized in the opposite areas of their bodies.  And you know they have been taught how to properly baptize, even in the NO church.

 

I just had someone tell me that the NO Mass is a terrible mass but still valid.  In other words, this is the Mass that Jesus wants us to attend so we can learn heresy and confusion and watch Christ being blasphemed and insulted, his words of consecration changed… and where we can watch men sin by viewing half naked women receiving "communion" because no one will ever tell them to leave or refuse them their sacrament...

 

This abomination is from the Holy Spirit?  Not even in the best of circumstances, even if their orders were valid, which they are not.  All anyone has to do is check.  They are not.  …I witnessed a Protestant baptism (before my conversion to true Catholicism) that was more reverent and correct than that N.O. baptism and "Mass".  And just imagine sending converts to Catholicism to this so-called church.  They would lose their faith.  My daugher in law got her tubes tied so there would be no more annoying children in her life.  She said she properly went to a priest, a N.O. priest.  Did he tell her it was a mortal sin and that she would lose her soul?  No.  He told her he was from the old school and that he didn't believe in it.  He never told her not to do it.  This is forbidden in the N.O. church, as is proselytism…

 

PM

 

JP2’s nude “Masses”

 

In trying to convince people that John Paul II was evil and not Catholic I sometimes bring up the fact that John Paul II had nude women at his “Masses.”  They always defend him by saying that that’s the way they are in those cultures, that that’s what is accepted in those cultures.  What would you say to that?

 

Wayne Lang,

Hays, KS

 

MHFM: First we would say that a Catholic cannot accept or tolerate elements of cultures which are opposed to faith or morals.  Walking around nude is opposed to decency and modesty.  That’s why the Catholic missionaries, who worked in all kinds of wicked and pagan cultures, always made sure to instruct the converts that they had to wear some clothing.  They would not give them the sacraments if they were not dressed.  Below is one quote which is relevant to that point.  It comes from the life of Padre Jose de Anchieta, who was called “the Apostle of Brazil”:

 

“Truly the Superior would drain the population to colonize Brazil, which, he wrote, is ‘our undertaking and has the greatest number of inhabitants in the world.’  Certainly clothing was needed.  At least one garment in all decency should be available for each new convert to wear to church.” (Helen G. Dominian, The Biography of Padre Jose de Anchieta, S.J. [1534-1597], Exposition Press, 1958, p. 46.)

 

Second, John Paul II not only tolerated the immoral nudity, but allowed this pagan way of acting into the liturgy itself.  That’s specifically condemned as Modernism.

 

Pope Pius X, Pascendi Dominici Gregis (# 26), Sept. 8, 1907, On the Worship of Modernists:THE CHIEF STIMULUS IN THE DOMAIN OF WORSHIP CONSISTS IN THE NEED OF ADAPTING ITSELF TO THE USES AND CUSTOMS OF PEOPLES, as well as the need of availing itself of the value which certain acts have acquired by long usage.”

 

New Audio on Papacy posted

 

The Bible teaches that Jesus made St. Peter the first pope [new 51 min. audio]

 

·         This is a very important audio for people to hear.  It contains devastating and irrefutable evidence from the Bible which proves that Jesus made St. Peter the first pope.  Among other things, this audio covers: the change of Peter’s name; the keys of the kingdom; who is the Rock of Matthew 16?  It’s Peter; Peter’s unfailing faith; Jesus entrusts all of His sheep to Peter; the prominence of Peter’s name in Scripture; Peter takes the prime role in the replacement of Judas; Peter’s primacy in the Acts of the Apostles and more.  This Part 1 contains the Biblical (and some patristic) evidence for the Catholic teaching on the Papacy.  Part 2 (which will be posted in the future) will demonstrate that the early Church recognized the Bishop of Rome as the successor to St. Peter’s authority.

 

This audio will be found permanently in the “Refuting Protestantism and Eastern Orthodoxy” section of our website.

 

Thank you

 

Thank you and may God bless your apostolate for giving us the truth!

 

Ralf Karlsen,

Sweden

 

Sister Faustina

 

To most misguided

How Dare You MISGUIDE Catholics in saying not to believe The Divine Mercy and the writings of Sister Faustina's Diary. I had severe bipolar and suffered. If it wasn't for the dedication of my family and finding and saying of the Divine Mercy Novena I would never have survived it and be a normail and mentally healthy woman today.

May God forgive you misguiding His children who believe the trash you write. The Divine Mercy Chaplet is a Power System for all God's children and I am completely sickened by what I found YOU SAYING ON THE NET to all around the world.

How I pity you who are so blind

Debra Farry   CATHOLIC

 

MHFM: No, you are so blind.  Her writings were on the Index of Forbidden Books prior to Vatican II.  You are obviously not a traditional Catholic, and thus not a real Catholic at all.  All you people care about are people you think are visionaries, not the dogmas of the faith. Sister Faustina's Divine Mercy Devotion is something to avoid [PDF File].

 

Perfect contrition, baptism of desire?

 

Dear Brothers:

I have a question about the Church's teaching on the perfect act of contrition.  I do not hold the baptism of desire theory, but I have always believed in the Catechism's teaching that you can make a perfect act of contrition to remit mortal sins if you cannot receive a sacramental confession in the case of imminent death. Isn't this sort of like baptism of desire in the sense that you can receive a sacrament without the outward sign in certain extraordinary circumstances? If a perfect act of contrition without the outward sign is a possibility for the sacrament of penance, then why not for baptism? They are both sacraments we need to obtain salvation.


Thank you for your time.

Melissa U

 

MHFM: The answer to your question is that we know that a baptized person could be restored to justification by perfect contrition plus the desire for confession because the Church has infallibly taught that this can happen (Council of Trent, Sess. 14, Chap. 4).  But the Church has not infallibly taught that an unbaptized person can have justification by baptism of desire.  On the contrary, the Church has infallibly taught that John 3:5 is to be understood as it is written (which contradicts baptism of desire); that the Sacrament of Baptism (desire is not a sacrament) is necessary for salvation; that the spirit of sanctification (i.e. justification) is inseparable from the water of baptism; that the unsacramentally baptized are not part of the Church; that the unsacramentally baptized cannot be subject to the Roman Pontiff; and on and on.  All of the infallible teachings which contradict baptism of desire are covered in Outside the Catholic Church There is Absolutely No Salvation [pdf file].  So, to give a short answer to your question: the Church teaches one concept but doesn’t teach the other.

 

Heresy of the Week

 

MHFM: If you haven’t seen it this week the Heresy of the Week was posted.

 

Confirmation

 

Dear Brothers,
         
I have recently converted to the true Catholic faith.  I am wondering whether or not my confirmation was valid since it was done in a Novus Ordo church by a bishop whom I have no idea of his ordination date.  If it was not valid, what do I need to do if anything?... Thank you for all of your help!  God Bless you all!                      

 

Jodi

 

MHFM: No, the Novus Ordo “Confirmation” is not valid, as shown here: The Changes to the Other Sacraments [PDF file].  Confirmation is not absolutely necessary for salvation.  Thus, if one doesn’t have a place to receive it (as is the case with almost everyone today) then there is no obligation to do so. 

 

A real Catholic

 

I completely desagree with the ideas written on your web site, although I respect them. A real catholic, which means a real Christ's follower, wouldn't abandone the Church of Christ just because he or she desagrees for a while with what the Church has decided. That's exactly what some eastern churches, Luther and all the protestants did. That's not to follow Christ's teachings about the unity of his Church. On the contrary, a real Christian would persevere within the Church, in spite of not understanding very well the religious decisions taken by its liders. That's to keep the unity of the Church and not attempting against it, as Saint Paul tells us with his epistles. Besides, Christ himself teaches in the Gospel that every decision taken by the Church's liders that has to do with moral or religion is inspired by the Holy Ghost. Therefore, by not accepting and by damning the Vatican II Council reforms you're away the true church of Christ and against it, so you would be considere as some heretics. I hope that this comment should help you to ponder. Thanks.

 

Paulo Hidalgo,

Catholic Layman.

 

MHFM: Paulo, you’re very confused and mistaken.  The men you are following are heretics and outside the Church precisely because they agree with the Protestants and accept them as true Christians.  Here’s just one example: The Vatican II sect's Protestant Revolution: the 1999 Joint Declaration with the Lutherans on Justification [PDF File].  They also teach that they shouldn’t be converted, that they can receive Holy Communion, etc.  Both Benedict XVI and John Paul II praised Luther, as our files document.  You should look at them.  You need to wake up and realize that staying with the Catholic Church and the Papacy is staying with the dogmatic teachings of all the true popes in history.  It’s not staying with men in Rome who are posing as popes, yet teaching a new religion contrary to what all the true popes have taught.  By following them you are leaving the Catholic Church and rejecting the Papacy.  The men you are following have been proven to be non-Catholic antipopes.  There have been over 40 antipopes in Catholic history, and the saints and doctors tell us what to do when confronted with heretics posing as true popes: The Catholic Teaching that a heretic cannot be a valid pope [PDF file].

 

Wow… a NO “baptism”

 

Dear Brothers,

I recently had the profound displeasure of witnessing the "baptism" of a child in the Novus Ordo. I know that I should not have attended, but was somewhat coerced and not as vigilant as I should have been.  The liturgy began normally enough, with the markedly unorganized air typical of the liturgical goings on of this parish. The altar girls, priest, and "deacon" processed out. They began by announcing what was going on that day, introduced the child to be baptized, paraphrased an opening prayer, anointed the child with chrism, then some laywomen read aloud the readings. A man read the gospel. The children are apparently dismissed before the readings, as there was a mass exodus of them from the nave into the narthex, where I imagine they received a watered-down lesson, or something like that. The priest, apparently an ultra-modernist, gave a sermon about repenting and "what it means to him." They then sang some nasty music. There was not one lick of traditional music in the whole thing; tambourines and electric piano, though, were given pride of placement. Then was the offertory, a time for a great many little children to run around making noise and coming up to the altar to put their offerings in a basket. It was at this point (if memory serves) that the deacon and priest walked to the font and began what appeared a typical baptism.

Then what happened I thought VERY strange. Apparently the child wrapped in towels was unclothed the whole time. The deacon removed the baby from the towels, and presented the naked baby to the congregation holding her at about chest level. He then held her behind the back and by the legs, and barely dunked her bottom into the font thrice, pronouncing the form. This was no immersion, this was a mere moistening of the bottom. The water didn't come anywhere near her head, it certainly did not flow on her head. Then there was the typical large amount of clapping as the child was handed back to the parents. I thought I was witnessing some pagan sacrifice; my jaw was probably on the floor the whole time.

The bad music started in again, the priest went to the altar and continued. The vast number of chalices and ciboria on the altar were eventually dispensed to eucharistic ministers (mostly women) who handed the "eucharist" over to people standing in long lines, many of whom proceeded to chew it as though the Body of Christ is merely a cracker of some kind - and indeed in this case it was. Most people didn't receive what is allegedly the blood, probably because they find it disgusting to drink out of the communal cup, I imagine. Those who did were typically small children who seemed to be making an effort to get as much as they could - I saw eucharistic ministers somewhat grabbing the chalices back from some kids... It ended just as it began. The closing hymn involved castanets and shouting "hallelujah!" A truly moving experience… I found this experience quite disturbing. This "baptism" was almost certainly invalid, and how many others like it have occurred unwitnessed by someone who is even aware of the concept of validity. I am baffled as to why it was done this way. I'm sure that this was more work than simply following the rubrics they had in front of them...

My question to you is this: What would be the proper course of action? I intend to write to the NO bishop, though I don't expect much. This did, afterall, occur at what is probably the second largest church in his cathedral city. But, perhaps it will incite a sudden outbreak of common sense, if only for a fleeting moment.

EE

 

MHFM: Yes, you shouldn’t have attended.  There’s no point in writing the heretical Novus Ordo “bishop.”  You should inform those who have care of the child about the necessity of a conditional baptism, if they ever intend to have the child raised in and as a member of the Catholic faith.  But since they are obviously and unfortunately immersed in the Vatican II religion, that’s obviously not their intention right now.  They need to accept the true faith.

 

Honorius “Proof”

 

Proof that Sedevacantism is wrong

Although Pope Honorius I was post-humously condemned for heresy by a general council, the Church does not consider him to have ceased to be Pope, even though he stood accused of heresy during his very reign.  Pope Honorius I was accused of heresy during his reign as Sovereign Pontiff but YET, the Church still considers him to be Pope and during his reign there was NO vacancy in the Papacy.  If you look in the complete list of Popes, Pope Honorius I was the 70th Pope who reigned from 625 to 638 and was not taken out of the list of Popes by the Church.

 

J…

 

MHFM: No, the case of Honorius doesn’t prove sedevacantism wrong.  Your objection is addressed and refuted in Objection 14 of this file: Responses to 19 of the Most Common Objections Against Sedevacantism [PDF file].  It’s also addressed and refuted in Part 3 of this file: A Response to the Attack on Sedevacantism.  Here’s a brief portion of the response:

 

…if you want further confirmation that heretics ipso facto cease to be popes, and that the case of Pope Honorius provides no evidence to the contrary, you don’t have to take our word for it. 

St. Francis De Sales (17th century), Doctor of the Church, The Catholic Controversy, pp. 305-306:  "Thus we do not say that the Pope cannot err in his private opinions, as did John XXII; or be altogether a heretic, as perhaps Honorius was.  Now when he [the Pope] is explicitly a heretic, he falls ipso facto from his dignity and out of the Church..."[16]

In the same paragraph in which St. Francis De Sales (Doctor of the Church) mentions Pope Honorius, he states unequivocally that a pope who would become a heretic would cease to be pope.  St. Francis De Sales wasn’t sure if Pope Honorius was a heretic or merely failed to stamp out heresy; but, whatever it was, St. Francis knew that the case of Honorius didn’t affect the truth that heretics cannot be popes. 

 

Shocked by the Novus Ordo

 

Hello,

 

I don't know how I received  the DVD of four programs in 1…  I held on to it for at least a year and am watching it today because in my visit to my mother in Long Island, NY, I met a man on the train and we had a conversation on the Catholic Church, both of us having come from pre-Vatican II backgrounds.  He mentioned the name Dimond and I recalled that I have the dvd.  

 

Not knowing that there was the term sedevacantist, I used to say that I felt that more authentically I was a "tridentine"  Catholic.  Interestingly, I stopped attending mass just before the novus ordo replaced the traditional mass and when I returned in 1987, it was strictly to a latin mass in NYC (St. Ann's and St. Agnus).  I finally decided to see what the the novus ordo was like and I was shocked, really shocked.  People walked in in shorts; the communion rail was gone; the priest was facing all of us; people touched the host; the genuflection was gone; the only latin prayer--what prayer?--was an "alleluia".  I was horrified.  But the worst part, as MHFM DVD indicates is that all those beautiful prayers and offerings of the liturgy WERE GONE!  Luckily I had my St Joseph Missal to remind myself.  And I still recite the Memorare and Prayer to St Michael to people to display the beauty and humility of those prayers.  I grew up with a protestant  father who was not around much and I knew early on that it feels like nothing is happening in a protestant church; it is like walking into an empty bowling alley.  So seeing what the Catholic churches were like in their new form, I was totally uninterested.  In Minnesota, I am surrounded by the nothingness of these structures…

 

Sincerely,

 

Rosemary Stanfield-Johnson

 

“Jehova’s Witness”

 

Hi Brothers:

 

…what would you advise a lady, whose daughter is an extremely hateful jahova's witness (with 2 hateful kids under 10), to do in addition to praying the Rosary & offering Masses for the daughter's conversion?   The daughter steals Rosarys, demands that the statue of our Blessed Mother be removed from the porch (The mother's owned mobile home is on the daughter's property) & does other more cruel/hateful things.

 

Is it fair to consider any Heretic actually possessed?

 

thanks,

 

john 

 

MHFM: Since “Jehova’s Witnesses” don’t believe that Jesus is God, we would advise her to share this file with her daughter: Where does the Bible teach that Jesus is God?  Next, we would say that she should move off her daughter’s property, if that’s possible.  If that’s not possible, she should ignore and avoid her as much as possible.  To your last question, yes many heretics are possessed.

 

Receiving sacraments from non-sedevacantists

 

MHFM: At some point soon we will be posting some comments and thoughts on the issue of whether it’s ever lawful to receive sacraments from priests who are not sedevacantist or hold a heretical position.  These thoughts will refute some schismatic views being spread in this area.

 

Creation and Miracles, Final Edition

 

MHFM: If you have not seen it, the final edition of our video Creation and Miracles, Past and Present can be seen on our WATCH OUR DVDS ONLINE FOR FREE page.

 

EENS- 1439

 

I read part of your website and found this:

 

Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, Sess. 8, Nov. 22, 1439, ex cathedra: “Whoever wishes to be saved, needs above all to hold the Catholic faith; unless each one preserves this whole and inviolate, he will without a doubt perish in eternity.– But the Catholic faith is this, that we worship one God in the Trinity, and the Trinity in unity; neither confounding the persons, nor dividing the substance; for there is one person of the Father, another of the Son, another of the Holy Spirit, their glory is equal, their majesty coeternal...and in this Trinity there is nothing first or later, nothing greater or less, but all three persons are coeternal and coequal with one another, so that in every respect, as has already been said above, both unity in Trinity, and Trinity in unity must be worshipped.  Therefore let him who wishes to be saved, think thus concerning the Trinity.

 

The Catholic Church was the only Christian church in 1439.

 

So what’s the big deal? Are they not saying in 1439 that to be saved one must have faith in Jesus Christ? And the only church that was teaching Jesus was the only Christian Church at the time the Catholic (Universal) Church.

 

That’s how I see it.

 

          Peter Flood

 

MHFM: Well, that definition does emphasize the point that the Catholic faith, if broken down in terms of its simplest mysteries, is belief in the Trinity and Incarnation.  That simply means that that’s the bare minimum requirement, along with baptism, for one to positively know in order to be saved.  For instance, if you met a pagan on an island who had 3 minutes to live and he wanted baptism, what would he have to know to be baptized, hold the Catholic faith and be saved?  The answer is the Trinity and the Incarnation.  (No person above reason who is ignorant of these mysteries can be saved.)  It doesn’t mean that one can reject other teachings of the Catholic faith and be saved.  Once this baptized person who believes in the Trinity and the Incarnation becomes aware or should be aware of other teachings and rejects them, he becomes a heretic.

 

Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, “Cantate Domino,” 1441, ex cathedra: “The Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that all those who are outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans but also Jews or heretics and schismatics, cannot share in eternal life and will go into the everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels, unless they are joined to the Church before the end of their lives; that the unity of this ecclesiastical body is of such importance that only for those who abide in it do the Church’s sacraments contribute to salvation and do fasts, almsgiving and other works of piety and practices of the Christian militia produce eternal rewards; and that nobody can be saved, no matter how much he has given away in alms and even if he has shed blood in the name of Christ, unless he has persevered in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church.”

 

All who become heretics by rejecting a teaching of the Catholic Church place themselves outside the Church.  So, even though this definition was promulgated before Protestantism began with Martin Luther in the 16th century, it applies to the Protestants just as well.  By rejecting the teachings of the Catholic Church, they become heretics.  All heretics are not saved, as this definition makes clear; and those without the Catholic faith are not saved, as the definition you asked about makes clear. 

 

Terrors of Vatican II

 

Dear Brothers Michael and Peter

 

I am grateful for your website.  Thank you.

 

I was Catholic schooled in the late 1950's and early 1960's just before the terrors of Vatican ll were unleashed upon us all.  I can distinctly remember the near frantic tearing down of our stately old church buildings only to be replaced with bowling alley like ultra-modern sanatoriums. Cold and sterile.  Gone were the Saints!  No more stations of the cross!  The tabernacle shoved into one corner while Our Lady was relegated to the shadows!  All this and more, all in the name of bringing the Church into the twentieth century.  Now we reap what they have sown!

 

As a young boy I loved our Church and our Faith.  As a young man I lost interest for a while.  Later, while I was raising my children, the Catholic Church ,once again, was an important part of our familys' life.  All my children were Baptised, went to Confession, received Holy Communion and were Confirmed into our Faith. My one married child was married in the Church.  Now that I am old I have learned ( from you primarily) that all those years were wasted. What a shame!  Well, the time may have been wasted but not the prayers.  For I am sure the prayers of yesterday have led me to your site today.

 

I must confess that from the very beginning I suspected that something was wrong.  As much as I loved Our Lord, I could no longer make that personal connection that had come so easily in my youth.  I attributed this emptiness to my own sinfulness.  And I am sure that this was a large contributing factor but now I am even more convinced that God no longer resides in this new religion. He is no longer approachable through these new priests with their new sacraments.

 

I have watched your videos, listened to your CDs and read your books and my question to you is: Now What?  I must get to Confession. I must receive Communion.  I must reside in the State of Grace or I will surely be dammed.  There are, no doubt, millions of lost Catholics just like me with a burning desire restore their relationship with God. Yet there are no valid Catholic Priests to administer these Sacraments.  So, I am left with the Rosary and the hope that Our Blessed Mother will intercede on my behalf.  She may well be our ONLY hope.  Pray for me brothers as I will pray for you.

 

Aidan

 

MHFM: It’s great to hear about your interest.  We have guidelines on our website concerning the issue of where to go to receive sacraments in these perilous times.  The options are limited, but there are still options out there for people.  If you contact us, we can help you more specifically with that question.

 

Confused about Vatican II

 

Dear Brothers,

I have recently came back to the catholic faith. There is a lot of hate in the world today and hatred to the Catholic Church. There has been an invasion of liberal ideas and practices that have infiltrated our church. I believe most if not all of these cases are confined within the United States. Regardless of who is pope or not pope we must stand firm together as children of our Lord. The Pope's office is a position of authority. We should have faith that no matter how evil or sinful a man becomes, that raises to the office of the papacy will be able to destroy the church.

The purpose of Vatican II was to refine and stand firm to our traditions and not fall into secular influences. Many people who called themselves catholics became upset because of the Church's position was too conservative and didn't adjust the church to the standards of society. Many of these people disregarded what Vatican II set out to do and took the power of the church into their own hands. We have seen this recently with so-called catholics ordaining women and holding untraditional masses.

Vatican II did change the translation of mass to the common language and this lead to some of the minor changes to mass but it did also effect the Old mass and made members of the church think that if the language of the church can change other disciplines of the church can be changed as well.

EWTN has reached out and spread the word of our Lord to those who were lost. I've listened to several EWTN broadcasts and I have yet to hear one that says one does not have to be Catholic to be saved. They have said those who have not heard the Gospel of our Lord through no fault of their own, but seek the grace of God, Jesus will have mercy on them when they die. This is because it is the Catholic Church's Mission to make sure every Man woman and child here the good news of the Lord if the Church fails this mission a person who is seeking God will not be denied. Those who say they know the Lord but do not hold true to his teachings will receive the judgment they deserve.

Your site and the language you use right now sounds a lot like the language used by Luther when he split from the church. He let the hate and sin of others blind him from the truth. I pray for you brother so that you will not let hate cloud your mind and your heart…. This is not an issue you face alone many see the evil that has infiltrated our church. From what I am seeing is between this pope and the last pope there is a focus on unity. The popes seem to be meeting with these "heretics" and praying with them. Does that mean the pope will allow their influences infiltrate our Church. No it doesn't, but we should keep an eye out and pray for them so that they will not err. What ever is to come God knows and as long as we hold true to what he has taught us we will not be lead astray.

Thank you,
Thomas DiGaetano

 

MHFM: You're very confused and mistaken.  You need to research the facts on our website, such as the clear heresies taught by Vatican II [PDF File], John Paul II [PDF file], Benedict XVI [PDF file], etc.  You also hold an incorrect view of Outside the Church There is No Salvation.  There are no exceptions for anyone; see Outside the Catholic Church There is Absolutely No Salvation [PDF FILE].  To say that there are any exceptions is heretical.  EWTN has indicated on many broadcasts that non-Catholics can be saved, which (as just mentioned) is heretical.  You should also look at this file: EWTN and the Charismatic Movement [PDF File].  Even EWTN’s most "conservative" preachers consider Protestants brothers in the faith, not heretics.  That’s contrary to Catholic teaching, of course.  Also, it’s the Vatican II antipopes who have praised Martin Luther and have adopted his heresies: The Vatican II sect's Protestant Revolution: the 1999 Joint Declaration with the Lutherans on Justification [PDF File].  We, on the contrary, totally condemn the arch-heretic and his heresies.

 

Bind and Loose

 

Good Evening Brothers,

 

I wonder if you may help me out on an issue that I have a hard time explaining when debating the EVILS of the Norvus Ordo Mass, the new doctrine, and all of these ANTI-POPES.  " What you shall bind on earth shall be bound in Heaven, and What you loosen on earth shall be lossened in Heaven"  has been spewed at me from some liberal Catholics and I dont know how to answer them. How would you answer that?

 

Thank you

 

g…

 

MHFM: That refers to Matthew 16, of course, and the power that Jesus gave to St. Peter.  We will not get into a discussion of the precise meaning of the binding and loosing reference (which also appears in Mt. 18 in reference to the apostles), but the short answer is that it’s precisely those dogmas which have been bound which prove that the Vatican II antipopes are not true popes.  It’s precisely because we are dedicated to the Papacy, to the papal dogmas and to the papal prerogatives that we follow what the true popes have taught and reject heretics.  And there is no doubt that the Vatican II impostors are heretics.

 

The Miracles of Blessed Martin De Porres

 

MHFM: Blessed Martin De Porres (1579-1639) was an interesting person.  Blessed Martin was a Dominican brother who was beatified by Pope Gregory XVI and, during his life, was favored by God with extraordinary gifts.  He raised the dead and bilocated.  He also had a special love for animals and was rewarded with favors in this area.  He has often been invoked, especially in Italy, as a special patron to relieve distress caused by the destructive presence of rats or mice” (William J. Kearns, The Life of Blessed Martin De Porres, 1937, p. 112.).  He also raised a dog to life:

 

The procurator of the convent had a dog that served him faithfully for eighteen years.  But now, as the animal was old and loathsome, he ordered him to be cast out.  However, the faithful beast always came back, looking for his master.  Then orders were given that the dog be taken off some distance and killed.  This was done, and Blessed Martin on discovering such ingratitude, as it seemed in his eyes, was moved to compassion and asked that the dead dog be carried to his cell.  He then sought out the procurator and said to him: ‘My Father, why did you order them to kill that animal?  Is that the reward you give him after he has served you for so many years?’  Then shutting himself up in the cell where the dead animal had been placed, Martin knelt for some time in prayer, begging God to restore life to the unfortunate animal if He so willed, and God did not turn a deaf ear to this humble petition.  On the following day Martin’s brethren saw him leave his cell, accompanied by the faithful dog, alive and perfectly well.  While feeding him in the kitchen, Martin was heard to utter these words of sober advice to the dog: ‘Now, be sure not to return to your ungrateful master’s service, for you have experienced only too clearly how little your long years of faithful service have been appreciated.’  It is said that the dog survived for many years, but that he always followed Martin’s warning, fleeing from his old master whenever he saw him approach.” (Ibid., pp. 113-114)

 

Blessed Martin also bilocated, even to Japan.  “… Father Francisco d’Arce declared that an old religious, whose proven virtue made him a reliable authority, assured him that Brother Martin also visited Japan, where persecutions threatened to destroy the Faith, in order to aid the martyrs in those islands” (Ibid., p. 122.).  Blessed Martin made the most of his time: “Brother Martin was a model of industry – his days and even his nights were crowded with activity.  How he found time to accomplish so much good would be very difficult were we not dealing with the life of a saint” (Ibid., p. 22.).  And like all the other saints, Blessed Martin held strongly to the necessity of the Catholic faith and preached it to others:

 

“Blessed Martin [who happened to be of dark skin color] has been teaching his white devotees a great many lessons of inestimable social worth; but he has a message of vital import to convey to his colored brethren.  He points out to them that their only hope for true happiness here and hereafter lies in their acceptance of the Catholic Faith; and that their only true friend is the Catholic Church, wherein they may find a spiritual equality that is based on love of God and not on wealth, education, or social distinction.” (Ibid., pp. 193-194)

 

Questions from Cameroon

 

Hi dear brothers

Peace with be you in the of Our Mighty Lord and Saviour JESUS CHRist.  I am so impressed to read all what you wrote and put in your website. It is really at the same time astonishing and amazing.  I can't believe such revelations are true.  But dear Brothers, don't you think you are too hative in your conclusions? are you sure things are taking place just the way you are describing them? Why are the council; the popes and the doctrine devilishly qualified as you do? please , I am writing from Cameroon; a country in West africa. I am catholic christian and believer.

I sincerely look forward to hearing from you!

fred…

 

MHFM: Yes, we are sure what we are saying on our website is true because it’s not based on our opinion but on the infallible and unchangeable teachings of the Catholic Church.  We cite popes, dogmas and councils.  They are what all Catholics must follow.  And we prove that the Vatican II “Church” rejects those teachings and is therefore heretical.

 

Implicit Desire?

 

Dear Brothers Michael and Peter,   I am interested to know if you have any material stating that the so called implicit baptism of desire is not a teaching of the Church. I of course know that it is a heresy, but I need the material for my son who wants to use it in his arguments with the many people whom he knows  who believe it to be a teaching of the Church, as also for myself to use in refuting the heresy.
 
                          +    Sincerely yours in Christ,   +
 
                                                           Norton Lewis 

 

MHFM: We recommend that you obtain the book: Outside the Catholic Church There is Absolutely No Salvation.  It covers the objections that people bring up on this issue and will equip your son with the in-depth facts he needs to refute denials of the dogma.  It’s quite in-depth because it covers in detail the history of the issue, as well as the many objections people raise.  Regarding implicit desire, it’s proven to be heretical when you iron out what people mean by their use of the “implicit desire” idea.  In other words, you have to question them, and get them to define and explain what they mean by implicit desire.  When they do that it becomes clear that they are applying “implicit desire” to people who don’t believe in Jesus Christ and the Trinity and/or to people who belong to false religions (those “invincibly ignorant” of the Gospel).  The former denies the dogmatic Athanasian Creed and many responses of the Holy Office; the latter is contradicted explicitly by Pope Eugene IV and other dogmatic teaching.  So, their explanation of implicit desire will demonstrate that they are rejecting dogmatic teaching.

 

But people must be on their guard about something.  As our material explains, there were saints who believed in explicit baptism of desire for unbaptized catechumens only.  They were wrong on that point; their opinions are not consistent with the infallible teaching of the Church on that issue.  But those saints who believed in it never applied it to pagans, Jews, etc.  They didn’t apply it to people who didn’t believe in Jesus Christ and the Trinity.  However, in certain contexts, while trying to express their (false) opinion on explicit baptism of desire, they used the word “implicit” to mean “not expressed in words.”  In other words, they might be speaking about a person who knows of baptism and believes in Jesus Christ and the Trinity, but does not express that desire in words.  Their (false) view would apply baptism of desire to that person.  They were wrong, but they were clearly not endorsing the utterly heretical “implicit desire” theory as it is understood today: that baptism of desire can apply to people who don’t believe in the essential mysteries of the Trinity and the Incarnation.  Nevertheless, implicit desire advocates will dishonestly attempt to use those passages, by taking them out of context, in order to promote their wicked heresy.

 

There is also this quote from Pope Pius X in Pascendi.  In the following quote he is denouncing the doctrine of the Modernists.  The Modernist doctrine which he denounces sounds almost exactly like what the modern day “implicit desire” heretics say regarding people who are not Catholics being saved by a desire within them, even though they don’t know of Jesus Christ, the Trinity, the Catholic Faith.

 

Pope St. Pius X, Pascendi (#6), Sept. 8, 19007: “They [Modernists] labor in fact to persuade man that in him, and in the innermost recesses of his nature and life are concealed a desire and need for some religion; not for any religion, but for such a one as is the Catholic religion; for this, they say, is absolutely postulated by the perfect development of life.  Here, moreover, we should again complain vigorously that there are not lacking among Catholics those who, although they reject the doctrine of immanence as a doctrine, yet employ it as a method of apology…” (Denzinger 2103)

 

Devastated by V-2 sect

 

Dear Brothers,

 

I converted to the Catholic Church a few years ago after a long journey to get there.  I had been drawn to the Church since I was a child.  I'm 53 now.  In the past few years I have had a terrible struggle with my faith.  Since joining the Church I have been so disappointed and offended.  I have stopped going, and I thought something was wrong with me.  People have told me that my expectations are too high, but I have been devastated over what I have seen at the Catholic churches I have attended.  I'm offended by the Eucharistic ministers, the altar girls, the people coming to church looking like they are wearing their pajamas or clothes they might wear to a nightclub, the terrible priest scandals, the sanctuaries that look like warehouses or some sort of "new age" temple, and many other things.  The Church has been nothing like what I thought it would be.  Thank you for the DVD's and other materials that you sent me.  They have been very enlightening.  I'm so relieved to know that I don't have to go to the N.O. mass.  I just wanted to ask you if you know of a valid mass or priest in the Jacksonville, Florida area… Thank you.

 

Cynthia Morris

 

Heresy of the Week

 

MHFM: Benedict XVI’s latest heresy is in the Heresy of the Week, which we put up on Wednesday night.

 

Annulments

 

to whomever at MHFM,


I am currently seperated and am seeking information on annulments.  You have so much on your website that somehow I am unable to locate this information.  I have close friends who are traditionalist Catholics who have advised me that I should seek an annulment.  I am not yet divorced and I feel that this legal process could take forever.  My main concern is my standing in the eyes of the Church.  My marriage is not what was intended, how do I go about seeking an annulment.


IK

 

MHFM: Thanks for the question.  Our article on annulments is here: The Annulment Fiasco - The Vatican II sect's De Facto acceptance of Divorce and Remarriage [PDF File].  Among other things, it points out that an annulment is a declaration that a “marriage” never was valid to begin with – it never existed.  Annulments are difficult to prove, were very rarely given, and were only given when there was clear evidence that a marriage had not been validly contracted.  If there is any legitimate doubt, the presumption is in favor of the validity of the marriage.  Since we’re in the Great Apostasy, there is presently no authority which could issue a binding decision that such a union never was a marriage.  But from what is stated in your e-mail, it sounds like you are definitely married.  Just because your marriage was “not what was intended” doesn’t mean that you can do away with it and marry again.  If you exchanged the vows and there wasn’t a clear-cut impediment, then you are married.  You may certainly separate from your spouse for grave reasons such as adultery, heresy, etc., but (based on what you’ve presented) you are not free to marry again.

 

More on Garabandal

 

Dear Bros Michael and Peter Dimond,

 

As a promoter and devotee of Garabandal for more than 20 years here in New Zealand up until about 1999, I present here a few good reasons why people should avoid this false apparition of Our Lady:… Our Lady is said to have "praised' Vatican II, a non-catholic heretical council.

 

Our Lady is meant to have told the girls that after John XXIII, there will be three more popes.

- no comment needed here!

 

About the time of the Cuban crisis (1962) Our Lady is meant to have told the girls "no third world war".( No mention here about a spiritual war which would have been more relevant in these latter times....salvation of.souls being more important than salvation of bodies)

 

A worldwide warning from God to correct the conscience of the world (that's nice, because now we don't have to worry anymore about having to tell all those souls who are on the road to damnation, and warn them that if they remain outside the Catholic Church they will burn forever in Hell ...that will save a lot of hassles!)

 

A miracle to occur at the village of Garabandal to confirm the events at which all the sick will be cured who are present....and Russia will be converted as a result of the miracle.(now that's an interesting one isn't it with Pope Pius XII having already consecrated Russia in 1952… The conditional chastisement if men do not amend...again a physical punishment and no mention of a spiritual chastisement.  Secondary considerations include the absence of the traditional Mass in the daily lives of the seers and at the village church in Garabandal...promotion of the freemasonic jewish Mess.

 

And a few others already mentioned by the MHFM in previous articles on this website.(and Deo volente, this one) St. Joan of Arc and St. Philomena - pray for us

 

David Shone

Auckland, New Zealand

 

New MP3

 

Mhfm,


My computer wont play the audio(no broadband)so ill buy it pretty soon. I noticed ye said ye will have it on the 4th audio mp3 disc comming out soon.(when is soon??),and will the 4th one have more Protestant beliefs explained?? And are ye writing a Catholic Apologetic book?? If so,when will i be able to get it??
Faithfully,

 

MHFM: The 4th edition of our MP3 disc is now available for order here: 4th edition of MP3 disc.  It contains 48 hours of audio programs including all of our recent audio programs. 

 

 

There are more projects coming in the area of refuting non-Catholics from the Bible.

 

How Absurd

 

In regards to your recent article ''SF Mayor to attend V2 ''Mass''.  I would like to mention that in the Diocese of Madison WI.  They just allowed the Latin Mass to be celebrated downtown at Holy Redeemer.  The retired N.O. Priest who was ordained in the old rite was to be saying the Mass this past Sunday.  So I decided to go to the Mass .  When I got there, someone came to me in the parkinglot  & told that the priest would not give me the sacraments due to my rejection of the three baptisms and being sedavacantist and something about  excommunication for going to independent Chapels,  unless I went to confession 1st.  So I got back in my car and left...    So let my get this straight...The SF Mayor, John Kerry and others can receive and nothing is being said against them...but yet I got turned away because I proclaim  One Baptism for the forgivenss of sins...  How absurd!!  

 

SM   Madison WI
                        

Truth found

 

Dear Sir

 

   My name is shebli Geegieh. I was born in Jordan (middle east) from catholic parents. I remember that when I was a kid I used to go to the church where there was an old traditional mass held. and when I became eighteen years old I saw major changes in the mass. they start to sing and to use musical instruments. they change the rhythm, and now I can see women  who are servants in the alter, and women who give the holy bread and the holy wine our lord body and blood to the catholic.

 

   when I talk to the priest in my country regarding that he screams on me. I couldn't understand what's happening. The salvation of non catholic was not a new thing to hear from your esteemed web site that I found suddenly by accident, I heard 5 years ago from my catholic priest. And I wondered at that time why don't I turn to a Muslim and marry four women, since the salvation is guaranteed !!! I'm 27 years old and I didn't went to the confession chair, nor taking the holy mass. for I couldn't find one good holy catholic priest.

 

I want to thank the lord for the Truth that revealed to me through your website. and I would like to thank you also. Also I would like to take your permission to translate some of your books to the Arabic language. And I'm sure that the lord will be with us. since we work for the glory of his name.

 

Kindest regards

 

shebli

 

Catholic vs. Protestant missionary work

 

MHFM: In the lives of Catholic missionaries and saints who were active in the new world after its discovery (especially those active among native peoples), it’s interesting to note the contrast between the efforts (and successes) of Catholics to convert people to the true faith and the lack of efforts by Protestants to convert people to their heretical version of the Gospel.  The following quote, coming from a Protestant, is interesting:

 

The Protestant historian Prescott, in the History of the Conquest of Peru, calls our attention to the zeal for the spread of Christianity that actuated even ruthless conquistadors and to the unselfish character of the pioneer [Catholic] missionaries: ‘The effort to Christianize the heathen is an honorable characteristic of the Spanish Conquest.  The Puritan [i.e. Protestant]… did comparatively little for the conversion of the Indian, content, it would seem, with having secured to himself the inestimable privilege of worshipping God in his own way.  Other adventurers who have occupied the New World have often had too little regard for religion themselves to be very solicitous about spreading it among the savages.  But the Spanish missionary, from first to last, has shown a keen interest in the spiritual welfare of the natives.  Under his auspices, churches on a magnificent scale have been erected, schools for elementary instruction founded, and every rational means taken to spread the knowledge of religious truth, while he has carried his solitary mission into remote and almost inaccessible regions, or gathered his Indian disciples into communities…’” (quoted by J.C. Kearns, The Life of Blessed Martin De Porres, 1937, pp. 10-11.)

 

V-2 changes

 

I don't know where to go.  My name is Cindy and I was baptized in the Catholic church in 1959.  My father stopped attending Mass when they brought in guitars and a priest who told jokes.  He had several arguments with family members that Mass was not the same and he was not going to attend anymore.  My Aunt said the changes were made by the Pope and that he is infallible and my father was committing mortal sin by not going to Mass anymore.  I have gone to Mass on and off since then and it gets creepier and creepier.  While in college, I went to different churches...mostly protestant and found that the service was much like mine.  The only difference I saw was that the minister could marry. 

 

I've read several things on your website about Mass being invalid.  Does this mean that the sacraments I've received are invalid as well?  I've had my daughters baptized in the church too and after reading your website I feel I am doing them a great disservice.

 

What is someone to do that wants to be a Catholic but can't stomach the changes that have been made?  I really need to know.

 

Sincerely,

 

Cynthia

 

MHFM: The New Mass is invalid, as covered in The Invalid New Mass [link to section].  The New Rite of Ordination is also invalid, as covered in Why the New Rite of Ordination is Invalid [PDF File].  As far as the other sacraments go, they are covered in The Changes to the Other Sacraments [PDF file].  This last file points out that anyone can validly baptize.  Thus, there’s no reason to conclude that your daughters haven’t been baptized, unless the person who baptized them drastically altered the matter or form or didn’t intend to baptize them (which would be extremely bizarre).  Our website explains what people need to do, and people can call us as well for more specific information if they’re in full agreement.

 

Astounded

 

Dear Most Holy Family Monastery: Do you issue a newletter currently?  If so, please send details.  Came across your website quite by accident and am astounded to read your articles!

 

Converted to Roman Catholicism about 7 years ago....am at a loss now!!  Your articles sure make sense and read them avidly!!

 

MAX EDELSON            MANY THANKS!!!

 

MHFM: Our newest updates and the newest items we offer are all posted on the website, so we encourage you to come back to it frequently.  But if you haven’t already, we would also strongly recommend that you obtain our DVD special offer which includes 6 DVDs (with 10 different programs), as well as 3 important books (including our 610-page book with 200 color photographs), an audio disc (with 20 hours of programming) and flyers for only $10.00 (no shipping charge in U.S.).

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        

Born-Againism

 

Subj: Please help, I’m losing the faith

 

Mhfm,

I need help.I believe what you teach but recently i feel that im turning to ''born-againism''.Ive recently seen some,um i think ye call them ''Gospel'' channels in America,well the christians on them seem so devoted to the Bible and they seem to have the Holy Spirit pouring out of them.Ive tried to defend Catholic teaching on bebo against born-again christians but they seem stronger,and im starting to think that theres a reason why??-i really cud do with help here because once again-a believe that Jesus founded one church not many-i would greatly appreciate if ye did that book on Protestantism that ye were talking about.  My main concern is really Mary.I mean why do we need to go to Jesus through her??I mean she is just a women,she didnt die on the cross.Ive read ''true devotion'' and to be honust it didnt really help.  I guess i could do with yer prayers and help.Perhaps alot of talks on different issues??  Actually,i was trying to prove that Mary was a perpetual virgin yesterday,and how brothers really means cousins,or family members.Then the Protetant siad ''how come we know Mary and Elizabeth were cousisns??'' and theres other places where the word cousin is used 2.

Yours faithfully,
Michael.

 

MHFM: We would recommend that you listen to this audio, which shows that “born-againism” is not true biblical Christianity: Justification by Faith Alone refuted and the Catholic teaching on Justification proved by the Protestant Bible [1 hr. 30 min. audio].  Also, you need to pray the Rosary and stop watching the heretical channels.  It’s poisonous to listen to heretics in that fashion.  It’s like hearing the Devil’s message.  The Holy Spirit is not pouring out of them; their religion is not remotely biblical.  Not only do they reject the clear teaching of the Bible on salvation/justification, but the Papacy (Mt. 16) and all the rest.  Their apparent devotion to God is unfortunately just a matter of externals and it lacks a true and pure intention to follow God’s law and truth.  It’s all about community and experience and making people feel good, but not about the truth.  When examined, you would discover that about 100% of those people you think are dedicated not only commit clear cut mortal sins (e.g. contraception, etc.) besides their heretical beliefs, but also hold that those who commit such mortal sins can be saved.  Don’t be deceived, and shut the spiritual poison out of your mind.

 

Contra Adultery

 

MHFM: In the book The Vatican’s Exorcists, which discusses certain cases of demonic possession, there’s this interesting quote.  It reminds us of the malice of adultery and mortal sin.

 

There’s the case of “a thirty-five-year-old woman, an accountant with significant responsibilities at a commercial firm, who suddenly became overcome with asthma-like suffocation every time she attempted to enter a church.  Her trouble began when she entered into an affair with her boss, who practiced black magic…” (Tracy Wilkerson, The Vatican’s Exorcists, 2007, p. 62.)

Baptizing a new convert today

 

MHFM: We’re happy to announce that we will be baptizing a new convert to the traditional Catholic faith today (Monday, Jan. 7).  He’s 40 years old.

 

Death and the Journey Into Hell, 2nd edition

 

MHFM: The 2nd edition of our Death and the Journey Into Hell video is available on our website; it has a classical music soundtrack throughout.  (The audio quality of the online version will not, of course, be as good as the quality on the future DVD.)  You can watch it on our WATCH OUR DVDS ONLINE FOR FREE page.

 

Interregnum

 

Hey Brothers,


Quick question. I was wondering at what point in history was the three year period without a pope. In between what two popes.
Thanks


Nate P.

 

MHFM: The longest papal interregnum (before the Vatican II apostasy) was between Pope St. Marcellinus (296-304) and Pope St. Marcellus (308-309).  It lasted for more than three and a half years.[17]

 

Who’s Amazed

 

I am amazed at the irony of your website. And I am sorry you dishonour the name of the most Holy Family, especially Our Lady, who is always obedient to the Pope and the authority of her Son's Church. (And it HAS ecclesial authority in Jesus' name, whether you like what it decides or not). To call an authentically elected Pope such as Benedict a heretic is scandalous. To publicly declare it, doubly so! The Spirit leads the Church into all truth. The early Church and previous popes were for their time. THe Church GROWS through history as new things are revealed to it by the Spirit. To denounce Vatican II, a valid ecumenical council, is to sin against the Holy Spirit. May God have mercy on you for your website and your disobedience to Church authority and your assurance that most catholics are going to hell!! How arrogant! Only God knows who is going to hell, and then only at the point of their death! "Do not judge, lest you be judged!" Or do you not accept Scripture either? Do you not see the hypocrisy in your site? I pray for enlightenment and humility for you and all so-called "traditional Catholics" with all sincerity. The only "traditional Catholics" are those that continue to accept apostolic tradition and Church authority! "Outside the Church there is no salvation" is one of your topics! Well then, come back inside and submit in humble obedience to your Pope! Come back to the "most holy family" of the Church that Jesus promised would not be led into error. For all your good intentions and fine sounding arguments, I am convinced that Satan has you in his pocket! Be humble enough to realise this! There is no conspiracy! The Pope IS Petrus!

Yours in Christ...

A concerned Catechist and student of Catholic theology

 

MHFM: We’re amazed at your blindness.  It’s truly amazing that you can be so blind to deny what’s documented and irrefutable (e.g., in The Heresies of Benedict XVI [PDF file]), that Benedict XVI completely rejects many Catholic dogmas (including the Papacy).  It’s amazing that you can be so blind that you fail to see that, by any traditional Catholic standard, Benedict XVI is a public heretic against the Catholic faith.  You obviously don’t have even a basic concept of what constitutes fidelity to the Catholic faith.

 

This is Benedict XVI with the “Orthodox” schismatic patriarch of Constantinople, Bartholomew, in Nov. of 2006.  They signed a joint declaration which declares that the schismatic leader is a “pastor in the Church of Christ,” even though he rejects the Papacy, Vatican I, etc.  Benedict XVI thereby denied that the Papacy is a dogma which must be believed to be part of the Church of Christ, thus making Benedict XVI a public heretic.

 

No Mass or priest in Malaysia

                                                                             

Dear Brothers,

 

My name is Dominic.  I am 62 and a cradle Catholic. I live in Malacca, Malayisa (a small Muslim country in South East Asia). The Catholic Churches here are 100% Novus Ordo and so are all the priests. I am not sure whether there are any priests ordained before 1969.

       

Since the new mass is invalid I cannot attend any mass offered in these churches.  This means that I have no way of fulfilling religious obligations, including confessions.  There is no way for me to know whether the novos ordo priest will say the words of absolution,  as mentioned by you.  I have not been attending Mass for quite sometime now.  Please advise me on the course of action I should take to fulfill my Catholic religious obligations.  Thank you.

       

May God Bless Your Good Works.

 

Dominic.

 

MHFM: It’s good to hear about your interest, Dominic.  As our material explains, there’s no obligation to attend Mass if the Church doesn’t provide you with a fully Catholic one in your area.  Since all you have is the invalid New Mass, you obviously have no obligation to go anywhere and you should just stay home.  As far as confession goes, just look for a priest ordained in the Eastern Rite (e.g. a Ukrainian priest, but not “Orthodox”) or a priest ordained prior to 1968 who can say the proper words of absolution.  If you cannot find one of those, then just continue to pray the Rosary (15 decades each day if you can) and make an act of contrition with the intention to go to confession when you can.  The Church teaches that perfect contrition with the desire to go to confession can restore a person to the state of grace (if he’s lost it) prior to sacramental absolution.  And if you ever travel, then we’re sure that, at that point, you can find some priest who can hear your confession.  Also, make sure you accept without compromise all the dogmas of the traditional faith and that you reject all the modern heresies (as discussed on our website) and that you make the Profession of Faith from the Council of Trent (also on our website).

 

Thank you

 

I greet you in the name of our Lord.

Happy new year.

I thank the Most Holy Monastery community for the good work your doing to help the people understand our religion more.

I have printed out many copies on how to pray a rosary, i will distribute them to my people so that we can be serious on praying the Rosary.

God Bless you

Regards

Kigambo Juliet

 

Heretical relatives

 

Dear Brothers,

 

Here is a tough choice and I inquire your opinion.

 

I was released from prison and recently a halfway house in August. While at that halfway house I befriended a man who opened my eyes to the truth that the Novus Ordo I had belonged to my entire life was a false religion, not the true Catholic faith, and I now hold true to the sedevacantist position, having done a ton of research on the matters.

 

The few people I care the most about in my life, my mother, brother, and sister, refuse to listen to me attempt to tell them the truth of what's going on. I've tried for 3 straight months to get my mom to quit the N.O. but she refuses and downright gets angry at me for bringing it up at all any more.

 

I love my mom and other family members dearly, and am desperate for them to see the truth. But despite my best efforts, it's falling on deaf ears. I read in an e-exchange recently that the (true) Catholic faith forbids us to hold company with anyone who doesn't accept the church's teachings inviolate. Well, am I supposed to cut off all communication with my mother, brother, sister? If so, that's asking the biggest sacrifice I will ever have to make. Not only would it break their hearts, it happens that I am living in a house my mom bought for me to live in since I got out of prison. She has been the only one who gives a darn about me in my life and I'm supposed to leave the home I'm living in that she has provided me with and go live God knows where, perhaps even go homeless? I have no where else to go. Also considering the nature of the crime I had committed, I can't just go live anywhere, even if I did find someplace else to live. Is there no exceptions??? Can't I continue contact with my beloved family AND CONTINUE TO TRY TO CONVERT THEM?? At what point do we give up on people who are obstinate in leaving the novus ordo?

 

I know this was a long email, but I need the help very much. Thanks.

 

MHFM: We think that the E-Exchange you’re referring to was in the context of giving Christmas gifts to heretics.  That’s not something you could do, since it gives them the false impression that they celebrate Christmas as Christians.  In your situation, you should cut of religious communication with those family members your speaking about; you shouldn’t do things which give them the impression that they are of the true faith.  Don’t say grace with them or the rosary, etc. 

 

But you don’t have to leave the house which your mom bought.  Similarly, if a person lives with his non-Catholics parents or a non-Catholic sibling, then he/she can have normal interaction with them, just not religious communication.  However, since you’re mom is very obstinate and you’ve already tried to convert her many times, you don’t need to (and probably shouldn’t) bring it up anymore unless she brings something up in that regard or a matter has to be addressed.  Titus 3:10 says that one should avoid the heretic after the second rebuke.  In your case, that would just mean cutting off religious communication.  

 

Bayside, Vatican II, denouncing priests

 

I hope you don't mind a question.  I'm sincere in this, I'm confused and don't know.  My search originated with whether the apparition at Bayside, New York was approved by the Catholic Church and this is how I ended up at your site.  Before, I let myself be drawn into any articles I saw on other sites about prophecies from there and so forth.  From there I started reading a little about Vatican II, (which I see all over other sites as well) and a picture of people worshipping the Pope as the Christ and so forth.

Ok, this is my question.  All this Vatican II stuff, which I am still trying to understand may very well all be true.. Personally, as I said, I am still looking into it and trying to understand it.  One thing stands out in my mind.  In the Pieta prayer book, you read that it was revealed to Mutter Vogel that you should never attack a priest but pray for them, because they are the Vicar's of Christ on Earth.  This apparently was a directive from Our Lord.  So then shouldn't we just pray for Our Pope, Our Church and Our priests and not paint them in a bad light?

Thats my question,

Sincerely I'm curious of your answer,
Roxane

 

MHFM: First, Bayside was not approved by the Catholic Church; it’s followed by members of the Vatican II (false) Church.  The Message of Bayside contains heresies, which shows that it’s false.  See those heresies here: The False Apparitions at Bayside, NY [PDF File].  If you’re reading on Vatican II, you want to start here: The Heresies in Vatican II [PDF File] It’s the most in-depth document on the many heresies in Vatican II.  Regarding the Mutter Vogel “revelation” in the Pieta booklet, we’ve discussed it before.  It’s clearly a false message from an evil spirit.  To say that a priest should never be attacked or criticized is contrary to justice and all of Catholic tradition.  That would mean, for instance, that the worst heretics in the early Church (most of whom were bishops and thus priests) should never have been denounced and attacked.  Yet, the saints, fathers and councils attacked these heretics and evil men with vigor in order to defend truth, expose lies and teach souls.  It was necessary.  One of the most famous examples of this concerns the 5th heretic Nestorius.

 

On Christmas Day in the year 428, Nestorius denied that Mary was the Mother of God from his pulpit.  A simple layman named Eusebius stood up and protested the public heresy.  This resulted in the Catholics of Constantinople breaking communion with their bishop, Nestorius; for they recognized that since he was a public heretic, he had no authority in the Church: he lost his office automatically.  They even chanted: “An emperor we have, but no bishop.”  This reaction was praised by councils and popes, as we see described below.  Notice that Pope St. Celestine says that Nestorius had no power to excommunicate after he began to preach heresy.  This confirms that heretical bishops lose their offices ipso facto (by that very fact) when they become heretics.  And this teaching on the loss of Episcopal office due to heresy applies precisely to the manifestly heretical “bishops” of the Vatican II sect: they have no authority and are outside the Catholic Church, even though they hold the buildings and possess the putative authority of a diocese.

 

Dom Prosper Guéranger, The Liturgical Year, Vol. 4 (St. Cyril of Alexandria), p. 379: “It was then that Satan produced Nestorius… enthroned in the Chair of Constantinople… In the very year of his exaltation, on Christmas Day 428, Nestorius, taking advantage of the immense concourse which had assembled in honor of the Virgin Mother and her Child, pronounced from the Episcopal pulpit the blasphemous words: ‘Mary did not bring forth God; her Son was only a man, the instrument of the Divinity.’  The multitude shuddered with horror.  Eusebius, a simple layman, rose to give expression to the general indignation, and protested against this impiety.  Soon a more explicit protest was drawn up and disseminated in the name of the members of the grief-stricken Church, launching an anathema against anyone who would dare say: ‘The Only-begotten Son of the Father and the Son of Mary are different persons.’  This generous attitude was the safeguard of Byzantium, and won the praise of popes and councils.  When the shepherd becomes a wolf, the first duty of the flock is to defend itself.’”


 

Heresy of the Week

 

MHFM: Sorry for the delay in the Heresy of the Week; it will be posted soon. 

 

Some popes?

 

Strict adherence to church doctrine is great! I am only 43 and ,of course, was born after the 2nd Vatican council. I am also a Catechism teacher at my church. My question is why do you follow changes Popes have made but not the changes made at the 2nd Vatican council? Why do you accept the papal infallibility of some Popes but not all Popes? What causes some Popes to be Anti-Popes? Thanks for your time.

Tom

 

MHFM: All the popes from St. Peter to Pius XII (not including, of course, the 40 or so antipopes who at different times claimed to be popes but weren’t) taught the same Gospel and the same traditional Catholic faith.  All the popes held the same views toward non-Catholic religions, the members of non-Catholic religions, etc.  The Catholic Church teaches that to depart from the Catholic faith is to cease to be a member of the Church.  If one is a priest or a bishop or even a “pope,” the person not only loses membership in the Church when departing from the faith (i.e. when becoming a heretic), but also loses any authority in the Church.   If that person had been elected pope, he would cease to be pope.  See this file:  The Catholic Teaching that a heretic cannot be a valid pope [PDF file]. 

 

If the person departed from the faith prior to the papal election (as did John XXIII, etc.) the election itself is invalid, as the aforementioned file also documents from the teaching of Pope Paul IV and his bull Cum ex apostolatus officio (1559).  So we know, by the very fact that John XXIII, Paul VI, John Paul I, John Paul II and Benedict XVI are heretics, that they possess, according to Catholic teaching, no authority in the Catholic Church whatsoever (since they are outside of her). 

 

To say that these men do have authority is not to be obedient to popes.  It is to be obedient to those who, according to Catholic teaching, are heretical non-Catholic antipopes who must be rejected.

 

Consecration of Russia

 

I did read all four volumes of Frère Michel's book, the whole Truth About Fatima, which was pretty compelling.
 
None of Fr. Alonso's material has been permitted to be printed.  He was even more thorough.
 
If Our Lady REQUESTED that the consecration be made in conjunction with all the bishops of the world on the same day, that's what she wanted.  Nobody in their right mind disregards their Mothers requests.
 
So what's the Dimond Brothers' point?

 

P

 

MHFM: First of all, Frere Michel’s work is three volumes, not four.  Secondly, the point is explained in detail in the article: The Whole Truth about the Consecration and Conversion of Russia and the Impostor Sr. Lucy.   Our Lady never promised that Russia would be consecrated with all the bishops.  From the article:

 

But didn’t Our Lady promise that Russia would be consecrated in union with all the Bishops of the world?  No!  This is a key point.  Our Lady requested that Russia be consecrated in union with all the Bishops of the world, but on July 13 she only promised that “In the end my Immaculate Heart will triumph.  The Holy Father will consecrate Russia to me, and it will be converted and a certain period of peace will be granted to the world.”  Notice that Our Lady didn’t promise: “The Holy Father and all the Bishops will consecrate Russia to me…”  Further, heaven revealed that the actual fulfillment of the consecration of Russia would not be fully in accord with heaven’s original wishes; for instance, it would be “late” (more on this in a bit).

 

Heaven also revealed that the actual consecration would, in the end, give only a “certain” period of peace, as opposed to the unqualified “period of peace” which was promised if her requests were completely fulfilled.  Thus, this is another indication that the actual fulfillment of the consecration would not be in full conformity with her original requests (e.g. not with all the bishops, etc.), yielding only a “certain” period of peace.  The article explains this.

 

Garabandal

 

Hello, I am confused as to the indignities perpetrated to the 4 young girls at Garabandal.The walking backwards, the sand in the eyes etc...Why was this necessary ? What are your views on the Apparitions there ?.... I dont see any mention of Garabandal on your website....regards,

 

Lee Alexander ...........

 

MHFM: We’d like to study Garabandal more, but based on what we do know, there are some problems.  The children had the vision while stealing apples; the walking backwards is problematic (as you mentioned), and there is another seemingly positive reference to the Second Vatican Council in the messages.  So for those reasons we don’t believe it.  There’s also the fact that the message stresses a “great warning” and a world-wide physical chastisement, when the real chastisement is spiritual.  It seemed to direct people away from the spiritual aspect and on to the physical chastisement, at the very time when the great spiritual deception of the Vatican II sect was getting underway.  It also promised people a warning and worldwide illumination, which contradicts the Bible’s teaching that the last days will be as the days of Noe (Mt. 24:37).  And not even when Our Lord came was every person given a personal “warning.”

 

Liked book

 

Praised Be Jesus Christ!

           

Dear Most Holy Family Monastery,

 

I just listened to the May 10 radio program and it was great. I heard that you might do a book for refuting protestantism. This would be very helpful. I don't like to use Vatican II friendly material. Please do this. I will pray for you on the project. Thanks and May God Continue to bless you

           

 

 Tom

 

MHFM: Thanks, we plan on doing more in-depth things relating to Protestantism.

 

Protestant rejection of the Eucharist

 

MHFM: Many Protestants are familiar with the writings of the famous early Christian bishop and martyr, St. Ignatius of Antioch (approx. 35-110 A.D.).  Along with some others, the epistles of St. Ignatius are a staple in every collection of the very earliest extra-biblical authentic Christian writings.  These fathers of the Church (and their writings) were so early in the Church that they are called “the apostolic fathers,” because they were early enough to have had contact with the apostles.  (These writings come from the end of the first century to the first half of the second century).  St. Ignatius was the third bishop of Antioch and was taught by the apostle St. John.  Here’s what St. Ignatius says about a group of heretics and the Eucharist:

 

St. Ignatius of Antioch, Epistle to the Smyrnaeans [ca. A.D. 110.], Chapter 7: “They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they confess not the Eucharist to be the flesh of our Saviour Jesus Christ, which suffered for our sins, and which the Father, of His goodness, raised up again. Those, therefore, who speak against this gift of God, incur death in the midst of their disputes. But it were better for them to treat it with respect, that they also might rise again. It is fitting, therefore, that you should keep aloof from such persons, and not to speak of them either in private or in public, but to give heed to the prophets, and above all, to the Gospel, in which the passion [of Christ] has been revealed to us, and the resurrection has been fully proved. But avoid all divisions, as the beginning of evils.”

 

Is it not mind-boggling that Protestants and Protestant scholars, many of whom regard St. Ignatius as a great early Christian and are well aware of his writings, can read something like this (in conjunction with the overwhelming evidence in Scripture: John 6, the other fathers of the Church, etc.) and still fail to see that the Catholic teaching on the Eucharist is the true Christian teaching?  Bad will is truly a horrible thing.

 

Extreme Unction – dilemma and basis?

 

I've a Catholic friend dying at a VA hosp..  His Prot. wife switched to N.O. years ago thinking she's now Catholic.   She claims Bill received the last Rites which isn't possible W/O a real Priest.

 

Would you please email me (or tell me where to find the info.) the basis for Extreme Unction.  I'll mail the info. to her hoping she'll allow me to try to find a Priest near them in PA. to see Bill while there's a chance he'll be lucid.  Unfortunately he stayed in the N.O.

 

They've both been devout to the Rosary.

 

through JMJ,

 

dave

 

ps:  She told my wife, by phone, that when they called for a Priest, at the recent death of their son, that a N.O. minister arrived (at the hosp.) for 5 min. & left when they asked the minister to pray the Rosary with them.  The N.O. minister said she (Bill's wife) could do it and then immediately left.

 

MHFM: The Biblical basis for the Sacrament of Extreme Unction comes from James chapter 5.

 

James 5:14-16: “Is any sick among you?  Let him call for the elders [i. e., priests] of the church; and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord. And the prayer of faith shall save the sick, and the Lord shall raise him up, and if he have committed sins, they shall be forgiven him.”

 

If these people claim to be Catholics, you shouldn’t need to give them proof for the Sacrament of Extreme Unction.  They should already know that it’s one of the seven sacraments!  If we are understanding your e-mail correctly, it’s problematic that they seem to be requiring proof for something that every adult Catholic must know and believe.  Further, if they are Novus Ordo, you could not arrange for a priest to administer the Sacrament of Extreme Unction (or any other sacrament) to either one of them.  You must contact Bill and first get agreement from him on the traditional Catholic faith; he must indicate that he rejects the New Mass, the Vatican II sect, etc.  He must indicate that he accepts the traditional teachings of the Church, that the Catholic faith is truly necessary, etc.  Until he manifests an agreement on these matters, a Catholic cannot arrange for him to receive any sacrament.

 

New Catholic, most important stuff to get?

 

Hello brothers.

My names Stanley and i live in California. I'm 19 years old and I'm a new catholic, i wanted to thank you for all your help on your website it is amazing. i had always believed in god but he only recently shown me the right way to go about thing's.  Your site is full of information that has gone along way to help me. I also have a few questions as a new catholic i really need to know. The number one thing is what are the most important things i should buy off your site. As I'm low on money right now i would want the most important things first of course. Also i just started to say the rosary as i was unaware of the importance of it. But my question on how to say the rosary is this. Do i need the beads like in the picture on your site on how to say the rosary? Also it says to meditate on the mystery's I'm not sure on exactly how to do this. i await your reply and thank you! by the way I'm sure i have a lot more questions but at the moment I'm not sure so I'm sure ill keep in touch.

 

MHFM: Stanley, the most important thing to get is our $10.00 DVD special.  (There’s a video version of the same special for $15.00 if you don’t have a DVD player.)  That’s the most important thing to get because it includes 6 DVDs (with 10 different programs), as well as 3 important books (including our 610-page book with 200 color photographs), an audio disc (with 20 hours of programming) and flyers for only $10.00 (no shipping charge in U.S.).  If you can get more, but only a few more things, we would recommend True Devotion to Mary, The Secret of the Rosary and Preparation for Death – tremendous spiritual books which are crucial for proper spiritual formation.  But we really recommend everything we offer.  We don’t sell a ton of items because we try to only sell things which have a lot of value. 

 

For instance, the video on Rock Music which we sell (even though it was done by a Protestant) is one of the most important tapes which those who are immersed in popular music/culture and/or don’t believe in the Devil can see.  Even those who don’t listen to that music can benefit tremendously from the tape.  The videos on the Shroud of Turin and the Exodus are tremendous.  The book Denzinger, which is the best handbook one can have for the traditional pronouncements of the Church, will give a person a good feel for where traditional Catholics are getting this stuff.  It’s also a book which our material cites frequently.  Just flipping through it will also give a person a clear idea of how the Vatican II sect is completely opposed to historical Catholicism.  And the Douay-Rheims Bible, if you don’t have one, is also very important.  The tapes we sell on 9/11, even though they obviously do not concern a strictly spiritual issue, can show people how the world is deceived on a major event.  They are all extremely powerful and important.  But if you’re very limited, we would first recommend that special offer and those first spiritual books mentioned above.  But we consider the other tapes and books we sell to be very important, which is why we offer them.

 

You should have a rosary (with the beads) if you are going to say it.  Until you obtain one, however, it would still be very efficacious to say the prayers of the Rosary without the beads: Our Fathers, Hail Marys, etc.  This file explains: How to Pray the Rosary

 

Archived Radio programs

 

Hi,

I have tried the link on your website for the radio program, but it does not work.  It keeps saying "the server is busy.  Please try again later."  This may be a stupid question, but can I get your program on a regular radio?  If so, what channel?  I am in East Tennessee.  Thank you.

Michele

MHFM: Michele, you have to click on the link at the time we are doing a program.  We do a program from time to time.  We post a notice when we’re going to do a new one.  But we have many programs archived, which you can listen to at anytime.  Just click here to see them: Archived Radio Programs.  We would recommend listening to the first and second programs (which are listed at the top) first, if you're new to the information.

 

Jesus and Church

 

… it doesnt seem like the loving Jesus I know to damn you to hell if you dont go to a certain church...It seems to me that he would be more interested in you simply worshipping him, and loving him. Im sorry, you do have some good passages you told me, but it doesnt seem in-line with the Jesus I know...PLZ HELP ME. Thanks for your time.

 

Chester Taylor

 

MHFM: No, Jesus founded His Church upon Peter (Mt. 16:18-20) and said that you must hear that Church or you will be as the heathen (Mt. 18:17).  That means that the only Jesus of the Bible teaches that if a person doesn’t hear the one true Church which He founded, which is the Catholic Church, that person will be damned.

 

To do?

 

Hello, I was looking at your website and was very disturbed but I remembered what I had read about Fatima and the Great Apostacy.  I live in a rural area where only one church serves the entire county.  I do not drive; however, if I did I would have to travel 2.5 hours to pray the nearest Latin mass.  What is a person to do?

 

In Jesus,

 

Judith Smedley

Portland, Ohio

 

MHFM: We're glad to hear about your interest.  If you called us someone could help you with that question.  There’s also a section on our website which gives guidelines on that issue.  There’s no obligation to attend Mass if the Church doesn't provide you with a fully Catholic option in your area.  The New Mass is not an option, of course, and must be avoided under pain of grave sin.  We also encourage you to pray the Rosary each day, 15 decades if possible, if you're not doing that already.  Once a person is convinced that the Vatican II “Church” and New Mass are not Catholic, and accepts the rest of the traditional Catholic faith, the Profession of Faith from the Council of Trent (on our website) is also something which those who are new to the traditional Catholic faith or coming out of the Vatican II Church need to make.

 

Convinced

 

Dear MHFM,

 

I just wanted to commend you for the hard work and dedication you have put forth for the conversion of poor sinners.  May God reward you in your efforts to lead poor sinners back to The Holy and unchanging Catholic Faith.

 

I too have been converted to the Holy Catholic Church. I also accept all of the Dogmas that have been given to us, because they are perfect in every way.  I have to admit when I began my journey….the information on your website was shocking and it hit directly to my heart and soul. I may have not understood everything in the beginning, but by the grace of God and the Blessed Virgin Mary my mother I have been able to understand and change my life around. Needless to say I am convinced that we are living in these last hours of End Days. I am just so grateful that our Merciful God has sent your Monastery and the Truth to us. Your website is a necessity for all True Catholics to hear, to have, and to live by, till the end of time.

 

I continue to pray for The Most Holy Family Monastery, and I hope you have a Very Blessed Christmas and a Blessed New Year!

 

Thank you, and May God reward you and Bless you!

Mary

 

Mary Anne Szweda

Aurora, IL

 

H.O.W.

 

MHFM: The Heresy of the Week will now be changed on Wednesdays instead of Mondays.

 

Liked audio

 

I really want to listen again to that MP3 on FAITH ALONE I am so impressed with the "ALMANAC, OF DOZENS OF BIBLE VERSES supporting this very true subject!

You know, after receiving that FAITH ALONE e-mail of yours, I sent it out to about 90 e-mail addresses in one single group  e-mail.

Within 5 days of receiving your MP3, I received not one, but TWO MIRACLES.  Your timing was so crucial in the exact sequence of events, God used you to save/rescue me out of a potential embarrassment.

My female boss at my place of employment gave me the biggest hug, right in front of 2 false slanderers who have been trying to get me fired for the last 3 and a half years!  Also a Catholic friend, Frank, witnessed this miracle at my work.  He could hardly believe the swift turn of events! Thanks with all my heart, in Jesus Christ forever for all the wonderful help you've been!  Your Monastery is so appreciated!

 

David

 

Christmas gifts

 

Dear Brothers,

Recently I sent you a sarcastic e-mail mocking your position on giving Christmas gifts to heretics.  I apologize for having done so because now I see things in a different light after having read your recent e-exchange on the subject.  I know it's absurd to think that God could bless a heretic, so logically heretics do not deserve God's blessings during Christmas.  So now it's more clear to me.  This year I gave a present to my sister-in-law who is a heretic.  But from now on every Christmas I will only give presents to other faithful Catholics and celebrate the holidays with them only.

AP

 

How to rebut this

 

Subject: How do you rebut this?

 

Dear Bros,

 

Whenever I try to explain to someone or debate the sheer evils of V2 and the Novus Order, such as to a N.O. priest or layperson, 9 times out of 10 they come up with the easy out of "Well, I don't know all the specifics/details of religious dogmas so I can't say for sure what their original intentions were". Brothers, how do I effectively refute this excuse which they seem to think lets them off the hook?? I try to point out specific heresies, the most clear cut examples such as the Joint Declaration of Justification, but they just don't get it. Please help.

 

-Josh

 

MHFM: The easiest way to refute it is to point out that dogmas are to be believed as they were once declared and that it’s therefore heretical to depart from the meaning of the dogma as it was once declared.

 

Pope Pius IX, First Vatican Council, 1870: “Hence, also, that understanding of its sacred dogmas must be perpetually retained, which Holy Mother Church has once declared; and there must never be a recession from that meaning under the specious name of a deeper understanding.” (Denz. 1800)

 

So what the people you bring up are saying is a combination of modernism and indifferentism; they could really care less what the dogma actually says.  To assert that one must investigate the “intentions” of the popes who promulgated those dogmas is pure nonsense.  Obviously one could never know all the thoughts and intentions of all the popes who promulgated infallible statements. 

 

We would recommend that you bring forward the above quote from Vatican I, and also the fact that Pope St. Pius X condemned the idea of the evolution of dogma.  If the evolution of dogma is a heresy, as Pope St. Pius X taught, it follows that dogma must have a declared and fixed meaning. 

 

If those points don’t get you anywhere, then you are obviously dealing with hard-hearted and totally faithless liberals.  In that case, there’s really nothing you can say to them, since they have not a whiff of real belief in Jesus Christ, His truth, the infallibility of the Papacy, etc.  In that case, they care neither how authoritative the pronouncement you bring up might be nor what it actually says.

 

Ranked 11th in the world

 

MHFM: In our Christmas letter we mentioned that, among “Catholic” websites, our website is the 17th most active in world.  Our website is actually higher than that; our website is actually ranked 11th in the world.  The ranking of 17th counted different sections of, for instance, the Vatican’s website as different websites.  But when you consider that these subdivisions are actually part of the same website, our ranking is 11th. 

 

John XXIII

 

Dear Brothers Dimond,

 

I have a question;

 

The third secret of Fatima was supposed to be opened and read to Catholics by no later than 1960.   Of course it was not.  Did that make John 23rd a valid pope, at least until he refused to do it?  I have no doubt that those who followed him were never true popes...

 

                                            T. B.

 

MHFM: No, as shown in this file, The Scandals and Heresies of John XXIII [PDF File], John XXIII was a heretic prior to his “election” in 1958.  Since he was a non-Catholic, he could not have been validly elected.  That’s the teaching of Pope Paul IV, which is also quoted in that file, at the end.

 

The third secret of Fatima was supposed to be released no later than 1960 almost certainly because it mentions a false council.  It was in 1959 that John XXIII announced that he was going to hold Vatican II.  Therefore, if the third secret had been released to the world in 1960, it would’ve had concrete meaning for people because everyone would have been thinking about the upcoming council.

 

Christmas Letter and Update

 

MHFM: This is a Christmas Letter and Update on the Activities of our Monastery.

 

Help in New Zealand

 

May Almighty God bless you in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit Amen!  Greetings to you all doing great works for Christ Jesus and his true Church!  my name is Clinton Edmonds of New Zealand. I'm writing you because I need some help regards to faith. I am married with 4 children, I don't have a job and I am failing my self and my family in my duties as a Father to my Children and, a Husband to my wife, but most of all, as a Catholic.  I understand the structures of the evil one although not completely, but have definate understanding of the plan in which the Devil has worked and continues in the world and through the detruction of faith and the Catholic Church and the rising Evil in all world powers! I have seen some of your videos… and am now more informed than ever before!  I now know I am weak at the moment and need help!

 

You have mentioned the need to return to the Holy Latin Mass of our Most Holy Catholic Faith but the problem New Zealand has is.....there may be 5-7 Churches that practice the True Latin Mass and where I live, I would have to travel 3-4 hrs to get to 1 of them which is extremely hard to do without a paying job and No money to gas my car etc.

I desire to take my family and attend The Sacred Mass everyday but can't! I am surrounded by Novus Ordo Mass and can sometimes feel the Evil one laughing at us....I don't know if I should stay home or not?... I ask you humbly to do this for us!

 

and thank you

 

God bless you!

 

Amen

 

regards, Clint

 

MHFM: Thanks for the interest, Clint. You need to stay home because the New Mass is invalid and must be avoided under pain of grave sin.  You don't have to travel 3 to 4 hours to get to a traditional mass.  There is no obligation for you to go anywhere and you certainly cannot go to the New Mass.  So you can just stay home.  But if you can find a priest who was validly ordained before 1968 or in a traditional rite of the Church then you could go to confession to him, provided you agree with the faith on all issues, including: sedevacantism, no baptism of desire, etc.  We encourage you to pray the Rosary each day, 15 decades if possible, and continue to look at the information.  We pray things go well for you.

 

Unbaptized infants

 

You must have a very low opinion of Gods Mercy, to think that he would not look kindly on an infant or aborted fetes would not show them mercy. Then again the Vatican's recent pronouncements on Limbo is worth you taking a look at. Or is this also heretical, Say what you will I will continue to believe in Gods Mercy.

 

dj

 

MHFM: You reject Catholic dogma. That's how simple it is.  You’re not a believer; you can’t submit to what Christ has revealed to the Church.  And yes, the recent Vatican pronouncement on limbo is absolutely heretical.  That’s proven in this article: The staggering implications of Benedict XVI's new blatant heresy on Limbo and in detail in the second half of this radio program: August 11, 2007 Radio Program.  This program covers many quotations from the not widely read document.

 

Position on Baptism of Desire?

 

Gracious Sir,
       

I have a question, I was wondering if you could answer.   I agree with you on the current situation of the Catholic Church.  However, on your website I found it inplied that their is absolutely no such thing as Baptism of Desire.   I learned from my cathicism from a Catechism of the Council of Trent, not a new revised post-vatican II catechism and I found that there is such a thing as Baptism of Desire.  And in the Catechism they mention three ways to be baptized, baptism of water, baptism of blood, and baptism of desire.  Now I know that baptism of desire does not mean everyone who desire salvation, makes it.  I was taught that Baptism of Desire was when a person wanted to become a Catholic but forces out of their control did not allow for that.  And the person wanted to be saved through the Catolic Church, but for some strange reason could not be baptized by water.  Please explain what your position on Baptism of Desire is, so, I can understand if your entire position is consistent with the Catholic Church's teaching throughout the ages.  (I understand that some people take Baptism of Desire and say it applys to everyone therefore everyone must be saved and we do not need to convert them and that this is heretical).
Please let me know what you think.


Sincerely,
Mike

 

MHFM: Mike, we have a book, which we sell, which is the most in-depth book on that issue.  There is a section on the Catechism of Trent and much more.  You can get the book with our $10.00 special, which we encourage you to do.  Click here to: order the book.  Click here to look at the book online: Outside the Catholic Church There is Absolutely No Salvation [PDF].

 

What the book proves is that the infallible teaching of the Catholic Church leaves no room for the idea of baptism of desire.  It teaches that Jesus's words in John 3:5 are to be understood literally and without exception.  It teaches that the Sacrament of Baptism is necessary for salvation without exception.  Baptism of desire is an error that has been taught in many fallible sources; it hasn’t been taught infallibly by the Church.  The Catechism of Trent is not infallible.  There are about ten arguments from the infallible and dogmatic teaching of the Church which contradict baptism of desire.  No baptism of desire advocate can successfully answer any of these arguments; they basically never even try.  They just lump together a calculated combination of distortions: fallible sources combined with misinterpreted teachings combined with an occasional falsely translated text.  When they put all of these things together they can appear formidable to a person not familiar with how to refute them.  But in sections 16 and 17 of the aforementioned book, in addition to the history and principles covered in sections 14 and 19, these objections are scrutinized individually and, when that occurs, it can be seen that not one of them proves baptism of desire.  The Catechism of Trent does not teach baptism of blood, by the way, but does contain a short paragraph which says, in a rather weak way, that people who desired to receive baptism could have righteousness.  It also contains statement after statement that no one can be saved without water baptism. 

 

Catechism of the Council of Trent, Comparisons among the Sacraments, p. 154: “Though all the Sacraments possess a divine and admirable efficacy, it is well worthy of special remark that all are not of equal necessity or of equal dignity, nor is the signification of all the same.

     “Among them three are said to be necessary beyond the rest, although in all three this necessity is not of the same kind.  The universal and absolute necessity of Baptism our Savior has declared in these words: Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God (Jn. 3:5).”

 

Catechism of the Council of Trent, Matter of Baptism - Fitness, p. 165: “Upon this subject pastors can teach in the first place that water, which is always at hand and within the reach of all, was the fittest matter of a Sacrament which is necessary to all for salvation.”

 

Catechism of the Council of Trent, Baptism made obligatory after Christ’s Resurrection, p. 171: “Holy writers are unanimous in saying that after the Resurrection of our Lord, when He gave His Apostles the command to go and teach all nations: baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, the law of Baptism became obligatory on all who were to be saved.”

 

The Catechism of Trent is not infallible.  We really hope you get the book we have on this topic because all the facts on this issue will be at your fingertips.  It covers all the issues and the objections.  Also, it should be pointed out that almost 100% of people who believe in baptism of desire hold the heresy that it can apply to people of every religion, just not all people of every religion. 

 

Four New DVDs

 

MHFM: We’re now selling four new interesting DVDs at our online store.   For an order form you can print: order form [PDF].

 

Mortal error?

 

Reverend Sirs,

 

Whilst commending your zealous adherence to the word of Catholic Faith, I believe you to be in mortal error by ignoring the spirit thereof, and by so doing to be in great danger of inducing yet another schism in the Church.   Whether you like it or not the Holy Father in Rome has absolute God-given authority over your Church; to resist that is evil.  Both Popes John Paul and Benedict XVI personally experienced and endured the horrors of World War II; one knew and the other yet remembers the severe damage and unspeakable misery inflicted upon this world by political and religious divisions.   Both, as men of peace, sought and are seeking to heal differences, to bring understanding, to replace hatred by love, to banish hostility, being true followers of Christ.  The first left a great legacy of goodwill and the second is continuing what he inherited.   “Blessed are the peacemakers …” Of course you, products of a land with an ingrained bellicose tradition, will neither understand not appreciate such goodness, but at least will you not see the immense harm that you are doing to the Church and to all Christendom through disseminating your rigid bigoted propaganda?   Or are you merely, as much puppets of Manhattan as your political masters, simply trying to replace Rome by New York, pursuing colonialism?

I shall pray for you.

 

Dr. Lionel Mann.

 

MHFM: First of all, dogmas are to be adhered to as they have been once declared.  To depart from the meaning of a dogma (e.g. Outside the Church There is No Salvation) as it has been declared is to fall into heresy and a truly mortally sinful error.

 

Pope Pius IX, First Vatican Council, 1870: “Hence, also, that understanding of its sacred dogmas must be perpetually retained, which Holy Mother Church has once declared; and there must never be a recession from that meaning under the specious name of a deeper understanding.” (Denz. 1800)

 

Second, even a true pope does not have the authority to change Catholic dogma, contrary to what you imply. 

 

Pope Pius IX, First Vatican Council, 1870: “For the holy Spirit was promised to the successors of Peter not so that they might, by his revelation, make known some new doctrine, but that, by his assistance, they might religiously guard and faithfully expound the revelation or deposit of faith transmitted by the apostles.” (Denz. 1836)

 

If a pope denies one dogma he becomes a heretic and ceases to be pope.  There have also been over 40 antipopes in the history of the Church, some of whom reigned in Rome for periods of time.

 

St. Robert Bellarmine, Cardinal and Doctor of the Church, De Romano Pontifice, II, 30:  "A pope who is a manifest heretic automatically (per se) ceases to be pope and head, just as he ceases automatically to be a Christian and a member of the Church.  Wherefore, he can be judged and punished by the Church.  This is the teaching of all the ancient Fathers who teach that manifest heretics immediately lose all jurisdiction."

 

Third, the fact that John Paul II and Benedict XVI endured World War II does absolutely nothing to change the fact that both proved themselves to be heretics against the Catholic faith.  Try to focus on that fact and forget the irrelevant and sentimental nonsense.  In these files: John Paul II (manifest heretic who claimed to be pope 1978-2005) - Benedict XVI (The Heresies of Benedict XVI File), it is proven beyond any doubt that both men accept false religions, embrace religious indifferentism, endorse pagan and idolatrous religions, and hold that heretics and schismatics don’t need to be converted, to name a few. By ignoring that and writing what you have written, you sadly exude thoughts of a person who perhaps deems himself sophisticated, but is actually blind to penetrating and meaningful facts. 

 

Rosary while driving and meat on Friday

 

Hi,


What is one to do if he or she forgets and eats meat on a Friday?

I have done this on an occasion or two. I either realized it as soon as I was done eating or latter in the day. This has happened because of habit. I always get the same breakfast on my way to work everyday that includes sausage or bacon. About two or three times in the past I eat the meat not thinking. I even say the rosary on my way to work in the car; but as I said, I forgot a few times and eat the sandwich.
Is there something I can do like not eat meat on saturday to make up for it or do i need confession?

Also I am worried because I feel maybe I forgot because I am getting laxed in my faith, but I do say the Rosary on the way to work.

Last question is is it a bad practice to say the Rosary while I am driving? I know I must concentrate on the road and this somewhat takes away from my concentration on the mysteries of the Rosary.

Thanks

 

MHFM: Regarding your second question first, we believe that it’s a good thing to pray the Rosary while driving.  It’s time very well spent.  Regarding forgetting to abstain from meat on Friday, if a person truly forgets what day it is then it’s not a mortal sin.  However, if a person’s negligent attitude toward such matters caused him or her to forget, then it would be a sin.  And if it happens repeatedly then that’s problematic.  In that case, a person needs to take action to prevent it from happening.  For example, place a note on the dashboard of your car or wherever you might eat that breakfast meal. 

 

For a person who has been practicing the traditional Catholic faith, abstinence from meat on Friday should be something that one practices so often that it’s built into one’s schedule.  Thus, a traditional Catholic should basically never or almost never forget about it.  But a person who is very new to traditional Catholicism might be more inclined to forget, once in a while, about the Friday abstinence.  We would recommend mentioning it in confession; just state what happened: that you ate meat on Friday because you forgot what day it was.

 

Jansenism and Fewness of the saved

 

Dear Sirs

 

       I am a Jesuit priest and one with a strong devotion to the Sacred Heart of Jesus.  The other day I accidentally ran across your website the other day.  I am curious about your position on whether many or few are saved.  Could you explain to me how your position on this mystery of God's providence compares with that of Jansenism, and specifically the position held by the Jansenist bishop Scipione de Ricci?

 

       Thank you,

       Fr. Thomas Sherman, S.J. 

 

MHFM: We can tell you that as Catholics we reject Jansenism, for it advocates many propositions which have been condemned by the Magisterium of the Catholic Church.  Some of these can be read in Denzinger (e.g., Denz. 1092, 1291 and following).  Regarding the fewness of the saved, we have a section on our mainpage which covers that issue.  We do hold that few are saved.  That few are saved is not only the teaching Jesus Christ and St. Peter in Sacred Scripture, but of many traditional saints, doctors of the Church, etc. 

 

Matthew 7:13- “Enter ye in at the narrow gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way that leadeth to destruction, and many there are who go in thereat.  How narrow is the gate, and strait is the way that leadeth to life, and few there are that find it!”

 

1 Peter 4:18- “And if the just man shall scarcely be saved, where shall the ungodly and sinner appear?”

 

In fact, since it’s a defined dogma that there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church, and most of the world is not Catholic, it’s certain that few are saved.  The traditional teaching of the saints went much further, of course, not only acknowledging that all who die as non-Catholics are lost but that most of those who profess to be Catholics are lost as well because they don’t have sufficient interest in the things of salvation and thus die in mortal sin.  Many saints and doctors of the Church, even during the ages of faith, taught that most adult Catholics are lost. 

 

St. Leonard of Port Maurice [A.D. 1676-1751], on the fewness of the saved: “After consulting all the theologians and making a diligent study of the matter, he [Suarez] wrote, ‘The most common sentiment which is held is that, among Christians [Catholics], there are more damned souls than predestined souls.’  Add the authority of the Greek and Latin Fathers to that of the theologians, and you will find that almost all of them say the same thing. This is the sentiment of Saint Theodore, Saint Basil, Saint Ephrem, Saint John Chrysostom. What is more, according to Baronius it was a common opinion among the Greek Fathers that this truth was expressly revealed to Saint Simeon Stylites and that after this revelation, it was to secure his salvation that he decided to live standing on top of a pillar for forty years, exposed to the weather, a model of penance and holiness for everyone.  Now let us consult the Latin Fathers. You will hear Saint Gregory saying clearly, "Many attain to faith, but few to the heavenly kingdom." Saint Anselm declares, "There are few who are saved." Saint Augustine states even more clearly, "Therefore, few are saved in comparison to those who are damned."  The most terrifying, however, is Saint Jerome. At the end of his life, in the presence of his disciples, he spoke these dreadful words: "Out of one hundred thousand people whose lives have always been bad, you will find barely one who is worthy of indulgence."

 

When St. Leonard of Port Maurice uses the term “Christian,” he means Catholics, not heretics.  St. Leonard is repeating the consistent teaching of the fathers and doctors: most adult Catholics (not even including the non-Catholic world) are lost.  If this was the sentiment about the salvation of Catholics in the ages of faith, what would they say today?  If you have trouble accepting the truths presented on this website because “it’s just too hard to believe that this many people could be wrong or deceived,” consider the teaching of Our Lord and the saints above.  Consider how much more true the teaching on the fewness of the saved is today:

 

“Lucia found Jacinta sitting alone, still and very pensive, gazing at nothing.  ‘What are you thinking of, Jacinta?’  ‘Of the war that is going to come.  So many people are going to die.  And almost all of them are going to Hell.’” (Our Lady of Fatima, p. 94; p. 92 in some versions)

 

Jacinta of Fatima, who had visions of future events, said that of those who would die in World War II almost all of them would go to Hell.

 

St. Anselm: “If thou wouldst be certain of being in the number of the elect, strive to be one of the few, not of the many.  And if thou wouldst be quite sure of thy salvation, strive to be among the fewest of the few… Do not follow the great majority of mankind, but follow those who enter upon the narrow way, who renounce the world, who give themselves to prayer, and who never relax their efforts by day or by night, that they may attain everlasting blessedness.” (Fr. Martin Von Cochem, The Four Last Things, p. 221.)

 

If one in any way attempts to equate the traditional Catholic teaching on the fewness of the saved or Outside the Church There is No Salvation with Jansenism that is a major mistake.  Nevertheless, some dishonest individuals do attempt to equate the uncompromising view of Outside the Church There is No Salvation with Jansenism by engaging in distortion.  For instance they quote an error of the Jansensists like this:

 

Errors of the Jansenists, #5: “Pagans, Jews, heretics, and others of this kind do not receive in any way any influence from Jesus Christ, and so you will rightly infer from this that in them there is a bare and weak will without any sufficient grace.” – Condemned in 1690 (Denz. 1295) 

 

As anyone can see, this merely condemns the idea that pagans, etc. do not receive any graces.  It doesn’t in any way condemn the fact, which is a defined dogma, that those who die as pagans, etc. are not saved. 

 

But we have a question for you: do you accept the Council of Florence’s infallible definition that all who die as non-Catholics are lost?  Keep in mind that Vatican I defined that we must accept dogma “as it was once declared.”  If the answer is yes, don’t you have a problem with Vatican II’s teaching that Protestants are in the way of salvation (Unitatis Redintegratio #3) and that Jews are not rejected by God and thus can be saved (Nostra Aetate #4)?

 

More nonsense

 

Gentlemen, I have just stumbled across your website, quite by accident. I did not go through it thoroughly, but saw enough to get the gist of things. I refuse to sink to the same level, that you do, apparently without any sense of shame or reverence for the Church. However, I would like to say that I think you should perhaps spend your time doing something more constructive. I am a faithful, conservative Catholic, and I find your website very offensive. I know that you will surmise that this is because I have been completely brainwashed by the devil and his infiltration of the Church. I have dealt with others who share your opinions and know that you perceive the greatest sin as "compromise", when, in point of fact, Our Lord clearly tells us that the greatest sin is the rejection of the Holy Spirit. It would seem to me that our Beloved Lord, Jesus Christ would be better served by your living His Love, as opposed to spreading hatred and suspicion masked as righteousness. I can't help but feel in my heart that you just may have cast the first stone at the adulterous woman, had you been there to watch Our Lord write upon the ground with His finger and forgive her. Do not lead the world into further scandal. Be a light that shines. "Nor do they light a lamp and then put it under a bushel basket; it is set on a lampstand, where it gives light to all in the house."

 

Pax, Bill

 

MHFM: Bill, your e-mail demonstrates that you’ve ignored the specific points and facts we’ve brought forward on our website.  Your e-mail presents a vague and emotional response and doesn’t point to one specific thing.  That shows that you are ignoring the truth right now because it’s discomforting to you.  Look at the material more carefully.  Consider, as just one example, that the Catholic Church has infallibly taught that Outside the Church There is No Salvation.  That’s a dogma which all Catholics must accept under pain of heresy and damnation.  Then consider that the post-Vatican II Church teaches that there is salvation for Protestants, schismatics, pagans, etc.  It even teaches that Protestants and schismatics don’t need to be converted.  Consider that such a fact proves that the representatives of the post-Vatican II Church are heretical and therefore outside the Church.  Consider the fact that there have been antipopes and that a Great Apostasy, to be led from Rome, is predicted to come in the last days in order to lead professing Catholics astray.  When you face up to the facts, rather than ignoring them, you will begin to see the truth you need to see and believe in order to be truly Catholic and saved.  We ask you to listen to this radio program, for it shows how all of what our website covers about what’s going on is true and based on Catholic teaching.

Aug. 22 Radio Program: An Overview of Present situation (First Show) (click here to listen, about 2 hrs.)

*This show contains a very important overview of the present situation of the Catholic Church and the reasons why the post-Vatican II Church is not the Catholic Church.  It discusses the facts, the evidence and the arguments which prove that the post-Vatican II Church is not the Catholic Church.  This is a show people should listen to.   It covers the heresies of Vatican II, the apostasy of John Paul II, Benedict XVI, Paul VI, that there have been antipopes, that our present situation has been predicted, and more.

Christmas get-togethers

 

Brothers,

Do you stand by your advice that it is forbidden for faithful traditional Catholics that agree on all your issues (Church Teachings) to attend family Christmas get-togethers and/or exchange gifts.

Please adress this issue on your e-exchanges as I am sure many traditional catholics will be dealing with this with their familes as the Holy Day of Christmas approaches.

Our son faithfully follows your "spiritual direction" and will not be giving his father a Christmas gift or will not attend the family gathering at his father's house. His father is a novus ordo catholic.

Thank you AP

 

MHFM: “Forbidden for faithful traditional Catholics… to attend family Christmas get-togethers and/or exchange gifts” with those who are Novus Ordo, Protestant or reject some other Catholic teaching - of course we stand by that.  It follows logically from apostolic teaching (II John 10), which was repeated in Pope Pius XI’s encyclical Mortalium Animos.  Thus, your son is without question doing the correct thing.

 

Pope Pius XI, Mortalium Animos #9, Jan. 6, 1928: “Everyone knows that John himself, the Apostle of love, who seems to reveal in his Gospel the secrets of the Sacred Heart of Jesus, and who never ceased to impress on the memories of his followers the new commandment ‘Love one another,’ altogether forbade any intercourse with those who professed a mutilated and corrupt form of Christ’s teaching: ‘If any man come to you and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into the house nor say to him: God speed you’ (II John 10).”

 

To celebrate Christmas with heretics or with those who reject the faith is tantamount to acknowledging those heretics as members of the true Christian religion who can share in the blessings of Christmas.  And that would be very wrong, of course.  Hence, those who really love God’s truth and believe it matters should not only agree that one cannot celebrate Christmas with such individuals, but should be enthusiastic about not doing it.  To put it another way, a person shouldn’t need a lot of persuasion that it’s not something one can do; rather, it should make complete sense.  The very thought of celebrating Christmas and exchanging gifts with someone who is, for instance, obstinate in the Novus Ordo should spark an internal discomfort in a traditional Catholic who really believes that truth matters.

 

Changed

 

“I watched your video… and it totally changed my life.”

 

Rich Helbig,

 

Pittsburgh, PA

 

Challenge refused

 

MHFM: This is a continuation of the “Get a clue” exchange below.  That person responded with more critical comments, so we challenged him to a debate on our radio show and he (not surprisingly) refused.

 

If you are referring to the works of the evil one your divisiveness is one. Second, the Holy Father is the Vicar of Christ. The manner you speak of the Holy Father thus equates to Christ Himself whom the Holy Father represents here on earth. The evil manner in which you write exposes that you do not have the heart and mind of Christ. The vitriol with which you write… makes you an easy pawn for the evil one, for whom you work fervently. Yours in Christ,


Jim.

 

MHFM: Oh really? Would you like to come on our radio program and debate the issue of whether the post-Vatican II claimants to the Papacy are true popes?

 

Thank you for the invitation. However, There is nothing to debate.  I pray God will have mercy on your immortal soul.

 

MHFM: Exactly as we expected... you prove that you are a coward.  In a debate it would be quite clear just how wrong you are that you know nothing about fidelity to the Catholic faith.  You are exactly like so many other heretics we encounter; they throw out their comments but are afraid to meet us in a debate and defend their position- just as we expected.  Someone just like you wrote a few weeks ago.  We challenged him to a debate as well.  He refused just like you.

 

No Salvation without baptism

 

Dear Most Holy Family Monastery,

 

I have been reading alot of the articles on your website and watching your DVDs and I agree and understand alot of what you are explaining, but I am struggling to accept no salvation without baptism.  I know God is Holy, but He is also Merciful.  I can't understand how a man can, for example, abuse and kill a toddler who was not baptized by the parents and send that child to Hell, but that killer can attain salvation if he has been baptized and repents of his sin.  Or a person who has no opportunity of ever hearing the gospel, such as a Muslim girl in a militantly Islamic country, and her being condemned if she never had the knowledge of what baptism was or even Christianity.

 

In my mind, your argument is logical that we must be baptized and I know that Our Lord Himself said we must be born again of water and spirit, but perhaps it is my faulty human heart that still hopes that these souls can be saved.  If I can accept your teaching logically, but my heart holds reservations, what do I do?

 

I remember reading in the books about the life of Venerable Anne Catherine Emmerich that she strongly said that the Church was the only way, but even she was surprised to learn that several of her ancestors were saved because Jesus said that had they known the Church, they would have been very devout Christians.  Also, in the lives of other Saints, everyone thought certain souls were damned, even the Saint himself, but later learned the soul was saved because they had a particular devotion to Our Lady.

 

Can you please help me to accept this better?  I know God's ways are not our ways and we cannot possibly understand them unless he reveals them to us, but I have a hard time understanding why a sinner like me has a chance at salvation after having lived a horrible, sinful life while a baby in it's mother's womb who is aborted has no chance at all.

 

Can you please help me understand this?  Thank you in advance for any help that you can give.  (And your DVD on Freemasonry is excellent!  I have ordered more copies to share with friends in the hopes it will open their eyes like it did mine...)

 

Sincerely,

 

Rachelle Wickstrom

 

MHFM: It comes down to submitting one’s mind to the revelation of Christ, which is found in Catholic dogma.  You are refusing to believe until you understand.  St. Anselm points out that a person with true faith believes in order to understand.  If God has revealed that all who die without baptism are lost, as He has, that’s because He knows infinitely more than we do about the lack of good will in those souls who die without the faith.  St. Augustine said it well:

 

St. Augustine (+428): “… God foreknew that if they had lived and the gospel had been preached to them, they would have heard it without belief.” (Jurgens, The Faith of the Early Fathers, Vol. 3: 1997.)

 

So one who doubts that all who die without baptism and the faith are lost lacks faith in Jesus Christ; for He is the one who ensures the integrity of dogmatic teaching.  The sad fact is that most men are of bad will; that’s why so many are left in ignorance of the true faith and baptism.  They are not sincere and thus God leaves them in ignorance.  In the case of infants, perhaps God taking them in infancy is merciful because if they had lived they would have died in mortal sin and gone to the fires of Hell.  If that’s the case, then taking them in infancy, even though they are barred from Heaven and put in a place of Hell where there is no fire, is the merciful thing.  Regardless, we know for certain that all infants who die without baptism are not saved.  They go to a part of Hell called the limbo of the children and God has a perfectly just reason for it.

 

You ask what you can do to help you be convinced.  We say: pray the full 15 decade Rosary each day.  If you pray it well and sincerely we believe that you will have a firm faith in this and all other Catholic teachings.

 

Fr. Francisco de Vitoria, O.P., a famous 16th century Dominican theologian, also summed up the traditional teaching of the Catholic Church on this topic very well.  Here is how he put it:

 

When we postulate invincible ignorance on the subject of baptism or of the Christian faith, it does not follow that a person can be saved without baptism or the Christian faith.  For the aborigines to whom no preaching of the faith or Christian religion has come will be damned for mortal sins or for idolatry, but not for the sin of unbelief.  As St. Thomas says, however, if they do what in them lies [in their power], accompanied by a good life according to the law of nature, it is consistent with God’s providence that he will illuminate them regarding the name of Christ.” (De Indis et de Iure Belli Relectiones, ed. E. Nys, tr. J.P. Bates (The Classics of International Law), Washington, 1917, p. 142.)

 

Regarding Anne Catherine Emmerich, some of things attributed to her are heretical and thus must be rejected.  The following section from our book Outside the Catholic Church There is Absolutely No Salvation [PDF FILE] would be relevant for you on the point of accepting all the truths of Catholic dogma.

 

THE CHAIR OF PETER SPEAKS THE TRUTH THAT CHRIST HIMSELF DELIVERED

 

     The truths of faith which have been proclaimed by the popes speaking infallibly from the Chair of Peter are called dogmas.  The dogmas make up what is called the deposit of Faith.  And the deposit of Faith ended with the death of the last apostle. 

 

Pope St. Pius X, Lamentabile, The Errors of the Modernists #21: “Revelation, constituting the object of Catholic faith, was not completed with the apostles.”[18][15] - Condemned

 

     This means that when a pope defines a dogma from the Chair of Peter he does not make the dogma true, but rather he proclaims what is already true, what has already been revealed by Christ and delivered to the Apostles.  The dogmas are therefore unchangeable, of course.  One of these dogmas in the deposit of Faith is that Outside the Catholic Church There is No Salvation.  Since this is the teaching of Jesus Christ, one is not allowed to dispute this dogma or to question it; one must simply accept it.  It does not matter if one doesn’t like the dogma, doesn’t understand the dogma, or doesn’t see justice in the dogma.  If one doesn’t accept it as infallibly true then one simply does not accept Jesus Christ, because the dogma comes to us from Jesus Christ. 

 

Pope Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum (# 9), June 29, 1896:

… can it be lawful for anyone to reject any one of those truths without by that very fact falling into heresy? – without separating himself from the Church? – without repudiating in one sweeping act the whole of Christian teaching?  For such is the nature of faith that nothing can be more absurd than to accept some things and reject others.  Faith, as the Church teaches, is that supernatural virtue by which… we believe what He has revealed to be true, not on account of the intrinsic truth perceived by the natural light of human reason [author: that is, not because it seems correct to us], but because of the authority of God Himself, the Revealer, who can neither deceive nor be deceivedBut he who dissents even in one point from divinely revealed truth absolutely rejects all faith, since he thereby refuses to honor God as the supreme truth and the formal motive of faith.”[19][16]

 

     Those who refuse to believe in the dogma Outside the Church There is No Salvation until they understand how there is justice in it are simply withholding their Faith in Christ’s revelation.  Those with the true Faith in Christ (and His Church) accept His teaching first and understand the truth in it (i.e., why it is true) second.  A Catholic does not withhold his belief in Christ’s revelation until he can understand it.  That is the mentality of a faithless heretic who possesses insufferable pride.  St. Anselm sums up the true Catholic outlook on this point.

 

St. Anselm, Doctor of the Church, Prosologion, Chap. 1: “For I do not seek to understand that I may believe, but I believe in order to understand.  For this also I believe, that unless I believed, I should not understand.”[20][17]

 

Romans 11:33-34- “O the depth of the riches of the wisdom and of the knowledge of God!  How incomprehensible are his judgments, and how unsearchable his ways!  For who hath known the mind of the Lord?  Or who hath been his counselor? Or who hath first given to him, and recompense shall be made him?”

 

Isaias 55:8-9- “For my thoughts are not your thoughts: nor your ways my ways, saith the Lord.  For as the heavens are exalted above the earth, so are my ways exalted above your ways, and my thoughts above your thoughts.”

 

Sorry

 

Dear Brothers:

In the past I have made many prank calls to your monastery, said nasty things, made vile noises, played satanic songs, and so on. I apologize. Obviously a demon possessed me to harass those who presented the truth to me, but I have now learnt to accept it and I hope to keep the demons at bay. I will be going to confession for the first time in 7 years as soon as I can find an acceptable priest. Please forgive me, and pray for me.

Alexander Mooney

 

Exorcism movie

 

Did you know there is a German movie version of the exorcism of Anneliese Michel?  It is called "Requiem".  Have you seen it?  I am probably going to rent it from Netflix since it is supposed to be more realistic and doesn't focus on the "horror" aspect of the story as much.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0454931/

God bless,
Ethan M.

 

MHFM: We haven’t seen that one; thus we can’t comment on it.  We did see the DVD of The Exorcism of Emily Rose.  Despite some things in the movie we don’t agree with (as was made clear in that audio commentary), we felt that on the whole it was very good and will probably benefit the general person out there.

 

Sure of salvation?

 

Season's Greetings,

 

My name is Chris, and I am a former Catholic; one who did attend the Mass everyday, and one who prayed the Rosary often.  I am writing to ask a question or two.       

 

My Dad (Mel Gegere – that’s “G-gear”) has been a Catholic all of his days (he’s 87)… But, even after faithfully attending the Mass, keeping the Sacraments, and praying the Rosary, etc., he is still not sure that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit have granted him everlasting life, and complete forgiveness of all his sins.  He has had some doubts, and, he is a bit superstitious.  -Some say that, “He is saved, but doesn’t know it.”  (Which raises a few questions, to say the least.)  In this life: Can a Catholic (or anyone) possess everlasting life - and know it? Has the Church ever believed, and therefore taught: that it would be a “sin” to say that we already have it?  (Everlasting life.)  Is it in the denial that we have it now:  somehow the key to having it later?... It appears that most in the Catholic Church do profess belief in, “the forgiveness of sins and everlasting life.”   But, it also appears that many in the Catholic Church do not (in fact) believe that they now possess it.  (Dogmatically, it does seem quite elusive.)…

 

MHFM: First of all, the Bible doesn’t teach the Protestant idea of eternal security: that all who believe in Christ can be sure of their salvation.  That’s proven in much detail in this audio program: Justification by Faith Alone refuted and the Catholic teaching on Justification proved by the Protestant Bible [1 hr. 30 min. audio].

 

Second, the Catholic Church teaches that it is sinfully presumptuous for a Catholic to say that he’s among the elect, except for a special revelation:

Council of Trent, Sess. 6 on Justification, Chap. 12: “No one, moreover, so long as he is in this mortal life, ought so far to presume as regards the secret mystery of divine predestination, as to determine for certain that he is assuredly in the number of the predestinate; as if it were true, that he that is justified, either cannot sin any more, or, if he do sin, that he ought to promise himself an assured repentance; for except by special revelation, it cannot be known whom God hath chosen unto Himself.”

That such an exception (“except by a special revelation”) is mentioned in the dogmatic text shows how something like the Message of Fatima – which ensured the three children of Fatima that they were among the saved – is perfectly consistent with Catholic teaching.  (It also shows us, by the way, that if there were exceptions to the necessity of the Sacrament of Baptism or the dogma Outside the Church There is No Salvation, they would be mentioned in the text.  But no exceptions are mentioned in the dogmatic texts on those issues because no exceptions exist.)  So the Protestant heresy, that all who believe in Christ are ensured of their salvation, is completely unbiblical and condemned by Catholic teaching. 

 

The sad fact is that no Protestant, so long as he remains a Protestant, will be saved unless he converts to the one true Church Christ established, the Catholic Church.  And we must say that your father, if he’s part of the Vatican II Novus Ordo “Church,” must embrace the traditional faith and abandon the New Mass and Vatican II religion if he is to be a true Catholic and be saved.  We would also strongly urge you to consider returning to the traditional Catholic faith because it’s the only true faith of Jesus Christ and necessary for salvation.

 

Get a clue

 

Outside the Catholic Church There is Absolutely No Salvation

 

News Alert:  You are Outside the Church.

 

You do many works for the evil one, the father of lies.

 

J

 

MHFM: Sure, that's why you don't name even one.  You’re a fraud.  You know nothing about fidelity to the Catholic faith or fidelity to the Magisterium.  If you did, you would get a clue that Benedict XVI trashes dogmas weekly and holds that the Papacy is meaningless.  If you weren’t spiritually blind you would see that it has been proven many times, from Catholic teaching, that he is a manifestly heretical non-Catholic antipope.  Get a clue, you bad willed heretic.

 

Exorcism of Emily Rose

 

The Real Exorcism of Emily Rose - 2 min. video

 

This is a 2 minute clip with images and sounds from the exorcism of Anneliese Michel.  The exorcism of Anneliese Michel is the true story behind the motion picture The Exorcism of Emily Rose. 

 

A discussion of the Exorcism of Anneliese Michel - 19 min. audio [By Bro. Peter Dimond]

 

This is an audio discussion of some of the very interesting and striking parts about the case of Anneliese Michel.  It serves as a powerful proof and reminder that the Devil is real, that there’s a spiritual war going on and why people must hold the true faith and stay out of mortal sin.

 

Baptism of desire

 

It would appear that they have not heard of Baptism desire, where a mother can want there child baptized but is unable to have it done.

 

Bo…

 

MHFM: No, the Church doesn’t teach what you have said.  The Catholic Church has anathematized the idea that any child can be saved without the Sacrament of Baptism – with no exceptions.  So what you have said is heretical.  From the book Outside the Catholic Church There is Absolutely No Salvation:

 

Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, Session 11, Feb. 4, 1442, ex cathedra: “Regarding children, indeed, because of danger of death, which can often take place, when no help can be brought to them by another remedy than through the sacrament of baptism, through which they are snatched from the domination of the Devil [original sin] and adopted among the sons of God, it advises that holy baptism ought not be deferred for forty or eighty days, or any time according to the observance of certain people…”

 

     Pope Eugene IV here defined from the Chair of Peter that there is no other remedy for infants to be snatched away from the dominion of the devil (i.e., original sin) other than the Sacrament of Baptism.  This means that anyone who obstinately teaches that infants can be saved without receiving the Sacrament of Baptism is a heretic, for he is teaching that there is another remedy for original sin in children other than the Sacrament of Baptism.

 

Pope Martin V, Council of Constance, Session 15, July 6, 1415 - Condemning the articles of John Wyclif  - Proposition 6: “Those who claim that the children of the faithful dying without sacramental baptism will not be saved, are stupid and presumptuous in saying this.” - Condemned

 

    This is a fascinating proposition from The Council of Constance.  Unfortunately, this proposition is not found in Denzinger, which only contains some of the Council’s decrees, but it is found in a full collection of the Council of Constance.  The arch-heretic John Wyclif was proposing that those (such as ourselves) are stupid for teaching that infants who die without water (i.e., sacramental) baptism cannot possibly be saved.   He was anathematized for this assertion, among many others.  And here is what the Council of Constance had to say about John Wyclif’s anathematized propositions, such as #6 above.

 

Pope Martin V, Council of Constance, Session 15, July 6, 1415: “The books and pamphlets of John Wyclif, of cursed memory, were carefully examined by the doctors and masters of Oxford University… This holy synod, therefore, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, repudiates and condemns, by this perpetual decree, the aforesaid articles and each of them in particular; and it forbids each and every Catholic henceforth, under pain of anathema, to preach, teach, or hold the said articles or any one of them.”

 

     So those who criticize Catholics for affirming the dogma that no infant can be saved without the Sacrament of Baptism are actually proposing the anathematized heresy of John Wyclif.  Here are some other dogmatic definitions on the topic.

 

Pope St. Zosimus, The Council of Carthage, Canon on Sin and Grace, 417 A.D.- “It has been decided likewise that if anyone says that for this reason the Lord said: ‘In my Father’s house there are many mansions’ [John 14:2]: that it might be understood that in the kingdom of heaven there will be some middle place or some place anywhere where the blessed infants live who departed from this life without baptism, without which they cannot enter into the kingdom of heaven, which is life eternal, let him be anathema.”

 

Pope Paul III, The Council of Trent, On Original Sin, Session V, ex cathedra:  “If anyone says that recently born babies should not be baptized even if they have been born to baptized parents; or says that they are indeed baptized for the remission of sins, but incur no trace of the original sin of Adam needing to be cleansed by the laver of rebirth for them to obtain eternal life, with the necessary consequence that in their case there is being understood a form of baptism for the remission of sins which is not true, but false: let him be anathema.”

 

     This means that anyone who asserts that infants don’t need the “laver of rebirth” (water baptism) to attain eternal life is teaching heresy.

 

Vatican II pastoral?

 

Is he accurate with this Brothers?

Dennis

 

[Quote]…“While I agree with you that this is desecration, as for œcumenism you must remember that VCII was a pastoral council and none of the documents produced by it are absolutely binding on the faithful under pain of mortal sin. Catholics are, however, bound to the disciplinary changes, unless the have been abrogated afterward.

Also, please try to steer clear of the heresy of Feeneyism.”

 

MHFM: No, he’s completely wrong.  If one assumes (for the sake of argument) that Paul VI was a valid pope, then Vatican II would have been infallible in its teaching of faith or morals, just like other ecumenical councils.  That’s shown in this file below.  It proves that Paul VI could not have been a valid pope but was an antipope:

 

Was Vatican II infallible?

(This article is for those who already recognize that there were heresies and false doctrines in Vatican II, but hold that the Vatican II “popes” who promulgated them still hold true authority in the Catholic Church.)

 

For those who want to see the heresies in Vatican II, they are found here: The Heresies in Vatican II [PDF File].

 

More on John Paul II

 

JMJ

 

Dear Brothers:  Re: Your recent posting on your web site titled "JP2 and the Jews" I remember reading that JP2's best friend the Jew Jerzy Kluger was also the first one to visit him after he was "elected" "Pope!"

 

Phil

 

MHFM: Yes, we have mentioned that in our material.  In fact, here’s the picture of the first “papal” audience which Antipope John Paul II gave – it was to the Jewish Kluger family.

 

 

 

 

Calendar Correction

 

MHFM: When we posted the December Calendar it did not list Dec. 24th (Christmas Eve) as a day of fast and abstinence.  We made the correction a few days ago.

 

Necessity of the Eucharist

 

Dear Bros,

 

I understand it is a matter of fact that baptism of desire is heresy- that one MUST be baptized by water before his/her death or there is no sacrament conferred. Well what about the sacrament of the Eucharist? Wouldn't God deem necessary that one MUST receive a (valid) Eucharist at least once in his/her lifetime? Consider how many people, like myself, have been raised in the Novus Ordo and have NEVER received a valid eucharist. I'm surprised I haven't seen anything on your website that says one MUST receive a validly consecrated host at least once in their lifetime after having left the novus ordo and having first made a valid confession to a pre-vat2 priest.

 

Thanks for your help.

 

MHFM: The Church doesn’t teach that receiving the Eucharist is absolutely necessary for each man’s salvation, as the Sacrament of Baptism is absolutely necessary for each man. For instance, the Council of Trent specifically declared that infants are not bound to receive it (Denz. 937).  The Church teaches that those who are able to receive the Eucharist need to for salvation; but if one cannot receive it because there is no priest around, or if one is below the age of reason, it’s not necessary.  That’s why, as shown in this section below, which comes from Section 22 of the book Outside the Catholic Church There is Absolutely No Salvation, it is seen that there is a subtle difference between Jesus’ words in John 6:54 and his words in John 3:5.

 

JOHN 3:5 VS. JOHN 6:54

 

     Some writers have tried to refute a literal interpretation of John 3:5 by appealing to the words of Our Lord in John 6:54: “Amen, amen I say to you: Except you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you.”  They argue that the language in this verse is the same as in John 3:5, and yet the Church doesn’t take Jn. 6:54 literally – for infants don’t need to receive the Eucharist to be saved.  But the argument falters because the proponents of this argument have missed a crucial difference in the wording of these two verses. 

    

John 6:54- “Amen, amen I say to you: EXCEPT YOU eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you.” 

 

John 3:5- “Amen, amen I say to thee, UNLESS A MAN be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.”  

 

     Our Lord Jesus Christ, when speaking on the necessity of receiving the Eucharist in John 6:54, does not say: “unless a man eat the flesh of the Son of man…”  He says: “Except you…”  His words, therefore, are clearly intended for the people to whom He was speaking, not every man.  Since the people to whom He was speaking could eventually receive the Eucharist, they had to in order to be saved.  This applies to all who can receive the Eucharist, that is, all who hear that command and can fulfill it, which is what the Church teaches.  But in John 3:5, Our Lord unequivocally speaks of every man.  This is why the Catholic Church’s magisterial teaching, in every single instance it has dealt with John 3:5, has taken it as it is written.

    

     The difference in the wording of these two verses actually shows the supernatural inspiration of the Bible and the absolute necessity of water baptism for every man.

 

JP2 and the Jews

 

Hi,

Perusing daily updates on the web, I came across this excellent article by a novus ordo magazine about JPII and the Jews; and I think it greatly shows the apostasy which this antiChrist engaged in from an early age and throughout its anti-pontificate:

"More than any other pope, John Paul II was the twentieth century’s greatest papal friend and supporter of the Jewish people. Indeed, John Paul II’s extraordinary relationship with the Jews..."

"Growing up in the small Polish town of Wadowice, where Jews and Catholics mingled with relative ease, Karol Wojtyla, according to biographer Tad Szulc, “had Jewish playmates and classmates with whom he enjoyed easy camaraderie.” John Paul’s closest friend was Jerzy Kluger, whose father was a prominent local attorney and president of the local Jewish community and its synagogue."

"On the festival of Yom Kippur, the Jewish Day of Atonement and the holiest day in the Jewish year, Karol was taken to the synagogue by his father to hear the Kol Nidre, the central prayer of the Yom Kippur worship service, chanted by the new cantor. In later years, Karol Wojtyla, as bishop and pope, would often remark on how moved and inspired he was by that memorable Yom Kippur service."… [From First Things Magazine]

Pax

 

Irish Dancing?

 

Dear brothers Michael and Peter Dimond

 

My name is Caitlin McDonnell and I am 17. I was wondering if you or someone you know could help me; I am trying to live a good Catholic life and was curious to know if dancing is sinful. I have read that the children of Fatimas' Parish Priest condemmned dancing calling it Pagan, however, I also read in Fr Lasance Book for Girls that dancing itself is not a sin, which is right? I wanted to learn Irish dancing and was discussing it with my sister and mother, I thought that I would not wear the dresses for I am aware they are not exactly modest, my sister then mentioned that dancing may be sinful; do you think it would be sinful to learn Irish dancing? Please help me because I don't wish to learn somehting that would be sinful.

 

Thankyou and God bless

 

Caitlin

 

MHFM: Thanks for the e-mail and the question.  We believe that participation in that dancing is a bad idea.  We believe that it would be sinful or an occasion of sin.  Therefore, we strongly recommend people not to pursue it.  Try to find something else for recreation or exercise.  We fully agree with the assessment of St. John Vianney. Here is the quote we mentioned on a radio program concerning St. John Vianney’s opposition to people taking part in dancing:

 

“There is not a commandment of God which dancing does not cause men to break… Mothers may indeed say: ‘Oh, I keep an eye on their dress; you cannot keep guard over their heart.  Go, you wicked parents, go down to Hell where the wrath of God awaits you, because of your conduct when you gave free scope to your children; go!  It will not be long before they join you, seeing that you have shown them the way so well… Then you will see whether your pastor was right in forbidding those Hellish amusements.’” (Abbé Francis Trocu, The Curé D’Ars, St. Jean-Marie-Baptiste Vianney, p. 146)

 

There are many similar quotes against dancing from this biography of St. John Vianney.

 

Re-enforced faith

 

Dear Brothers,

I would like to thank you very much for all of your excellent work and defense of the Catholic faith. Your videos and material have really re-enforced my faith. A friend of mine introduced me to your website during a period of doubt, which was a very hard time in my life, and am extremely grateful he did. Before I read your site and watched your videos I was going a long with the Novus Ordo Church and had no idea of the absolute heresy and apostasy that is rampant in it. I have been showing your material to everyone I know and have even helped convert a friend to the Catholic faith. I am especially grateful for your video, Creation and Miracles: Past and Present, because I wasn't able to find any other Catholics who believed the Creation and Flood accounts as written in the Holy Scripture and for the excellent refutations of the Darwinists. Once again, thank you very much and keep up the great work.

Sincerely,
Dylan O'Connor,
Chicopee, MA. 12/4/07

 

Defending Vatican II

 

Dear Brothers,

       I think that your teachings on Vatican II and how it is all false is absolutely insane. I am a strong devout Catholic and I think what you are saying is wrong. First of all, you are not the pope. You don't make the rules about what the Catholic religion believes in and does not believe in. If you truly believe that the Catholic Church has total infallibility, then you should believe in Vatican II because the Church declared it.
       Second, you calling John Paul II an "Antipope" is ridiculous. He was the best pope who every lived. He traveled the world and touched many people's hearts. Catholics and Non-Catholics. The Bible teaches us to love our brothers and sisters no matter what religion they are. We are suposed to encourage them to convert to Catholicism. And if they don't convert, then at least we tried to convert them and in God's eyes we still did our part and did a good thing.
       Third of all, you guys telling everyone that they need to change their lifestyle or they are going to Hell is a sin itself!!! The Bible says that we are not to judge others based on their sins!! For we are all sinners! You cannot honestly tell me that you have never commited a sin in your life because there was only one being who has never commited a sin during his life on Earth-Jesus.
       I think that you guys should get real and stop preaching such nonsense. You make no sense at all and you are constantly contradicting yourselves. Please take everything I have said and take it into consideration that you are wrong and that these so called "Antipopes" are right. After all, they were chosen by God to become popes. Otherwise they would have never become popes. As Catholics you should believe that the Church is infallible and whatever laws of the Church the pope makes, is really God establishing these laws through him. Please get with the program and start accepting Vatican II like almost 99% of the Catholic population on Earth. Please respond if you would like to. May God Be with you my brothers.

                                                                               Sincerely,
                                                                                     Anonymous

 

MHFM: Your e-mail is pathetic, ridiculous and demonstrative of the blindness which envelopes your soul.  For instance, in response to the multitude of facts which prove that John Paul II was a heretic – such as his having kissed the Koran, his having bowed his head as the Jews prayed for the coming of their Messiah, and his having signed joint declarations with schismatics stating that he won’t convert them – you say people must love their neighbors no matter what religion they are.  So you have equated loving one’s neighbor with denying Catholic truth, encouraging a neighbor to remain outside the Church of Jesus Christ and keeping a neighbor on the road to damnation.  Anyone with a semblance of good will can see the falsity and error of such an argument.  It reveals that you are oblivious to sound logic, to Catholic dogmas and to the clear heresies of the Vatican II antipopes, as well as the fact that there have been antipopes, the fact that ecumenism is apostasy, etc.  A comment really isn’t even necessary for our readers to see that your e-mail is another example of how those who defend Vatican II are spiritually blind, bad willed and have no fidelity to the truths of the Catholic religion and no good answer to the facts which are presented against the Vatican II sect. 

 

Learning the faith

 

Bro. Michael Dimond and Bro. Peter Dimond,

 

I was baptized in the Catholic Church but have never received confirmation and was never exposed to church teachings. As an adult I am beginning to fell a real desire to learn about my catholic heritage and to develop a relationship with Christ. I have been learning about true Catholicism and some sort of neo-catholic church. How and where can i learn about more about my true catholic heritage? I currently live in San Pedro Ca.

 

Thank you for any assistance that you could provide.

James

 

MHFM: You can learn about it from the materials on our website and the materials we offer.  We sell a traditional catechism, bible, handbook of dogmatic statements, and the most in-depth material on what has gone on since Vatican II and the Catholic teachings which oppose it.  As far as where to go to receive sacraments, you can call us here at about that question.  There is also a section on our website which discusses guidelines on that issue.  It's not like we are in normal times where you can just show up somewhere locally and receive the information about the true faith.  We're in the Great Apostasy and there are hardly any fully Catholic priests around in the country.  The true faith is first and foremost a set a beliefs which you must have, and that's what our material covers.

 

If you haven’t already, we would also strongly recommend that you obtain our DVD special offer which includes 6 DVDs (with 10 different programs), as well as 3 important books (including our 610-page book with 200 color photographs), an audio disc (with 20 hours of programming) and flyers for only $10.00 (no shipping charge in U.S.).

 

Prot. B-ball game and no Fri. meat

 

Hello again Brothers Michael and Peter.  I have soaked up most of your information and I have also read Vatican 1st Council's documents and they seem to expressly contradict what I believe now to be heretical documents of the Second Vatican Council.  Thank you for answering all of my questions thus far.

I have another question:

Would I be sinning if I participate in a basketball game, when I know that a non Catholic Protestant speaker has been invited to do a brief evangelical talk after the game?  Is this the same as attending non Catholic or heretical worship?

And if it is not too much trouble, could you please tell me:  What is the Church's view on eating meat on Fridays? Is it a sin and if so, how severe (venial, mortal)?

Thank you very much,
Your brother in Christ,
Dave Landry

 

MHFM: If this is part of an actual league that you signed up for – and some of the people decided on their own to have this man give the talk – then, in our view, we would say that you could participate in the game and then leave.  That’s because signing up for the league has nothing to do with a few members of the team deciding to have this man talk.  But if this is a pick-up game, or a somewhat informal pre-arranged game with a smaller group of people who basically all are in favor or involved with having the person give his talk after the game, then we would say not to participate in that game.  For in that case the heretical talk is basically connected with the game and with most or all of the participants in the game and the decision to meet for the game.  So in the latter case we wouldn’t play in that game; in the former case we believe one could, as long as one leaves after the game.  We would also recommend that you talk to those you know about his false Protestant views and encourage them to look at our website and not to go to his talk or play in the game in the latter case.  But we would say that you could play in other games where such a talk is not occurring.  We would also recommend talking to the Protestant speaker, who probably believes in justification by faith alone.  We would encourage him to listen to our new audio on the topic: Justification by Faith Alone refuted and the Catholic teaching on Justification proved by the Protestant Bible [1 hr. 30 min. audio].

 

As far as eating meat on Fridays, it’s forbidden under pain of mortal sin.  But if one was not aware that this is the law of the Church then it’s not necessarily a mortal sin, unless one was sinfully negligent in acquiring this information.  But once one knows that this is the law, it’s forbidden under pain of mortal sin.  It was the Vatican II sect which abolished the laws of fasting and abstinence.  Since their “popes” were/are antipopes with no authority, the laws of fast and abstinence as they were before Vatican II are still in effect.  These two files explain them.  This section is found about 15 links down our page.

 

Traditional Catholic Calendar (December 2007) 

(to print the Calendar on one page try the “landscape” printing preference)

Info on Fast Days, etc.

 

Thank you

 

Thank you!  I was totally confused with what was going on with Vatican II, until I found your site.  I now understand better what Jesus said about the world hated Me before it hated you.  I am amazed how many “Catholics” get upset with me when I tell them what the doctrines of the Catholic Church are.  I’ve even had names hurled at me.  They refuse to believe me…

 

Ronald Eber,

West Friendship, Maryland

 

“Orthodoxy”

 

Dear Whoever,

 

I love your website - you are doing the world a great service as far as exposing these post Vatican II popes - I do love it.

 

However, and please forgive my bluntness,  you should not attack the Holy Eastern Orthodox FAITH as it the truest to the FAITH taught by Christ to His Apostles and by His Apostles to the world. Of course the Orthodox Church is filled with men and therefore filled with various flaws, and sadly, I do admit it is.

 

It is the Orthodox FAITH itself which is true, pure and has not changed.  As conservative as you are, your catholicism has been greatly compromised and has deviated so greatly from the FAITH (this is due mostly to Augustine and Aquinas etc.).   You seem like smart people. Do not confuse the imperfections of the human side of the Church with the One True Holy Catholic and Apostolic Faith which exists only among the truest of the faithful Orthodox Eastern Church or those in Communion with Her.


Read the Scriptures and the Right-believing Fathers!!! 

 

Keep up your good work, but please lay off the Orthodox,

 

                                                                                            The servant of God,

                                                                                                     Dejan

 

MHFM: This is a link to a quick explanation why the Eastern “Orthodox” faith is false: A letter refuting Eastern Orthodoxy.  Its position on which councils it accepts is completely illogical and shows that Eastern “Orthodoxy” is, ultimately, an earlier form of Protestantism.  Also, the scriptural evidence that Jesus made St. Peter the first pope is simply undeniable (Mt. 16:18-20; Jn. 21:15-17; Lk. 22:31-32; etc.).  You need to look at this honestly and think about the significance of Jesus saying these things to St. Peter and how that would be reflected and perpetuated in history.  That honest reflection should cause you to see the truth of the Catholic position on the Bishop of Rome and to become a traditional Catholic, the only faith delivered by Jesus Christ.  Hopefully soon we will have something more in-depth which refutes Eastern “Orthodox” and Protestant views on the Papacy.

 

New Article on the Ravenna Document

 

MHFM: This article concerns the bold heresies present in the document which was talked about so much in the media recently, concerning the union of Benedict XVI’s Vatican II sect with the “Orthodox.”

 

The Ravenna Document - the Vatican II sect's latest ecumenical outrage with the "Orthodox"

 

Poll on Religious Indifferentism in France

 

Dear brothers in Christ,


In case you didn't notice, there was a poll in France, made by the journal "La Croix", about the image of the christians in modern society. Among many things which confirm just everything
you say on your web site and in books, dvd's etc., one thing in particular is very interesting. Namely, around 63% of  "practicing catholics" in France think that "all religions are equally worthy". Just for comparison--the percentage of atheists and other non-catholics (well, let's just for the moment pretend that there are catholics in France at all) who think the same, is around 60%. You can look at http://www.la-croix.com/documents/doc.jsp?docId=2320114&rubId=1306 to see for yourself what is it all about.

May our Saviour bless you with many graces through our Mother Mary.

Vladimir

 

MHFM: That’s interesting.  It just confirms how widely the Vatican II apostasy has spread.  And that poll concerned the question of whether all religions are equally worthy.  That doesn’t include the people who think they are Catholic – and even conservative or traditional – who would never say that all religions are equally worthy, but freely admit that they hold that certain members of all religions could be saved.  In fact, just today we were contacted by an older gentleman who thinks that he’s a knowledgeable and conservative “Catholic.”  He knows about some of the problems with the Novus Ordo, but scoffed at the idea that those who die as Jews, etc. cannot be saved.  He remained obstinate even after the teaching Council of Florence on this point was pointed out to him, thus demonstrating that correct belief on the issues of the Faith must be our main concern and that Vatican II and other heresies against faith, in addition to false sacraments, kill souls.

 

More debating

 

MHFM: Our reply to Ferrara (from the e-exchange below) was forwarded to him, to which he responded:

 

Matt,

 

Don't you see what it is a waste of time to argue with these people?  If the statements quoted do not DENY an article of divine and Catholic faith, they cannot be evidence that one doubts an article of divine and catholic faith unless one wishes to make interpretations and deductions that do not involve an opportunity for the accused to respond. 

 

Even one who says we should not require belief in the Immaculate Conception for Protestant converts ---and Ratzinger says nothing nearly that clear---is not denying the Immaculate Conception as such.  I have no more time to waste.  Please do not send me any more replies.

 

Chris

 

MHFM: The statements absolutely deny an article of faith; they deny that the Papacy must be accepted by all Christians.  We’ve underlined that so that people can consider whether 1) the Papacy must be believed by all Christians is an article of divine and Catholic faith.  The answer is yes [], of course.  And consider whether 2) Benedict XVI has denied that all Christians must believe in the Papacy.  The answer is yes [], as proven in those quotes.  Thus, any honest person can see that Benedict XVI has repeatedly denied an article of divine and Catholic Faith.  To deny that is to be a total, mortally sinful liar.  Thus, any honest person can see what a waste of time it is to argue (see Titus 3:10) with utterly dishonest individuals who have remained obstinate on these points after multiple rebukes.  Further, contrary to Ferrara’s final false claim, Benedict XVI’s statements are as clear as a statement that belief in the Immaculate Conception shouldn’t be required for converts.  Benedict XVI says Rome “need not ask” for belief in Vatican I and the Papal dogmas.  That is to say the same thing as the example about the Immaculate Conception; it just substitutes a different dogma.  Thankfully, the person who originally forwarded the portions of our articles to Ferrara and others can see through their dishonesty.  He wrote back to Ferrara as follows:

 

Subj.: No need to reply to Ferrara.  He’s beat.

 

Chris,

 

As stupefying as it is, Ratzinger clearly says that whoever claims allegiance to Catholic theology doesn't have to "regard as the only possible form and, consequently, as binding on all Christians the form this [dogmatic papal] primacy has taken in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries." What other form is this if not it's true form which is binding?

 

How can you possibly say this isn’t a doubt and denial of an article of divine and Catholic faith?

 

Look! Ratzinger expresses undeniable doubt when he says that the Orthodox teaching might be correct: "it would be worth our while to consider whether this archaic confession, which has nothing to do with the ‘primacy of jurisdiction’ [Catholic dogma] but confesses a primacy of ‘honor’ and agape [Eastern Orthodox heresy], might not be recognized as a formula that adequately reflects the position that Rome occupies in the Church." How else can we interpret “might not be recognized” other than doubting Catholic teaching?

 

As painful as it is (and after I'd read Ratzinger's passages about half a dozen times I bitterly wept), I can find no way around it: this is heresy. Sorry, but I can only conclude you are in denial, the same denial you accuse conservative Novus Ordo Catholics of falling victim to.

 

Furthermore, Benedict XVI cannot possibly be Pope because, as the Church has always taught (and we’re bound by this teaching) a heretic cannot be Pope or be elected to that office.

 

Matt

 

MHFM: For those who want to read an in-depth refutation of Ferrara’s many completely false arguments, it’s here: A Response to an attack on Sedevacantism.

 

Debating on Benedict XVI

 

MHFM: A reader of ours forwarded some of our critiques of Benedict XVI’s heresies to prominent defenders of Benedict XVI.  He sent them passages from our articles which concern Benedict XVI’s heresies against Vatican I.  In these passages it is proven that Benedict XVI denies that Protestants and schismatics must accept the definitions of Vatican I.  The reader wanted these prominent defenders of Benedict XVI to offer a response to these passages.  He got one.  The reader forwarded the response which he received to us.  He claims that the response comes from "Christopher A. Ferrara."  “Christopher A. Ferrara” allegedly writes this short note:

 

“The statements you quote are not heresies.  They do not involve the denial of an article of divine and catholic faith, but rather theologically questionable speculative opinions, which are hardly the same thing.”

 

Ferrara is referring to these passages below.  

 

Cardinal” Ratzinger, Principles of Catholic Theology (Ignatius Press, San Francisco, 1982), pp. 197-198: “Against this background we can now weigh the possibilities that are open to Christian ecumenism.  The maximum demands on which the search for unity must certainly founder are immediately clear.  On the part of the West, the maximum demand would be that the East recognize the primacy of the bishop of Rome in the full scope of the definition of 1870 [Vatican I] and in so doing submit in practice, to a primacy such as has been accepted by the Uniate churches.  On the part of the East, the maximum demand would be that the West declare the 1870 doctrine of primacy erroneous and in so doing submit, in practice, to a primacy such as has been accepted with the removal of the Filioque from the Creed and including the Marian dogmas of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries.  As regards Protestantism, the maximum demand of the Catholic Church would be that the Protestant ecclesiological ministers be regarded as totally invalid and that Protestants be converted to Catholicism;… none of the maximum solutions offers any real hope of unity.”

 

Cardinal” Ratzinger, Principles of Catholic Theology (1982), p. 198: “Certainly, no one who claims allegiance to Catholic theology can simply declare the doctrine of primacy null and void, especially not if he seeks to understand the objections and evaluates with an open mind the relative weight of what can be determined historicallyNor is it possible, on the other hand, for him to regard as the only possible form and, consequently, as binding on all Christians the form this primacy has taken in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries [ed. This means the schismatics don’t have to accept Vatican I]The symbolic gestures of Pope Paul VI and, in particular, his kneeling before the representative of the Ecumenical Patriarch [the schismatic Patriarch Athenagoras] were an attempt to express precisely this and, by such signs, to point the way out of the historical impasse... In other words, Rome must not require more from the East with respect to the doctrine of the primacy than had been formulated and was lived in the first millenniumWhen the Patriarch Athenagoras [the non-Catholic, schismatic Patriarch], on July 25, 1967, on the occasion of the Pope’s visit to Phanar, designated him as the successor of St. Peter, as the most esteemed among us, as one who presides in charity, this great Church leader was expressing the ecclesial content of the doctrine of the primacy as it was known in the first millenniumRome need not ask for more.

 

Cardinal” Ratzinger, Principles of Catholic Theology (1982), pp. 216-217: “Patriarch Athenagoras [the non-Catholic, schismatic Patriarch] spoke even more strongly when he greeted the Pope [Paul VI] in Phanar: ‘Against all expectation, the bishop of Rome is among us, the first among us in honor, ‘he who presides in love’It is clear that, in saying this, the Patriarch [the non-Catholic, schismatic Patriarch] did not abandon the claims of the Eastern Churches or acknowledge the primacy of the west.  Rather, he stated plainly what the East understood as the order, the rank and title, of the equal bishops in the Church – and it would be worth our while to consider whether this archaic confession, which has nothing to do with the ‘primacy of jurisdiction’ but confesses a primacy of ‘honor’ and agape, might not be recognized as a formula that adequately reflects the position that Rome occupies in the Church – ‘holy courage’ requires that prudence be combined with ‘audacity’: ‘The kingdom of God suffers violence.’”

 

Ferrara’s response is ridiculous.  First of all, one is a heretic if one denies or doubts an article of divine and Catholic faith.  Therefore, in order to be a heretic, one doesn’t need to say that Vatican I is false or Vatican I is not binding.  If one says that Vatican I might be false or Vatican I might not be binding or accepting Vatican I might not be the way to achieve Christian unity, that is sufficient to qualify him as a heretic.

 

Canon 1325.2: “After the reception of baptism, if anyone, retaining the name Christian, pertinaciously denies or doubts something to be believed from the truth of divine and Catholic faith, such a one is a heretic…”

 

Benedict XVI certainly denies and doubts the dogmas of Vatican I in the quotes above.  Further, think about Ferrara’s response more carefully.  He says that such statements, if advanced as speculative opinions, are not heresies.  Ferrara’s assertion is simply heretical.  Suppose someone said:

 

 “You know, it’s my speculative opinion that Protestants would more likely convert if they didn’t have to acknowledge the dogma of the Immaculate Conception.  So I feel that considering that teaching binding is not the way for unity.” 

 

Would anyone dare say that such an utterance is not heretical because it is that person’s “speculative opinion”?  Of course it’s heretical.  That’s the point; one is not allowed to have “speculative opinions” that contradict defined dogmas.  Ferrara’s statement is simply heretical, false and a pathetic attempt to defend the indefensible.  Benedict XVI’s statements, which are quoted above, not only doubt the dogmas declared by Vatican I, but they clearly deny that a dogmatic council and its definitions are binding.  That is heretical.  Benedict XVI says that accepting Vatican I is “not the way for unity” and that “Rome need not ask for more” than what the “Orthodox” already hold.  He also says that Paul VI’s gestures indicated that the “Orthodox” don’t have to accept the Primacy.  Anyone who says that Benedict XVI’s statements, which are quoted above, are not heretical denials of Vatican I is simply being dishonest, exercising bad will and defending heresy.

 

New Audio Refuting Justification by Faith Alone

 

Justification by Faith Alone refuted and the Catholic teaching on Justification proved by the Protestant Bible [1 hr. 30 min. audio by Bro. Peter Dimond]

 

Or order the audio tape here: Justification by Faith Alone refuted and the Catholic teaching on Justification proved by the Protestant Bible - Audio Tape * a great tool to give to the many Protestants and non-Catholics you might encounter who claim to be Bible-believing Christians. (1 copy/$2.00, 15/$10.00, 25/$15.00, 50/$27.00, 75/$35.00).  This audio will not be shipped for one to two weeks.  It will also be available on version 4 of our mp3 disc, which will come out soon.

 

This audio broken down by section: Introduction [9 min. audio]: explains the term Justification, the Catholic and Protestant views, Martin Luther’s view, mortal sin, venial sin, etc. The 4 Gospels against Justification by faith alone [23 min.]

The places in 2 Cor., Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, 2 Thessalonians, 1 & 2 Tim., Hebrews and James in the Protestant Bible which refute the Protestant view of Justification by faith alone [29 min. audio] Romans [8 min. audio] 1st Corinthians [6 minute audio] Acts of the Apostles [5 min. audio] 1st & 2nd Peter, Apocalypse (Revelation) and Conclusion [9 min. audio]

 

* You will not hear a presentation like this – which makes these critical points and covers this much material in just 90 minutes – anywhere else.  Using the King James Version of the Bible, this audio gives the irrefutable and overwhelming evidence from almost every book in the New Testament that man is not justified by faith alone and that “eternal security” (i.e. the “once saved always saved” idea) is a completely unscriptural myth.  This audio proves that the Bible teaches the Catholic view of Justification, that works are a part of Justification and that a true believer can lose his salvation by mortal sin.  This audio also addresses the key verses that Protestants bring forward to attempt to prove Justification by faith alone.  This is a must-listen for non-Catholics who claim to follow the Bible as the word of God, for it shows that Scripture refutes the Protestant view of Justification which is held by millions and that it’s necessary therefore join the Church which upholds and teaches the real teaching of the Bible on Justification!

 

This is found permanently in our: Refuting Protestantism and Eastern "Orthodoxy" page.

 

Love one another

 

Please, look in yourself..deep inside you cannot think that no human being will be saved, if not belonging to roman-catholic faith?!
You cannot limit Holy Ghost, my friend, to only certain group (roman-catholics) of people. The truth is that none of us knows what will be of non-christians, muchless what will even be of ourselves. Who are we to say that someone will not be saved. Only God knows that. All we have to do is to love one another, no matter what religion a person belongs to. And why do you say that Orthodoxy does not accept the Pope? Orthodoxy has one Pope and doesn`t need another till the end of time..and that Pope is Jesus Christ.  God bless, my friend.  Only love can heal us.

 

Wook…

 

MHFM: It is not we who have limited salvation to those who die as Catholics; it is Jesus Christ who has done this.  It was He who revealed this to His Church, which infallibly defined it as a dogma, thus requiring all Christians to believe it as absolutely certain.  Deep inside true Catholics not merely think, but know that only those who die as Catholics can be saved; for it is Christ who has revealed it.  You do not possess that faith, since you are outside the Church and are, we must say, quite a liberal right now.  You say that all men need to do is love one another, regardless of what religion they belong to.  And then you proceed to speak as if you are devoted to Christ.  But the idea that it doesn’t matter what religion one belongs to is a complete repudiation of Jesus’s central message, that you must accept Him for salvation and that if you don’t you will be damned (Mk. 16:16).  It’s also a false idea of loving your neighbor, for you are not loving your neighbor if you leave him on the path to eternal damnation and fail to admonish him about what he needs for eternal happiness.  So, in one sentence you reject Jesus’s teaching about the necessity to believe in Him and all His truth, while in the next you speak as if you are devoted to Him.  You are very misled.  You need to come out of your liberal spiritual stupor and begin to realize the justice of God and the obligation of truth.  You must convert to the Catholic faith before you die as a heretical schismatic and are lost.  By the way, below is what the true Church of Jesus Christ says about your idea that it doesn’t matter what religion one belongs to as long as he loves his neighbor. 

 

Pope Gregory XVI, Mirari Vos (# 13), Aug. 15, 1832: “With the admonition of the apostle that ‘there is one God, one faith, one baptism’ (Eph. 4:5) may those fear who contrive the notion that the safe harbor of salvation is open to persons of any religion whatever.  They should consider the testimony of Christ Himself that ‘those who are not with Christ are against Him,’ (Lk. 11:23) and that they disperse unhappily who do not gather with Him.  Therefore, ‘without a doubt, they will perish forever, unless they hold the Catholic faith whole and inviolate(Athanasian Creed).

 

Ashamed

 

You should be ashamed of yourself with all the misinformation you post on this site. If you were truly doing the work of a Christian you would try to bring unity not criticize, for one example Pope John Paul II. How dare you use pictures of him showing him meeting with other world leaders and then saying he was this or that. First off he was totally committed to doing the work of Jesus, Love One Another! He was also committed to the Blessed Virgin Mary. Further more to use the name of your site as the most holy family is a sacralige, I will do you a favor though,I'll keep you in my prayers and all the people that read the material that you put on this site and believe that it's the truth.

 

MHFM: Yes, how dare we use pictures of John Paul II meeting with the leaders of other religions and then point out that he was saying “this or that.”  How dare we!  How dare we document his departures from Catholic teachings, his many acts of condemned interreligious indifferentism and apostasy, his many denials of Catholic dogma.  Perhaps you should think about learning something about the historical Catholic faith; think about digesting the points we made and the facts we brought forward in using those pictures, which demonstrate that what he preached and did were directly opposed to traditional Catholic teaching.   Wake up and get a clue about the Catholic faith and about the meaning of dogmas and fidelity to them.  Get a clue that the Catholic religion is more than just a bland and phony message to “love one another”; get a clue that endorsing false ideas, beliefs and religions is a rejection of Christ and thus a rejection of true charity (love).

 

Encounter with the Devil?

 

Dearest Brothers,

I am 47 years old.  I was born into a family that professed the Catholic faith, so that was all I knew. My problem was, that even though my parents took me, my sister and 2 brothers to church every Sunday and on Holy Days of Obligation, I was not a very good Catholic.  My parents made sure I received all the sacraments as good Catholics parents were obligated to do.  I never really gave much reverence to the faith at all.  I am a good person but that is not good enough.  For 40 years I have been a terrible sinner.  I was totally damming myself to hell and not giving it a 2nd thought.  I went to church when it was convenient for me, I took communion when I probably shouldn't have and I went to confession to be absolved of the sins I participated in and then repeated some of those very sins again.  This past summer I went though a divorce and moved into an apartment to start my new life.  A friend of mine started to talk to me about the direction that the Catholic church had moved into & it actually peaked my interest more than I thought it would have. My friend gave me the Padre Pio book that you offer on your website to read and I was deeply moved and cried alot while I read that book. I started to look at my life and was overwhelmed with grief and guilt because of the direction I had been moving into.  I decided to look into finding a priest that was ordained prior to 1968 to confess my sins too, validly.  This was a new beginning for me.  I was completely remorseful and I fully intended to turn my life around and persevere reverently, my Catholic faith.  I happened to fall into mortal sin again and was sick about it.  I prayed for forgiveness because I knew how wrong it was and how motivated I was just prior to that. A few evenings later, I went to bed after I prayed a mystery of the Rosary.  In my quest for transformation of my life I vowed to pray the Rosary everyday, all 3 mysteries. This night as I slept, I struggled with someone on my living room floor as I was hanging over the edge of my couch.  I held this person's ankle with all my might to keep him down on the ground as he was struggling to get up to get at me with no doubt.  My strength kept him down on the floor for quite sometime. I could not see who it was because the face was not in my view, only the body. Shortly thereafter the struggle seemed to subside. All I could think of at this point was,  what is he thinking, why has he stopped the struggle with me, what is his next move.  With these thoughts, I opened my eyes, propted up my head & looked over to the empty side of my bed. What I saw on the pillow next to my face was absolute horror.  The head that lay on the pillow next to me was as black as the night,  with snakes that were slithering, on the top and around his head.  Then the whites of those eyes that were bulging out at me were as evil looking as could be, also the tongue that slithered in and out of his mouth was long, like the snakes on his head.  He grinned at me in a very mocking way.  After looking at that horrifying sight that lay next to me in my bed, my eyes couldn't turn away fast enough.  My heart was beating so fast, so hard and so loud, it felt as if it was going to bust right out of my chest.  I started to pray out to Our Blessed Mother to help me and to God Almighty for His forgiveness. When I looked back at the pillow, the creature was gone.  I believe that the devil visited me personally to mock and tease me because I had turned away from a life of sinning so that I might be able to save my soul from an eternity in hell.  He had plagued my soul for 40 years and I know that I have [angered him].  I have read The Secret of the Rosary by St. Louis De Montfort and I just wanted to let all the other "sinners" out there know that there is still time for them to convert themselves and save their souls, even more so if they say the Holy Rosary devoutly everyday until death for the purpose off knowing the truth and obtaining contrition and pardon for their sins.

Thanks for listening
Michele, Buffalo, NY

 

Quote from Trent contradicts Baptism of desire

 

Subject:

Necessity of Sacramental Baptism- A NEW PROOF NOT YET USED BY MHFM!!!! (one i've never heard before!)

 

I have personally, with the Lord Jesus Christ's incredible help and that of His saints, discovered a statement from the Council of Trent that proves that the sacrament (not merely the desire) of baptism is necessary for salvation.  For Trent declares at the beginning of its "Decree on the Sacraments":

 

"For the completion of the salutary doctrine on Justification, which was promulgated with the unanimous consent of the Fathers in the last preceding Session, it hath seemed suitable to treat of the most holy Sacraments of the Church, through which all true justice either begins, or being begun is increased, or being lost is repaired."

 

 

What this statement from Trent is saying is that ALL TRUE JUSTICE in man that exists, is related to the sacraments in one of three ways: it has either begun by them, been increased by them, or been restored by them.

 

Therefore, what of that justice that first comes to a man when he is a Catholic.  If justice comes by the mere desire for baptism, and not the sacrament of baptism, then that would be justice that does not fulfill any of the three relationships required by Trent!  The justice of "baptism of desire" would neither begin with a sacrament, be increased by a sacrament, or be restored by a sacrament!!!!!!!!  The justice of baptism of desire would not relate to any sacrament, thus completely contradicting Trent's statement.  This proves, once and for all, beyond all doubt, that the sacrament of baptism alone confers justice!  This is the most powerful dogmatic proof for the necessity of the sacrament of water baptism that I have ever seen.  It totally annihilates the baptism of desire advocates!

 

To my knowledge, the Dimond Brothers or any other Feeneyite has never used this argument.  Yet this argument is more powerful than any they have advocated, because it makes the necessity of baptism universal in the clearest terms possible.  I agree with the Dimonds on what they say, but I think even they can admit this proof is clearer than theirs.  Their proofs say that baptism is a sacrament, but their proofs do not teach baptism is always a sacrament.  This proof that I have just presented clearly shows that baptism as a sacrament is always necessary for justice to be established in a man, because this proofs says all true justice meets the three requirements.  A "justice" given by baptism of desire meets NONE of the three requirements…

 

[from Philip]

 

MHFM: For years we’ve had a section on this quote and its significance in contradicting baptism of desire in the book Outside the Catholic Church There is Absolutely No Salvation [pdf file, online version], which you can order here for only $4.00 or get it with our special.  So it is completely incorrect for you to say that we have not used this quote.  In fact, to our knowledge, our book was the first to bring that quote forward to contradict baptism of desire.  Here is the section from the book dealing with this quote, which you can find in section 23.

 

-----

23.  All True Justice and the Causes of Justification

 

ALL TRUE JUSTICE MEETS UP WITH THE SACRAMENTS (de fide)

 

     In the Foreword to Sess. 7 of the Council of Trent’s Decree on the Sacraments there is a very important statement.

 

Pope Paul III, Council of Trent, Sess. 7, Foreword, ex cathedra: “For the completion of the salutary doctrine of Justification… it has seemed fitting to treat of the most holy sacraments of the Church, through which all true justice either begins, or being begun is increased or being lost is restored.”[21][547]

 

     The Council of Trent here defines that all true justice (sanctifying grace) either begins or is increased or is restored at the sacraments.  I repeat, all true justice either begins or is increased or is restored at the sacraments.  This means that all true justice must be at least one of the three: begun at the sacraments, increased at the sacraments or restored at the sacraments.  But the baptism of desire theory is that some persons can have a true justice (sanctifying grace) that is none of the above three!  They argue that some persons can have true justice that is: 1) not begun at the sacraments, but before; and also 2) not increased at the sacraments (since the person dies before getting to the sacraments); and 3) not restored at the sacraments (for the same reason as # 2).  Thus, the “baptism of desire” theory posits a true justice which is neither begun nor increased nor restored at the sacraments.  But such an idea is contrary to the above teaching of Trent, and therefore such a “true justice” which they posit cannot be true justice.  This shows again that baptism of desire is not a true teaching, but a false teaching littered with contradictions against infallible truths such as that above.

 

St. Ambrose (+ 390): “… when the Lord Jesus Christ was about to give us the form of baptism, He came to John, and John said to Him: I ought to be baptized by thee, and comest thou to me?  And Jesus answering said: Suffer it to be so for now.  For so it becometh us to fulfill all justice (Mt. 3:14-15).  See how all justice rests on baptism.”[22][548]

 

The Ravenna Document

 

Do you think that the Vatican and the Orthodox will unite in the near future?  Have you come across any other information about this Ravenna Document?

 

Dev…

 

MHFM: Yes, we read it.  It’s quite bad.  We will post some more specific comments on it soon.

 

Reader on “Bad will on B-16”

 

Good Evening Brothers,

 

In regards to the Catholic who teaches the Catholic faith on the radio, it is astonishing how the words of our Blessed St. Paul : 2Thes 2  "They will be punished by the instrument of ERROR", is so true today. The fact that numerous people who claim that they are Traditional Catholics, Catholics, or NewEra Catholics but through their words, actions, and deeds seem to speak illogically is explained by the Blessed St. Paul. The fact that these Catholics can not figure out that 1+1=2 not 3 is simply because they do not want to know the TRUTH, or LOVE GOD enough to earn the rewards of faith so that GOD may show them the TRUTH through his special Graces. Lets for example look at the remark from the Catholic who teaches on the radio: He referes to anyone who agrees with the hard work that you (Brothers) have put into this web site to guide the TRUE FAITHFUL as schismatic's and part of the "ELECT" that will fall, and have already fallen. This is an example of 1+1 = 3. To prove this all we need to do is understand what the PURPOSE of "SATAN" is.  To Lie, Deceive,Trick, Mislead,and to ultimately turn us away from GOD, so we end up in the eternal fire. When we consider the fact that 98.5% of all the Catholics today dont hold to the TRUTHS and TRADITIONS that our Blessed St. Paul ordered us to STANDFAST by, proves the illogic of such promoters of the dark.  To believe Satans goal is to trick 1.5% of Catholics is illogical, absurd, and shows a lack of charity on the part of such that promote these diabolical statements. With dedication to the 15 decade rosary, a devotion to our Blessed Mother, we WILL learn how to LOVE GOD, and learn what charity is for the better of the church. Keep up the great charities, and God Bless You All !

 

Gary C

 

Pre-Vatican II rot

 

Hi, I recently got a box of old Catholic books that were being given away for free at a yard sale, One of the books in the pile was about Natural Family Planning.

The Title is "Legitamate Birth Control According to Nature's Law In Harmony with Catholic Morality"

The book was written by Rev. John. O'Brian, Ph. D. Chaplain of the Catholic Students, University of Illinois

The copyright is 1934

The reason I am writing all of this is because many Traditional Catholis believe that anything the Church taught before vatican 2 must be truth.

Well by that very standard we must believe in birth control because it was taught before V2. This idea of course is ridiculous. Well it also proves that just because Baptism of Desire was taught before V2 it does not mean it is truth.

These so called Traditional Catholics need to wake up or maybe just read the Bible or follow the council of Trent.

What is scary is most who claim to be Traditional Catholic believe in Baptism of Desire simply because it was taught before V2.

This is sad, it is bad intentions not faith.

God Bless

 

a….

 

MHFM: That’s right.  That’s one of the biggest problems among those who profess to be “traditionalists.”  People must understand that if something does not meet the level of magisterial teaching, just because it was published before Vatican II doesn’t mean that it’s Catholic and not false or heretical.

 

Effeminacy vs. Apostolic Zeal

 

Good morning Brothers,

 

As I read the Liturgical Year for 11/22 (St. Cecilia), I was amazed with this excerpt pertaining to Apostolic Zeal and its connection with effeminacy:

 

      "Let each one of us set to work, and gain one of his brethren: and soon the number of the faithful will surpass that of the unbelievers... but why does it (Apostolic zeal) slumber so profoundly in so many hearts...?"

        "The cause is unhappily to be traced to that general coldness, produced by effeminacy ..."

 

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

a) I profoundly believe that this effeminacy is one of the major traits exhibited by novus ordo "bishops" and its effects are quite evident. These false successors give to their "flocks" such RECENT treasures as, in the case of the "bishop" of Birmingham in Alabama, a charismatic prayer service at one of the largest "churches" in the "diocese". Also, he is providing a "Taize" Community prayer service. A new addition to the novus ordo "mass" in at least one place - a 14 y.o. altar boy standing at the table with the president of the congregation and a deacon. The altar boy turns the pages for the "minister".

 

A RECENT EXAMPLE OF novus ordo ACCEPTANCE OF ALL CREEDS:

B) I spoke with a woman yesterday. When I told her that I was Catholic and my wife converted, she said, "That's cool." "I went to Catholic school K through 12 and it was OK." "I am Greek "Orthodox" but there was nothing in the Catholic school to make me change my religion." "Afterall, the two are so similar it doesn't matter." This woman went through 13 years of "catholic" schooling and never felt the need to convert (her analogy)…  Thanks for your apostolic zeal at MHFM. The fruits of your zeal and efforts will be strong and courageous Catholics, as opposed the effeminate pseudo-zeal of the Counter Church,

 

Gary

 

Bad will on Benedict XVI

 

I forwarded your article about the abolition of the Papacy to a very knowledgeable Catholic man who teaches the Catholic Faith on the radio.  Here was his response:  (please read carefully and completely) Traditionalists manufacture this sort of garbage faster than any person could respond to it.  I've received worse.  The only general response I can give is that, if these people really believe such conspiracy theories, then they have no reason to remain a Catholic.  Apparently, contrary to the promise of Christ, the powers of hell have prevailed against the Church.  So, why be a member of it any longer?  Traditionalists undermine their own traditionalism.  The passages taken from the Gospel of Saint Matthew refer to the Antichrist who will persecute the flock of Christ to its very heart, so that many Catholics will indeed fall away.  The original historical meaning of the "abomination of desolation" comes from an invasion of the Jerusalem temple by the Roman emperor Antiochus IV Epiphanes who, 168 B.C., placed  an image of the pagan god Zeus on the altar and sacrificed swine to it.  Our Lord's mention of a future "abomination of desolation" refers to the fall of Jerusalem to the Romans in the year 70 A. D., a horrible tragedy to which Jesus referred during His carrying of the Cross.  He said to the women,

 

"Daughters of Jerusalem, do not weep for me, but weep for yourselves and your children.  For behold, days are coming in which men will say, 'Blessed are the barren, and the wombs that never bore, and the breasts that never nursed'  Then they will begin to say to the mountains, 'Fall upon us,' and the hills, 'Cover us!'."

 

An additional future fulfillment of this "abomination of desolation" will come at the end times, and arise, as with theprevious two, from an external source of persecution; namely, the state, and most especially, the person of the Antichrist. Your traditionalist acquaintance has foolishly directed our Lord's prophecy about His primary end times foe, instead, against the Church.  How very untraditional.  You should ask him if he's consulted the original 1582 Rheims New Testament, which clearly explains this.

 

As for your acquaintance's references to the efforts of Pope Benedict - he's simply got his facts wrong.  The pope is striving to unite Christians - especially the Orthodox - under the authority of the successor of Saint Peter.  This is a great good in itself, and is especially necessary as we all face anti-Christian sentiments throughout the world.  Understand that tradionalists have no sense whatsoever of the evil of division.  After all, they're schismatics in denial and actually share in the persecution of the true Church.  Indeed, even the "elect" will fall, and have already fallen.

 

MHFM: This just demonstrates how bad willed these people are.  No matter what Benedict XVI will do, they will attempt to say that he is trying to convert the “Orthodox” – which is manifestly false.  They are liars to the core.

 

Reading

 

Dear Brothers

My wife and I  have been reading your website for three weeks now and are gaining spiritual strength by the day.  It is like reading a true handbook of our Catholic faith.  Thanks for all your work and prayers: a difference is being made!

Dennis & Michele Pacelli

 

St. Thomas on attending Masses said by heretics

 

Subj.: St. Thomas on attending non-Catholic Masses

 

I answer that, As was said above (5,7), heretical, schismatical, excommunicate, or even sinful priests, although they have the power to consecrate the Eucharist, yet they do not make a proper use of it; on the contrary, they sin by using it. But whoever communicates with another who is in sin, becomes a sharer in his sin. Hence we read in John's Second Canonical Epistle (11) that "He that saith unto him, God speed you, communicateth with his wicked works." Consequently, it is not lawful to receive Communion from them, or to assist at their mass.

 

Ihsrosario…

 

MHFM: It’s obvious that you are implying that our position, according to which people can receive Communion from certain undeclared heretics without supporting them (e.g. certain priests celebrating a traditional Mass who profess to be Catholic but who are not notorious or imposing about their heresy), is sinful and contradicts the teaching of St. Thomas Aquinas.  It’s too bad that you – and the heretic from whom you took the truncated quotation – didn’t bother to quote the next paragraph.  That’s typical of schismatics.  The words which you didn’t include come in the very next paragraph:

 

St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, Supp. Part, Q. 82, A. 9: “Still there is a difference among the above, because heretics, schismatics, and excommunicates, have been forbidden, by the Church's sentence, to perform the Eucharistic rite. And therefore whoever hears their mass or receives the sacraments from them, commits sin. But not all who are sinners are debarred by the Church's sentence from using this power: and so, although suspended by the Divine sentence, yet they are not suspended in regard to others by any ecclesiastical sentence: consequently, until the Church's sentence is pronounced, it is lawful to receive Communion at their hands, and to hear their mass. Hence on 1 Corinthians 5:11, "with such a one not so much as to eat," Augustine's gloss runs thus: "In saying this he was unwilling for a man to be judged by his fellow man on arbitrary suspicion, or even by usurped extraordinary judgment, but rather by God's law, according to the Church's ordering, whether he confess of his own accord, or whether he be accused and convicted."

 

Read the bold and underlined portion very carefully, for it refutes your position and shows that ours is perfectly in line with the teaching of St. Thomas Aquinas.  This quote refutes the position, which is promoted by some “traditionalists” who claim to be traditional Catholics in our day, that receiving Communion from a priest who professes to be Catholic but is a heretic is never allowed and is always sinful.  This shows that it’s not ipso facto unlawful to receive Communion from such a priest.  Before there has been an official pronouncement, there is a distinction in notoriety between such a priest and the notoriously heretical groups (e.g. Protestant and Eastern “Orthodox”) – to which one can never go.  Now, this is very important: there can arise situations with the priest who has not yet been officially pronounced against whereby receiving Communion from him would become unlawful.  For example, if circumstances with him become such that he makes his heresy notorious or imposing, then to go to him for Communion would imply a compromise of the faith.  That’s why we point out that people must not go to those priests who make their heresy notorious or imposing.  One must analyze each case.  But this quote disproves your criticism and vindicates our position.  It shows that it’s not absolutely and always unlawful to receive Communion from such priests, contrary to what some are saying.

 

Confused

 

HELLO,   Came across your website and not really getting the full picture of what you are saying.  Post vatican 2 church is falllen. Understand  that part but then what??? sspx not the way to go,  If not catholic. join catholic church but ran by anti christ.  I actually am lost on what your advice is.??  I have read some catholic apologetics books and see how the case for being catholic makes since. But then have all the child sex abuse junk, how can my family join that??? Live in the kansas city missouri area. Confused, 

 

Doug

 

MHFM: Doug, it’s great to hear about your interest.  The steps to convert are given on our website.  If you contacted us here we could also assist you more specifically.  If you haven’t already, we would also strongly recommend that you obtain our DVD special offer which includes 6 DVDs (with 10 different programs), as well as 3 important books (including our 610-page book with 200 color photographs), an audio disc (with 20 hours of programming) and flyers for only $10.00 (no shipping charge in U.S.).  We would also recommend obtaining a catechism from our online store.

 

[To MHFM]: dear, we all are really in state of confusion, please help us by reading these paper

we all are very worried what to do now.

 

please give us solution soon

 

people from

karachi, Pakistan

 

robson…

 

Thanks

 

Greetings Brothers

 

Thank you so very much for giving us access to such valuable information in these last days, information no other "traditional group" seems to want to provide { they know it would condem themselves } I assure you of my prayers and financial support for your work of God… Thank you so very much and may OUR LORD Bless you.

 

RB

 

Web stats for October 2007

 

MHFM: For the last period from Sept. 30 to Nov. 1 (barely over a month) we had over 4 million hits and 194,000 unique visitors on our website.

 

 

For those who want more information about our website traffic, please contact us via e-mail.

 

A punishing God?

 

I was talking with one of my sons this evening,the subject "forgiveness" came up, he is with the impression that if one forgives oneself, then God will forgive them and they will get to heaven, he does not believe there is a punishing God, I believe that we are given free will by God and those who choose wrong will be punished, He kept repeating "you have to forgive yourself '.Isn't that a practice protestants believe?

Thank You so much for your  website,don't remember how I found you,but,I am so thankful,I'm certainly anxious to read the Spirituality and Quote.I have read much of your writings,but,one just cannot get enough of the truth. Thank You and may you  continually be blessed by Jesus and Blessed Virgin Mary.You are a God Send.

 

Paula

 

MHFM: Thanks for the words of support.  He sounds like a Modernistic liberal who doesn’t fear God and therefore doesn’t have the humility to recognize that the all-powerful creator will punish Him for neglecting His truth and laws.  He says that God is not a punishing God; he says that one must focus on forgiving oneself.  That’s pretty much Luciferian self-worship, where all that matters is reconciling with oneself.  Perhaps he should focus on reading the words of God, and he will discover that God is not exactly who he thinks He is. 

 

Deuteronomy 32:35- “Revenge is mine, and I will repay them in due time, that their foot may slide: the day of destruction is at hand, and the time makes haste to come.”

 

Nahum 1:2- “The Lord is a jealous God, and a revenger: the Lord is a revenger, and hath wrath: the Lord taketh vengeance on his adversaries, and he is angry with his enemies.”

 

That’s why Jesus says:

 

Matthew 12:36- “But I say unto you, that every idle word that men shall speak, they shall render an account for it in the day of judgment.”

 

Yes, the Bible is also clear that God is just and merciful, of course.  But His mercy is upon those who fear Him, something that is stated more in the Bible than perhaps anything else.   Those who truly fear Him are those who, in good will, want to do the right thing, try to do the right thing, accept all of His truth, and stay out of mortal sin. 

 

Young and interested in the Faith

 

Dear mhfm,
 
I am a 16 year old girl named Julie. I am very glad to say that i am proud of all your doing. I really admire what you are trying to do, and i totally believe in everything you say and do.  A lot of students make fun of me and my family because we believe in god and my mom has 15 children who i am all proud to have as brothers and sisters. I really dislike my classmates actions and it makes me so sad to see them offend our lord so meanly and it really makes me want to cry.  I really don't know what to do… but then they tease me, saying i do not know about god and that he is a "fake" and that i should forget about him. I would NEVER turn my back on my lord, Jesus Christ, for I love him so much for all he has graced me with and how much he loves me, and i always remember that saying Jesus said,
" If the world hates you...remember that it has hated me first...If they persecute me, they will persecute you." I just wanted to tell you that i am SO very lucky to know you, and almost EVERYTHING i know about God is because of you.... i want to say… if it wasn't for you and for our Lord, my soul would have perished by now…

 
Our lord first served
 
Julie

 

The correct “O My Jesus” Prayer

 

Hello MHFM, I have been looking at… the Rosary in latin. This intrigued me and I was wondering what you thought. Also, I noticed that they printed the 'O my Jesus' prayer as saying "deliver the holy souls from purgatory" instead of the familiar "lead all souls to heaven". Now, I ceased to pray the 'Divine Mercy' when I left the Novus Ordo but as I thought about what might make it wrong was comparable to what concerned me about the 'O my Jesus'- 'draw all souls to heaven'. They both seem to make all of humanity quite inclusive which I did not even have a problem with until I came across your material one month after leaving the Novus Ordo. I do understand that the "Divine Mercy" asks for atonement for the whole world which is quite different than asking God to 'draw all souls to heaven', but what do you think about this 'o my Jesus' prayer that I found on this website and the fact that there seems to be a small variety of ways to pray this prayer. I don't find variations being proposed with the 'Our Father' or 'Hail Mary' and in the case of 'O my Jesus' this new variation I found seems to be a more practicle prayer rather than praying for all souls to be saved 'draw all souls to heaven'. Ultimately in these questions I am always looking for what is Catholic and would never want to pray something I just liked more. I loved the "Divine Mercy" but I let it go immediately. Which version of the 'O my Jesus' is most accurate?

 

Gand…

 

MHFM: William Thomas Walsh, the author of the famous and tremendous book Our Lady of Fatima, specifically asked the real Sr. Lucy about this question in an interview with her on July 15, 1946.

 

William Thomas Walsh: “In many books about Fatima, the prayer Our Lady asked you to say after the decades of the Rosary is given in some for as this: ‘O my Jesus, pardon our sins, save us from the fire of Hell, have mercy on the souls in Purgatory, especially the most abandoned.’  Is this correct?

 

Sister Lucy: ‘No, it is not,’ she replied positively.  The correct form is the one I have written in my account of the apparition on July 13: ‘O my Jesus, pardon us, and save us from the fire of Hell; draw all souls to Heaven, especially those in most need.’” (William Thomas Walsh, Our Lady of Fatima, p. 220.)

 

Psychological or spiritual disorders?

 

Dear Bros,

 

I recently read in an e-exch. that it is your opinion that schizophrenia is actually possession. I'm just wondering if it's your opinion that all (or most) other pschological/psychiatric disorders are spiritually related? For example, I have tourettes syndrome (involuntary "tics") and depression, and obessive compulsive disorder. Are either of these, in your opinion, actually demonic possession? The tourettes syndrome in particular is something I've had since childhood and am now 30. As a child, I never dabbled in any type of occultism whatsoever. If I am possessed, wouldn't I have had to have made an act of will to sort of "invite" a demonic entity for it to possess me in the first place? Well, I certainly hope my disorders aren't a result of possession, but please give me your input, and what I need to do if you believe I may indeed be possessed. Thanks.

 

MHFM: Yes, it is our view that most, if not almost all, of such disorders are spiritual.  Regarding your question about your personal problems, we do believe that they are spiritually related.  We’re not saying that it’s necessarily demonic possession in your case (as we believe it is with schizophrenia), but a result of mortal sin and/or spiritual insufficiency.  (To become possessed one doesn’t have to invite the Devil inside his/her soul; one can become vulnerable to it by the commission of mortal sin.)  Depression is a common result of spiritual sloth – people having an inward emptiness that eats at them because they are not accomplishing much or anything of lasting value, since they are spiritually lazy or inadequate.  Thus, we believe such problems are a result of spiritual problems.  So, if a person makes sure that he or she is out of mortal sin, believes everything one must believe, has confessed to a validly ordained priest all mortal sins committed, is praying the full 15-decade Rosary each day, is avoiding the occasions of sin, and trying to deepen his or her faith by spiritual reading and study of the faith, then those problems will disappear.  After all, Our Lady said that there is no problem, spiritual or temporal, that cannot be solved by the Rosary.

Regarding the Holy Rosary, Sister Lucia told Father Fuentes in a famous 1957 interview:

"Look, Father, the Most Holy Virgin in these last times in which we live has given a new efficacy to the recitation of the Holy Rosary.  She has given this efficacy to such an extent that there is no problem, no matter how difficult it is, whether temporal or above all, spiritual, in the personal life of each one of us, of our families, of the families of the world, or of the religious communities, or even of the life of peoples and nations that cannot be solved by the Rosary.  There is no problem I tell you, no matter how difficult it is, that we cannot resolve by the prayer of the Holy Rosary.  With the Holy Rosary, we will save ourselves.  We will sanctify ourselves.  We will console Our Lord and obtain the salvation of many souls."

Mixed Marriages

 

Dear Most Holy Family Monastery,
 
   (1) I would like to ask you what does the Council of Trent
        have to say on mixed marriages.
 
   (2) What does the Popes said about mixed marriages?
 
   (3) Should people have mixed marriages today?
 
   (4) Can a validly ordained priest give special permission for
        a mixed marriage, if the Catholic bride is pregnant out of
        wedlock from a non-Catholic?
                                                                   
                                                                  Thank You,
                                                                 Amanda Valles

 

MHFM: The popes have consistently condemned mixed marriages in very harsh words, although exceptions were allowed at times. 

 

Pope Gregory XVI, Commissum divinitus (#9), May 17, 1835: “… Church doctrine which forbids mixed marriages as disgraceful because of the communion in holy things and because of the serious danger of the perversion of the Catholic spouse and the perverted education of the future children.”

 

Pope Leo XIII, Constanti Hungarorum (#7), Sept. 2, 1893: “… it is of utmost importance that pastors never cease to admonish their flocks to refrain as far as possible from entering into mixed marriages.  Let the faithful correctly understand and resolutely remember that it is their duty to regard with horror such marriages, which the Church has always detested.  They are to be abhorred for the reason we emphasized in another letter, ‘They offer the opportunity for a forbidden sharing and participation in sacred things; they create a danger to the religion of the Catholic partner; they are an impediment to the virtuous education of children and very often cause them to become accustomed to viewing all religions as equal because they have lost the power of discriminating between the true and the false.’”

 

There are many other quotes like this that could be given, but this should give one the idea of what the Church teaches on this issue.  Mixed marriages are something that the Church looks down upon and they have only been allowed under rare circumstances with all the proper dispensations.  No, people should not have mixed marriages today.  No independent priest today has the authority to grant such a dispensation.  So, if a traditional Catholic today is considering marriage, he or she should only consider marrying another traditional Catholic.

 

Reader on Orthodox Jews spitting on Christians

 

Dear Dimond Brothers:

 

I am writing in response to your most recent article posted on your News and Commentary page entitled, Orthodox Jews spitting on “Christians”.  It is interesting to note the statement  “Archbishop” Manougian’s made to an Israeli newspaper after being spat upon and attacked by Orthodox Jews.  He stated, "When there is an attack against Jews anywhere, the Israeli government is incensed, so why when our religion and pride are hurt, don't they take harsher measures?"

 

Apparently “Archbishop” Manougian is unaware of the centuries old custom of the Jews of spitting upon a crucifix or when passing by the entrance of a church.  These expressions of scorn and hatred toward gentiles were codified in the halakhic laws and practiced by virtually all Jews from the 9th century to the end of the18th century.  Interestingly, these laws are maintained to this very day by Orthodox Judaism and taught in their religious schools (see “Jewish History, Jewish Religion: The Weight of Three Thousand Years” by Israel Shahak).

 

Perhaps “His Beatitude”, being a member of the schismatic Armenian Orthodox Church, attended one of John Paul’s notorious interfaith “ecumenical prayer gatherings” and left with the impression that Orthodox Judaism is somehow friendly to Christianity (have you ever noticed how shifty-eyed those representatives of Orthodox Judaism were at the Assisi prayer meetings as documented on one of your videos?)

 

-John.

 

No priest on Island

 

Hello Brothers Dimond,
 
I took your advice and searched the entire island in the hope of finding a priest who was not ordained under the new mass, but unfortunately every single priest has been ordained under the Novus Ordo.  In such a case what can I do, for I have no other alternative to turn to, I can't imagine myself without the Eucharist.  Would it be wrong to spend time before the blessed sacrament considering that the consecration would also be done by a priest of the Novus Ordo?   I think I am truly trumatized by this ordeal and don't know what to do particularly with my very young children; should I tell them that we will no longer attend mass?  Christ did say that "unless we eat his body and drink his blood we would have no life in us," where does this leave me and my children now if we can't receive the Eucharist and attend mass.  How can a true Priest come to my island to represent the true faith and feed the lost sheep or else everyone will be led astray along with the aspostasy, (and this is exactly what is happening).
 
Please advise me, what can I do to make others aware of what is happening?
  
I TRULY NEED HELP!!
 
Yours in Christ.

 

MHFM: The New Mass is not valid.  By going there one is not receiving "Communion," not attending a real Mass and going to a sinful non-Catholic service.  Therefore, one must have nothing to do with the "adoration" in the Novus Ordo since Our Lord is not present there!  It's a matter of your salvation to have nothing to do with the New Mass or the Vatican II sect.  You should explain to your children that the New Mass is a false Mass which Catholics cannot attend.  We’re very surprised that you cannot find one priest ordained before 1968 or in the Eastern Rite to hear your confession. 

 

Regarding attending Mass, there were many Catholics in history who had nowhere to go for periods of time.  There is, of course, no sin in not attending Mass if the Church doesn't provide you with an acceptable option in your area.

 

Denying Mt. 16:18

 

You folks are loonier than the liberals!  You must hear black helicopters in your sleep.  The biggest, baddest heresy of all is the heresy that denies the clear teaching of Matthew chapter 16:18.  In your very  narrow minded little world, you are calling the Lord Jesus a liar for saying that the gates of the netherworld will not prevail over his Church.  Your entire website screams just the opposite.   

 

MHFM: Your statement demonstrates that you know almost nothing about the Catholic Faith or our website.  If you did know a little, you would discover that Benedict XVI is a heretic and an antipope precisely because he denies the office of the Papacy.  He is a heretic because he denies what was promised by Jesus to St. Peter in Mt. 16:18-20 and conferred upon St. Peter in John 21:15-17.  Benedict XVI the heretic holds that Protestants and Eastern Schismatics who reject the Papacy are part of the Christian Church.  He says that these people, who reject that Mt. 16:18 refers to Jesus telling St. Peter that he will be the first pope, are part of the Christian Church.  He holds that they are on the road to salvation and don’t need to believe that Mt. 16:18 refers to the Papacy.  By defending Benedict XVI and bringing this up you are therefore: 1) displaying your ignorance of the Catholic Faith; and 2) defending an arch-heretic who denies the very thing you are bringing up.  Below is a quote where Benedict XVI is referring to Vatican I and its dogmatic definitions about the Papacy (Mt. 16:18; etc.).  He says that Protestants and the schismatics converting to Catholicism and accepting Vatican I (i.e. Mt. 16:18 and its true meaning, etc.) is NOT THE WAY FOR UNITY! 

 

Benedict XVI, Principles of Catholic Theology, 1982, pp. 197-198: “Against this background we can now weigh the possibilities that are open to Christian ecumenism.  The maximum demands on which the search for unity must certainly founder are immediately clear.  On the part of the West, the maximum demand would be that the East recognize the primacy of the bishop of Rome in the full scope of the definition of 1870 and in so doing submit in practice, to a primacy such as has been accepted by the Uniate churches.  On the part of the East, the maximum demand would be that the West declare the 1870 doctrine of primacy erroneous and in so doing submit, in practice, to a primacy such as has been accepted with the removal of the Filioque from the Creed and including the Marian dogmas of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries.  As regards Protestantism, the maximum demand of the Catholic Church would be that the Protestant ecclesiological ministers be regarded as totally invalid and that Protestants be converted to Catholicism; the maximum demand of Protestants, on the other hand, would be that the Catholic Church accept, along with the unconditional acknowledgement of all Protestant ministries, the Protestant concept of ministry and their understanding of the Church and thus, in practice, renounce the apostolic and sacramental structure of the Church, which would mean, in practice, the conversion of Catholics to Protestantism and their acceptance of a multiplicity of distinct community structures as the historical form of the Church.  While the first three maximum demands are today rather unanimously rejected by Christian consciousness, the fourth exercises a kind of fascination for it – as it were, a certain conclusiveness that makes it appear to be the real solution to the problem.  This is all the more true since there is joined to it the expectation that a Parliament of Churches, a ‘truly ecumenical council’, could then harmonize this pluralism and promote a Christian unity of action.  That no real union would result from this, but that its very impossibility would become a single common dogma, should convince anyone who examines the suggestion closely that such a way would not bring Church unity but only a final renunciation of it.  As a result, none of the maximum solutions offers any real hope of unity.”[23]

 

This is BLATANTLY HERETICAL.  Any professing Catholic who sees this quote and doesn’t admit that it is heretical either 1) can’t read or 2) is a mortally sinful liar.  But this is just one quote; anyone who reads our material knows that Benedict XVI indicates that the Papacy is meaningless (in his view) basically weekly.  He does this by his heretical overtures to the schismatics who reject the Papacy.  So wake up!  There have been over 40 antipopes in Catholic history, including those who have reigned in Rome.  The promise of Mt. 16:18 doesn’t preclude the possibility of antipopes falsely posing as true popes, even in Rome, or the true Church being reduced to a remnant in the last days (which is predicted to occur).  You might want to consider these files:

 

A complete list of the 42 antipopes in Church history [PDF]

(In Catholic history there have been 260 valid popes, starting with St. Peter, and 42 antipopes – that is, men who claimed to be true popes but were not)

 

Pope Paul IV's Apostolic Constitution Cum ex Apostolatus Officio

(Pope Paul IV solemnly declares that a heretic cannot be validly elected pope, even with the unanimous consent of the cardinals)

 

The Catholic Teaching that a heretic cannot be a valid pope [PDF file]

Responses to 19 of the Most Common Objections Against Sedevacantism [PDF file]

The Great Western Schism (1378-1417) and what it teaches us about the post-Vatican II apostasy - Massive confusion, multiple antipopes, antipopes in Rome, an antipope recognized by all the cardinals; The Great Western Schism proves that a line of antipopes at the heart of the post-Vatican II crisis is absolutely possible-

 

Schizophrenia

 

To whom it may concern:

 

Please help my daughter, she is beautiful intelligent and innocent. She was diagnosed with schizophrenia and she has had all kinds of treatments most which have left her confused and unfocused. She hears a voice of a white male who brings other voices with him. They always confuse her or put her down. She is trying to go on with her life, but it is so hard. It is so very hard to watch her cry and suffer like this please help. I am a Christian and so is she, but she has not been to Church for a year.  Worried.

 

c…

 

MHFM: We believe it’s obvious that she’s possessed.  Schizophrenia is, in our opinion, demonic possession.  She needs to convert to the Catholic Faith, get out of mortal sin and pray the Rosary every day.  The Catholic Church is the only Church Christ established.  Other forms of "Christianity" are false.  Thus, if you and she are not Catholics (traditional Catholics), God will not bless you and you cannot have salvation.

 

We have held that schizophrenia is a result of demonic possession for a long time before your e-mail.  But what is stated in your e-mail is very interesting because it corroborates it.  She hears a voice (i.e. a demon) which brings with it other voices (i.e. other demons).

 

Coming back

 

Dear Bros. thank you so much for your web site. Last year I went to a mason hall for a breakfast, not knowing much about the masons I didn,t think much about it. I told my friends how cold and empty the place felt then about a month later I went to a funeral of a friend at a NO church-WOW- THE SAME FELLING.Since then I have been studying your web site and reading your books and PRAYING THE ROSARY everyday. I went to a Catholic school in the late 50,s and 60,s my Mom quit taking us to church when the new mass came out Thank GOD. Thanks to MHFM I am coming back to the TRUE FAITH  - GOD BLESS

 

DENNIS

HEBRON KY

 

Keep fighting

 

Salutations in Christ.  Your persistent investigation and protection of Truth is really a pristine spring of water for we who thirst after righteousness.  The book, What Really Happened to the Catholic Church after Vatican II, packs a definitive and decisive barefisted punch in the jaw to this prevalent Luciferian conspiracy representing the common consensus of contemporary Catholicism.  The thoroughness you and your brother apply to your counterattack is a magnificent sight to behold.  I consider it second only to Sacred Scripture as a mandatory book for all Catholics of the current age.  Trouble is, the “Don’t confuse us with the facts” tendency in Human Nature is epidemic in power.  Conformity cheaply provides false security, social prestige is a matter of going along to get along, and personal social prestige may be the most prevalent form of idolatry.  Christopher Columbus didn’t fit contemporary opinion, and the masses and aristocrats were quite comfortable with self-delusion.  MHFM is in a Columbus type predicament.  The truth is a terrible realization, too. 

 

Your consistent and confident audacity for Truth remains a powerful and persistent inspiration, that forges the required maturity of mind I need to observe today’s tragic events with accuracy.  Events conceived through Satanic saboteurs of the Second Vatican Council.  Your bold presentation of facts drove me out of a sleepwalk into delusion and damnation… please continue aggressive work on a video production concerning Marxist anti-pope John 23rd.  Here’s another request for you, please consider writing an article on the indifferentism which developed during the Pope Pius the 12th years, and how this infectious atrocity built the foundation for the 2nd Vatican Council… I thank God for MHFM.  The initiative you men take in investigating too often forgotten irrefutable Truth, which I previously had no contact with, has helped me understand  who we truly are as Christ’s Mystical Body, and what we are obliged to believe.  Keep fighting with tigerlike tenacity, I pray I can promote your productions more and more…

 

Henry Benton

 

Bible and Religion

 

Hi,

 

I found your names… Thank you.   You mentioned there that questions are ok, and I have a questions for you. Let me preface this by saying, I believe in the One True God, but religion was never part of it.

 

Here's my simple question... Where's the best place to get a bible? And which is best, old or new testament?

 

One more question, why not just worship God? If Jesus is God then why not worship God directly (the Holy Ghost is always there in all of us)?

 

Also, as indicated on your website...

 

“In all, St. Patrick brought to life some forty infidels in Ireland, one of whom was King Echu… On raising him from the dead, St. Patrick instructed and baptized him, asking what he had seen of the other world.  King Echu told how he had actually beheld the throne prepared for him in Heaven because of his life of being open to the grace of Almighty God, but that he was not allowed to enter precisely because he was as yet unbaptized.  After receiving the sacraments… (he) died instantly and went to his reward.”

 

Why would being baptised or not matter to God?

 

Thank you and regards,

Patrick T Wolfert

 

MHFM: The best bible to get is the Douay-Rheims.  You can get it here: The Douay-Rheims Bible.  It contains both the Old and New Testaments.  But people who are new to the Bible and new to investigating the faith should begin with (and focus on) the New Testament, and specifically the four Gospels.  You ask, “Why not just worship God?”  The answer to that is that Jesus Christ proved, by His life of miracles and His Resurrection, as well as His precise fulfillment of the Old Testament prophecies concerning the coming of the Messiah, that He was the Messiah to be listened to.  So it is God who, by His prophecies about Jesus and Jesus’s power of miracles, directs all men to Jesus.  And Jesus indicated that He was both true God and true man and He proved it. 

 

Jesus explicitly revealed the inscrutable mystery of the Trinity: that God is Father, Son and Holy Ghost – one God in three divine persons.  So, the short answer to your question is that we must worship Jesus because He is God and God commands us to worship Jesus.  To your other statement, that religion was never a part of believing in God, that’s simply not true.  From the beginning God commanded men to follow His instructions and if they did not they were abandoned by Him.  To acknowledge God’s existence was not sufficient.  Following precise instructions, commands and practices directed by God is what religion is; it’s truly following God.  So baptism is absolutely necessary because Jesus said it was (John 3:5).

 

We strongly encourage you to continue with your investigation into the holy Catholic faith, and to pray.  Pray the Rosary every day; our website has a file which explains how: How to Pray the Rosary.  You should get a Catholic Catechism, The Penny Catechism, and start the road to conversion; for it’s a matter of your eternal salvation. 

 

It fits

 

Dear Father,

 

I have been reading and listening to your website for a couple of days and I am amazed at what I have been learning. Everything you say fits into place like a key turning a lock. I believe what you are saying about the church and sedevacantism. I have been attending SSPX for the last five years and I have always been uneasy about certain things, mostly that I have had to constantly defend the heretical popes. I notice that when you teach catechism, you teach with authority - it is in your voices and very noticeable in the videos. The SSPX are very knowledgeable and interesting teachers but do not seem to have that same authority in their preaching. They are living in fear of Benedict XVI instead of openly proclaiming him the heretic that he is. This really weakens the SSPX and seems to be the centre of their problems… By the way, I have been devoted to St. Benedict for the past while and I have been praying to him so it is no coincidence that I found your website after all these years of searching… 

 

Yours in Jesus, Mary & St. Benedict,

 

Colm Lawless

 

Dublin, Ireland.

 

MHFM: It’s great to hear that you found the information.  Since the SSPX priests, like so many others, hold that it’s possible for souls to be saved as non-Catholics – and therefore show themselves to be unconvinced of the defined dogma that all who die as Jews, pagans, etc. are lost – they cannot be convinced that any dogma is absolutely true without qualification.  Thus, it makes sense that they are unable to teach with a conviction which comes from unswerving faith in the unerring dogmas.  The same goes for many other heretics out there, who purport to be traditional Catholics and “traditionalist” priests, but hold that there are exceptions to the aforementioned dogma. 

 

Rock Music

 

I am concerned about my oldest son's recent interest in rock music. I am sincerely concerned about the way he talks about these "rock stars". Could you perhaps reference me to some more information on the adverse effects of this music, if you can call it that, on my child's soul?

 

Sd

 

MHFM: Yes, we would recommend the video we sell: Rock-n-Roll Sorcerers of the New Age Revolution.  This video, even though it was done by a Protestant, is excellent, extremely powerful and extremely revealing.  Those who don’t understand the evil behind rock and almost all popular music, as well as those who don’t believe in the Devil, need to see this tape.

 

Problem reading

 

THANK YOU FOR ALL YOU DO.....I SO WANT TO READ THE FILE ON THE SSPX BUT I CAN'T ACCESS IT...... I'M WONDERING IF THERE IS ANOTHER WAY TO OPEN IT OR COULD IT BE SENT TO ME.... I'M SORRY FOR THE BOTHER.....THANK YOU SO VERY MUCH AGAIN.....

AVE MARIA!!!  

 

Bonnie

 

MHFM: It’s probably because you don’t have an Adobe Reader.  You can download one for free here: Can't Read our PDF Files?  Download a free Adobe PDF Reader.  This will enable you to read all of our PDF files.  This link is also on our mainpage, the last one down on the list.

 

What’s going on?

 

Dear brothers.


i am just after reading a very long artical on your site about the messages of fatima.  The Whole Truth about the Consecration and Conversion of Russia and the impostor Sr. Lucy. it is very interesting and has made me think about things in a very  different way. however my main reasion for this email. if as you say. the mass of the catholic church as it stands to day, is not a true mass and therefor invalid, means that i, as a catholic of 47 years have  never recived the, true body and blood of Jesus. infact it would mean that i am not even a catholic as i was baptize in 1960 and that was when Vatican 2 came about. where does that leave all the millions of 'catholics' who have  follow the church sence V2.  i am watching one of your downloadable videos on benedict xv1 and i have to say, you put your case very well. for almost 7 years i was with a group of lay catholics in ireland who claim the this pope is an anti christ, and will bring in the antichrist once he has prepaired the way. as you can gess they  are ont well liked. i am not sure if you have heard of the Two Patricks.  they are reciving messages from Jesus. in the messages, Jesus ask us to follow the true teachings of the Catholic  Church and points us to the last pope JP11 saying we should follow his  teachings. it seem the catholic church is in a 3 maybe 4 way split. which one is the real one, or is there a real one any more. your way of teaching sounds like, the way things where when Jesus was on the  earth. what was it he called the teachers of the law back then?
can you see where i am coming from. what if you are wrong about V2? i find it hard enough to follow Jesus in this moderen faithless world, and  now i am not even sure if i am following Him in any at all. the church as i see it will go through the same death as Jesus did in his  body, but it will rise also as he did. in full glory. the devil must enter  the church, this we know and infact is ready even now to take his place, the  place he should not be. but because he is to enter the church does not make it any less the church. Jesus was not less Jesus because of judis, was He?  hope your getting what i am trying to say.

sorry about the spelling.  please get back to me on this.

brian.

 

MHFM: Brian, thanks for the interest.  The Catholic Church is not split.  It cannot be divided. 

Pope Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum (# 4), June 29, 1896:
"The Church in respect of its unity belongs to the category of things indivisible by nature, though heretics try to divide it into many parts."

Pope Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum (# 4):                  
"Furthermore, the eminence of the Church arises from its unity, as the principle of its constitution - a unity surpassing all else, and having nothing like unto it or equal to it."

Pope Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum (# 5):
"'There is one God, and one Christ; and His Church is one and the faith is one; and one people, joined together in the solid unity of the body in the bond of concord. This unity cannot be broken, nor the one body divided by the separation of its constituent parts.'"

The Church has, rather, been reduced to a remnant, as predicted in the last days with the arrival of the end times counterfeit known as The Whore of Babylon: Is the Vatican II sect the Whore of Babylon prophesied in the Apocalypse?  The Vatican II Church is not the Catholic Church, but teaches obvious heresies (e.g. ecumenism/its false teaching on other religions) which are opposed to the 2000-year faith of the Church.  If believed, these heresies render the necessity of belonging to the Catholic Church meaningless.  To your question about what’s going to happen to people who are “V-2 Catholics,” the sad answer is that they will lose their souls if they have the “faith” of the Vatican II sect.  That’s why people must pray (especially the Rosary), study the faith, do spiritual reading; for if they’re not proactive in increasing their faith, growing in spirituality and making sure they save their souls, then they will fall prey to these heresies or religious indifferentism, such as the Vatican II sect teaches.  Unfortunately, most people do fall prey to such heresies because they are not doing the things we have just described and thus they go along with whatever is most convenient or familiar.  One needs to get out of the New Mass and the Vatican II sect to save his/her soul.

 

Regarding some of the other things you mentioned, the idea that dogma changes has been condemned as modernism.  The truth of Jesus doesn’t change.  Regarding the assertion that the Devil has to enter the Church, the idea that the Church can teach error or be taken over by the Devil is heresy.  It’s contrary to the Church’s indefectibility and infallibility.

 

Pope Pius XI, Mortalium Animos (# 10), Jan. 6, 1928: “During the lapse of centuries, the mystical Spouse of Christ has never been contaminated, nor can she ever in the future be contaminated, as Cyprian bears witness: ‘The Bride of Christ cannot be made false to her Spouse: she is incorrupt and modest.  She knows but one dwelling, she guards the sanctity of the nuptial chamber chastely and modestly.’”[24]

 

Pope Pius XI, Quas Primas (# 22), Dec. 11, 1925:

“Not least among the blessings which have resulted from the public and legitimate honor paid to the Blessed Virgin and the saints is the perfect and perpetual immunity of the Church from error and heresy.”[25]

 

This is all wrapped up in Jesus’ promise to always be with His Church and that the gates of Hell cannot prevail against her (Mt. 16).  The idea that the Church needs to be reformed or to “rise again” is also contrary to the same promises.  We’re glad you were watching the DVD on Benedict XVI.  Any honest person who watches that will be able to see that he is without question a non-Catholic heretic and therefore is not a true pope.

 
Also, to your other question, no you have never received Jesus if all you have gone to is the New Mass.  But anyone can baptize validly, even a non-Catholic, so if you were baptized with the proper form and the person was doing it seriously (and with the intention of the Church) then it was valid. Regarding the “apparitions” you asked about in Ireland, the fact that they say that people should follow John Paul II tells you all you need to know.  They are false apparitions from the Devil.  See:
John Paul II (manifest heretic who claimed to be pope 1978-2005).  It’s truly amazing how many different people who claimed visions in the past decade or two mentioned, as part of their “message,” that people should follow John Paul II.  That, in itself, is a proof that their messages were from the Devil.

 

Guidance

 

I have spent two days reading over many things on your website, and I am quite concerned for my eternal soul and would rather spend that
eternity with God.  How do I know that I am in a valid diocese?  How can I find out if I am truly receiving the Lord every Sunday?  What consolation can you offer me?  Your website would seem to imply that the church itself is broken, but we know the gates of hades cannot prevail.  Is there any particular link on your site that might be of particualr use to me in discerning the actions I need to take in order to guard my soul from eternal separation from God?

Thanks in advance,
Dave

 

MHFM: Dave, one needs to pray the Rosary every day, accept all the traditional teachings of the Church, stop going to the New Mass and get out of the Vatican II sect.  Also, don't compromise with heresy.  There are many links on our site which cover this and document what's going on in great detail.  The section 3/4 of the way down in red, for those converting or leaving the New Mass, is also something you should look at.  It contains the Council of Trent's traditional profession of faith, which you should make once you're convinced of all the teachings of the Church and of the facts against the Vatican II sect. 

 

Also, people must avoid mortal sin and the occasions of sin.  For even if a person is 100% traditional and uncompromising on the dogmas of faith, if he or she dies in mortal sin that person will be damned. Also, regarding your comment that the Church seems broken, see the comment above.  We point out that the Vatican II sect is definitely not the Catholic Church.  One must to be convinced of that, for otherwise one is holding a heretical position that the Catholic Church has fallen into error.

 

DVDs for pennies

 

Get quantities of any of our DVDs for pennies for a limited time

 

Faith in Crisis, swearing?

 

Subj: Faith in Crisis

 

Dear MHFM,

 

1. The last line of the Council of Trent's Profession of Catholic Faith asks me to "swear" to the faith. Although I am eager to "promise" and "vow", I know the bible says never "swear" to anything. I teach my children never to swear. What does canon law say about swearing?

2. Some SSPX "priests" have been mentioned being involved with sex scandals in a Pennsylvania "Catholic" boy's high school (see below). The FSSP has since taken over operations. I read that the SSPX has formally disassociated itself with the current Vatican, yet the FSSP recognizes the Vatican's authority. I guess I just don't know who to trust anymore. I do know that I totally reject V2 and I believe we haven't had a true pope since John XXIII was mysteriously put in power. I just want myself and my family to be able to receive valid sacraments from a valid priest. The N.O. parishes in my area are quite protestant in every way and I refuse to go to them anymore, but I desperately need some sound guidance. Who can we turn to? Our souls hang in peril.

 

Sincerely,

PMC 

 

MHFM: Regarding swearing and oath taking, obviously the Church is not opposed to it.  As you pointed out, it’s mentioned in the Profession of Faith promulgated by the Council of Trent.  In Apocalypse 10:6 we also read:

 

“And the angel, whom I saw standing upon the sea and upon the earth, lifted up his hand to heaven, And he swore by him that liveth for ever and ever, who created heaven, and the things which are therein; and the earth, and the things which are in it; and the sea, and the things which are therein: That time shall be no longer.”

 

In Matthew 5:34 Jesus is condemning unnecessary oaths in common speech, in which the name of God is flung about in a disrespectful fashion.   Thus, people should avoid stating “I swear” loosely or in a vain fashion, as so many people unfortunately do.  Jesus is teaching that frequent oaths are unnecessary, since man’s “yes” should mean yes and his “no” should mean no.  But oaths for special occasions, in which it is necessary to show that God is witness to the act, are perfectly licit and sanctioned by Church teaching and Sacred Scripture, as we see above. 

 

Regarding your question about to whom you should turn, you should turn to the traditional, infallible teachings of the Church.  You don’t put your trust in man.  These teachings are provided in our material and it is upon these infallible teachings that we base our positions.  And you certainly don’t look for guidance from the groups you mentioned, both of which are heretical in numerous areas.  To see the heresies of the SSPX, look at: The File on the Positions of the Society of St. Pius X   [PDF file].  To see the heresies endorsed by the FSSP, just look at our section on Vatican II or John Paul II or Benedict XVI, since the FSSP endorses the heresies of all three.

 

Rock Music taints the brain

 

From a story in the The Virginian-Pilot, July 25, 1997:

 

          “Your mom was right.  Rock ‘n’ roll really does rot your brain.

          That’s according to David Merrell, a 16-year-old Nansemond River High School student whose high school science experiment supports what parents have been saying for years: Hard rock taints the brain – well, at least the brains of mice.

          Using 72 male laboratory mice, a stopwatch, a 5-by-3 foot maze and the music of Mozart and Anthrax, David worked with an Old Dominion University statistician to establish that hard rock impedes learning….

To prove his point, David assembled three separate groups of 24 mice: a control group, a hard rock group and a classical group. To ensure scientific validity, each white mouse weighed between 15 and 20 grams, was four to six weeks old, and was bred to ensure no genetic abnormalities existed.

          The mice spent the first week getting used to their controlled environment in David’s parents’ basement. They received measured feedings and 12 hours of light each day. Each mouse navigated the maze to establish the base time of about 10 minutes.

          Then David started piping in music ten hours a day. The control group navigated without music. He put each mouse through the maze three times a week for three weeks.

          The result: The control group shaved five minutes from its original time.

          The mice that navigated the maze with Mozart knocked eight and one-half minutes off their time. But the group listening to hard rock bumped through the maze, dazed and confused, taking an average of 30 minutes, tripling the amount of time it previously took to complete the maze. Most noticeably, the hard rock mice didn’t sniff the air to find the trails of others that came before them.

          ‘It was like the music dulled their senses,’ David said. ‘It shows point-blank that hard rock has a negative effect all around. I can’t think of a positive effect that hard rock has on learning.

          In fact, David thinks that the negative effects go well beyond learning.

          During the four-month experiment, David housed each mouse in separate aquariums. That’s because last year, for a similar project, he kept all the hard rock mice together, all the classical mice together, and all the control mice together.  The results were horrific.

          ‘I had to cut my project short because all the hard rock mice killed each other,’ David said.  ‘None of the classical mice did that at all.’”

                  

Thanks

 

Dear Brother Dimond:

 

We thank you very much for the insight.  Now we know what’s going on.  Most Catholics we know have no clue as to what is going on. 

 

Agnes Williams,

Hillsdale, MI

 

Another Phony Annulment

 

[To MHFM]: I am sorry to bother you but I have a question about a situation I can't seem to get an answer to. 
Basically, I dated my husband for 4 years and was then married for 16.  We had 6 children (5 surviving).  My husband met someone else who could offer him a more secure financial future (his own words) and filed for a divorce.  He was granted an annulment under the fact that he "didn't realized the vow he was taking and felt pressured into  getting  married".  Even though the priest who counseled us in pre-cana asked him several times if he knew what vow he was taking and the seriousness and permanency of it.  Here is my dilemma.  Every time I pray I feel as if our Lord is telling me that the annulment is not valid and I am still considered married in the eyes of God.  I would have kept my vows until death and it sickens me that my family is broken.  I did not pursue nor did I give any reason in the annulment hearing to say that this marriage should be considered null so my conscience is clear.  What is my obligation?  Should I consider myself never married and accept the tribunals decision considering I did not pursue any of it?  Or should I consider this a farce and consider myself still married.  I can not find peace with  this.  Incidentally, the church has married him to the woman he was committing adultery with.  I have 5 children that I must set a proper example to on what is right in the eyes of God but I am still young and would like to be married if that is in the Will of God for me.  I just don't know what to do.  Can you please tell me what someone should do in a situation like this.  I am not able to talk to my local priest as he told my husband that he could be with his mistress even in front of my children prior to the divorce.  I know that is hard to believe but my oldest son told me with his own mouth that the priest told him as "long as his father acts like a gentlemen" in front of him that he could vacation as a family with her while still married to me and living under the same roof.   I shudder at the repeating of this.  At any rate, thank you for any advise you can offer. 

 

Yours in Christ, Karen

 

MHFM: No, the annulment is not valid.  You are married and he is living in adultery.  It’s another example of a ridiculous phony annulment handed out by the Vatican II sect, as explained in this article: The Annulment Fiasco - The Vatican II sect's De Facto acceptance of Divorce and Remarriage [PDF File]. 

 

Quote of the Day

 

Hi,

That was a very thought provoking quote which you had posted under "Quote of the Day", and I think it illustrates the fact that had those souls therein referred to not been brought the faith, they would have faced destruction, refuting "invincible ignorance":

Pope Leo XIII (+1902): “By his (Christopher Columbus’) toil another world emerged from the unsearched bosom of the ocean: hundreds of thousands of mortals have, from a state of blindness been raised to the common level of the human race, reclaimed from savagery to gentleness and humanity; and, greatest of all, by the acquisition of those blessings of which Jesus Christ is the author, they have been recalled from destruction to eternal life.” (Encyclical, Quarto Abrupto)

It shows once again that the faith is necessary to be saved, and that someone "invincibly ignorant" cannot be saved by it, but must believe and be baptized in order to have eternal life.

God Bless

 

n…

 

MHFM: Yes, it’s in one of the sections of our book Outside the Catholic Church There is Absolutely No Salvation [pdf file] which deals with refuting the idea that souls who are ignorant of the Catholic faith can be saved.

 

Coulter and “Fr.” Francis Stone of EWTN

 

Good morning Brothers,

 

A couple of items:

 

1) On your recent radio program you mentioned Ann Coulter being labeled as "anti-semitic". Yesterday, I happened upon a telecast in which Ann was already in the process of explaining her "position" and some of her religious history. She made a number of comments:

a) 'We don't need a church - we have Jesus Christ who died for us.'

b) 'If you are a Muslim or Hindu I would tell you that you have to believe in Jesus Christ. If you are a Jew, I would tell you stay where you are. You have the Old Testament and we have the New which just happens to complete the Old.'

 

2) There is discussion about Father Francis Mary Stone online, e.g.,

"That Father Francis Mary "was counseling a widow who has small children and he fell in love with her, and has taken a leave of absence to discern his vocation... he was re-thinking his vocation, that we should pray for him and all involved, that God's mercy is there for all..."
Father Anthony Mary was somber, shocked, and in disbelief...

 

"Please pray for Father Francis Mary of EWTN, who is re-thinking his Vocation as a Priest, for Our Lord to pour down upon him now, and all involved, His unfathomable love and mercy. Dear Blessed Mother, your Beloved Priest son needs you, please keep him close."

I think about the content of "Life on the Rock" and his (Stone's) allowance of immodest dress and silly content that misdirects youth, his praise of WYD (even in the face of its sacriligeous acts), and his telling people that you don't have to be Catholic.

 

I pray that he convert to the True Faith and be validly ordained. To find his vocation and minister to Christ's Church and no longer be part of the counterfeit church.

 

Gary

 

MHFM: Regarding Coulter’s statements, they demonstrate that she’s a total heretic.  Perhaps she should check out the New Testament and all the places where Jesus says that all men and specifically the Jews must believe in Him for salvation (Jn. 8:23-24; Jn. 3:36; Mk. 16:16; etc.). 

 

Regarding “Fr.” Francis Stone, it’s not a bit surprising that he’s thinking of breaking his vows and abandoning his vocation.  He reported on and vigorously promoted Benedict XVI’s apostate visit to the Synagogue in 2005.  He was a promoter of the worst of the Vatican II sect’s false ecumenism.  He also denounced those who hold the dogma that only those who die as Catholics can be saved and was angered by the thought that Protestants and other heretics are not going to be. 

 

So, if he thinks that members of false religions, members of heretical sects and their “ministers” can be saved, even though they practice contraception, don’t receive the sacraments, reject the teachings of the Church, etc., then it only follows that he probably feels that God will have mercy on him if he breaks his priestly vows.  He’s an outrageous heretic who, being excommunicated from the Catholic Church, is “delivered to Satan” (1 Cor. 5:5) – which, according to a common interpretation of 1 Cor. 5:5, is the spiritual effect of being excommunicated. 

 

Came Across

 

Dear mhfm,

               

 I want to use this medium to show my appreciation to the good work you have been doing in exposing the malicious and diabolical deceit that has been going on in the Vatican.I want also to thank God for introducing me to your web site. I came accross your site accidentally while searching for SSPX site. Since I discovered this site I have fallen in love with it and I hardly open other sites for browsing.   I want to tell you that you have exposed me to many things I have never known before about my church… I am a nigerian and married with three kids. There is almost zero traditional masses in this part of the world… I want to let you know that I have since stopped attending the novus ordo masses, I do my traditional devotion instead please tell me is this adviseable?  I will be please hearing from you soon. Thank you and God bless.  

                                                                                       

Paulmaria Ekpe

 

MHFM: Thanks for the interest.  Yes, one absolutely cannot go to the invalid and Protestant New Mass.

 

Novus Ordo Seminary and Ordination Dispute

 

What would you say to a man such as myself who believes he has been called by God and was ordained by the Norvus ordo.

Clearly I am unhappy with several matter within the Church, but I have a difficult time believing my orders are invalid -- especially when I have seen the Grace that has flowed through me by God's doing to lead people down an orthodox path.  God has worked through my sinful hands.

One other thought, I happen to be quite worried about things that are going on in the Church, but one thing is certain... my seminary was not a cess pool of homosexuality.  The one person who was openly homosexual was run out by the seminarians -- not saying he was treated with Christian charity, but this homosexual person was run out.

God bless you,
TJH

 

MHFM: TJH, you must cast aside the personal feelings that you have and look at the facts.  The New Rite of Ordination is definitely invalid, as our article shows: Why the New Rite of Ordination is Invalid [PDF File]. (This article explains why the New Rite of Ordination – which was instituted by Paul VI on June 18, 1968 after Vatican II – is not valid.)  It's invalid for the same reasons that the Anglican Rite was declared to be invalid.

 

Also, the scandals among the Novus Ordo clergy speak for themselves about the prevalence of homosexuals.  We've also conversed with many of them and been alarmed at the astoundingly high rate of effeminate Novus Ordo priests.  This is further confirmed by the fact that the Vatican II sect cannot even bring itself to ban homosexuals from its seminaries.  What a disgrace!  This reveals the perverse grip of evil which reigns over the Vatican II sect.  Even if your particular seminary was not a cesspool of homosexuality, it certainly was a cesspool of indifferentism and false ecumenism, following (as it was) the heresies of Vatican II.

 

Pittsburgh Novus Ordo Horrors

 

Dear Sir,

I am writing for a referral to any authentic Church in the Pittsburgh area.  I have studied your website… I had abandoned the Catholic faith after having had very negative experiences at the Church I was attending - somehow thing didnt seem right.  Then about 6 months ago, I was walking thru a salvage yard and saw a beautiful - really beautiful statue of Our Lady of Victories that was removed from a Church which was demonlished - it was so badly damaged that even the head of Jesus was broken off. I cannot described my reaction........I was horrified....no more so than that - that I went home and cried and cried and cried all night.  I wanted to buy the statue from the vendor but he knew my feelings to take advantage of them and placed the price over 2,000 dollars which was more than I could afford.  But I am still devestated and continually think of the horror of the disrespect. I then started to research local Catholic Churches - but I have not found one which adheres to the old ways - they are all "renewed" . Please, I want to return to the old way - but I dont know how. Help me.  Thank you.

Carol Carraway

 

EWTN Heresy

 

Dear Brothers,

Here is a recent Question and Answer on the EWTN website:

muslims in heaven- Question from ray busacco on 10/22/2007:  

My son-in-law is now a Christian, however his Mom & Dad were of Muslim faith from Iran and recently passed away.  He is struggling with thinking that they are lost and  not able to enter heaven and also thinks that it will do no good to pray for them to enter the kingdom of heaven. We are not sure how to console him.  I appreciate your response.

Thanks,

Ray Busacco

Answer by Fr. Robert J. Levis on 10/23/2007: Ray, Our Church teaches that non-Catholics may well be saved if they lived good upright lives according to their own traditions, said their prayers regularly, considered their own faith valid. There are 5 billion people on earth who today will never even hear the word, Jesus, or anything about him. God is good and we can hope and pray for the saving of these who neverhave been told of Christ. -Fr. Bob Levis

If what Levis said was true, then why would anyone bother to go to the ends of the earth preaching the Gospel and converting people to the Catholic Faith like the missionaries did, even going so far as to be martyred, rather than tell them what Levis just stated? What a heretic!

Bridget

 

MHFM: Yes, and the pathetic part about this is that almost all sedevacantist priests who believe in baptism of desire would give basically the same heretical answer.

 

Fast Days

 

Hello Brothers,

 

I had previously sent you an e-mail on this through my yahoo e-mail, but I'm not sure that you received it because I did not hear from you on my below question. Would you please help clarify this for me . . . I see that there are certain fast days assigned in the Traditional Catholic Calendar on your website . . .

Are these days mandatory?  I presently abstain from meat on every Friday, and I observe the traditional catholic Lenten fast regulations.   Is it a mortal sin to not fast on the other assigned fast days in the year?  Your help would be greatly appreciated.   Thank you and God bless your work.

 

cw

 

MHFM: Yes, they are mandatory under pain of mortal sin for all people 21 to 59 years of age, unless a person has an unusual health problem or his/her ability to work would be greatly impeded by observing the fast days.  The law of abstinence (e.g. not eating meat on Friday) must be observed by those 7 years of age and older.  They are explained in this file: Info on Fast Days, etc., which is located in the “Traditional Catholic Calendar” section of our website.

 

Non-Catholics attending Catholic funerals, weddings, etc.

 

Greetings good Brothers,

 

    My question may not have a simple answer, but here goes:

(fyi-I am a traditional Catholic who agrees with you straight on the line in faith)

 

    Q:  If catechumens were not allowed by the Church to participate at Holy Mass after the sermon in the early days of the Church, when did this cease to be the rule?

    Also, what does the Church teach us about non-Catholics attending our weddings, funerals, baptisms, etc.?  They are now permitted to attend, even sitting at the very front of the church, closest to the altar of sacrifice, for which they hold not the same reverence as do Catholics.  What's up with that?  (pardon my ignorance, and, by the way, the 'non-Catholics' I am referring to also includes those of the New Order, family members who have left the Church/Faith for mortal sin, etc.) It appears that the Church is no longer exclusive and that penalties no longer apply. 

    I know you will be able to clarify this for us, Brothers.

 

In Christ,

Louise Kent.

 

MHFM: We’re not aware of an exact date when it fell out of practice, but the division of the Mass between catechumens and faithful, and the practice of the ancient Church to observe that division, demonstrates what the ancient Church believed about who make up the Church of “the faithful” (i.e. only the sacramentally baptized). 

 

Regarding your second question, whether non-Catholics should attend Catholic funerals, weddings, baptisms, etc., the answer is no.  They should not be invited, with one exception.  They should not be invited because it’s wrong to ask people in mortal sin and/or heresy, apostasy, paganism, etc. to celebrate or participate in something holy with you.  By inviting them to those special occasions, one gives them the false impression that he or she considers them to be in a good state or fit to celebrate with members of the household of faith.  The only exception to this would be a person who is on the road to conversion, who is open to conversion and who might benefit tremendously and be moved toward further conversion by attendance.  But that would be very rare.  But with people you have known for a long time, who have resisted or remained inert toward the true faith, even if some of them have not been hostile but simply not in agreement, they should definitely not be invited for the reason described above.  The principle involved was mentioned by the apostle John in Sacred Scripture and repeated by Pope Pius XI:

 

Pope Pius XI, Mortalium Animos #9, Jan. 6, 1928: “Everyone knows that John himself, the Apostle of love, who seems to reveal in his Gospel the secrets of the Sacred Heart of Jesus, and who never ceased to impress on the memories of his followers the new commandment ‘Love one another,’ altogether forbade any intercourse with those who professed a mutilated and corrupt form of Christ’s teaching: ‘If any man come to you and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into the house nor say to him: God speed you’ (II John 10).”

 

Benedict XVI’s recent Assisi

 

MHFM: If you haven’t already, make sure to check out this week’s Heresy of the Week.  Benedict XVI held his own Assisi-like interreligious prayer-meeting.  Have you noticed that since he “gave back the Latin Mass” he has been on an absolute rampage of weekly outrageous heresies?  He is again showing his true demonic colors, after having deceived certain “conservatives” some months back with the wider permission for the Latin Mass to be offered by mostly invalid “priests” of the Vatican II sect.

 

Recent Radio Program Archived

 

MHFM: Our Oct. 26th, 2007 radio program has been archived:

 

Oct. 26, 2007 Radio Program [1 hr. – This program covers Benedict XVI’s recent outrageous heresies, as well as the recent outrageous scandals of the Vatican II sect.]

 

It’s found permanently in: Archived Radio Programs.

 

Separation of Church and State?

 

Dear MHFM,

 

Thank you for an informative sight. I am now rediscovering the catholic faith of my Irish grandparents brought to this country in the 1920's. Your site has helped me to understand my father's point of view on the Traditional church. You see I was born in 1960 and raised in the V2 church (USA). My Catholic High School advertised it's mission was: to provide students with a superior high school education in a supportive atmosphere based upon Christian values in the Catholic tradition.

 

As you can see from their mission statement, much effort went into crafting a generic and bland religious education. The school did not want to disturb the non-catholic athletes they recruited for the football team, or upset the protestant parents who paid 30% higher tuition payments.  

 

As an adult, I have considered the Greek Orthodox church. Your sight has been enlightening as to it's theological and liturgical status. I do miss the parrish community.

 

I have one question, do you disagree with the separation of church and state? I seem to have heard this on one of your audio segments. 

 

Tim H.

Atlanta, Georgia   

 

MHFM:  Yes, the idea that the Church should be separated from the State has been condemned by the Catholic Church.  That the State should only recognize the Catholic religion necessarily follows from the fact that God’s law and His truth are to be respected, honored and given special place in the public arena as well as the private.  Separation of Church and State has been condemned repeatedly by the popes, although it can be tolerated if the alternative is worse (e.g. a State which would discriminate against the true religion).  That’s why Pope Leo XIII pointed out that the law in the U.S.A. is preferable to many other situations, but he noted that it’s not ideal.

 

Pope Pius IX, Syllabus of Errors, Dec. 8, 1864, # 55:

“The Church is to be separated from the state, and the state from the Church.” – Condemned. (Denzinger 1755)

 

Pope Leo XIII, Libertas (# 21-23), June 20, 1888:

Justice therefore forbids, and reason itself forbids, the State to be godless; or to adopt a line of action which would end in godlessness – namely, to treat the various religions (as they call them) alike, and to bestow upon them promiscuously equal rights and privileges.  Since, then, the profession of one religion is necessary in the State, that religion must be professed which alone is true, and which can be recognized without difficulty, especially in the Catholic States, because the marks of truth are, as it were, engraven upon it… Men have a right freely and prudently to propagate throughout the State what things soever are true and honorable, so that as many as possible may possess them; but lying opinions, than which no mental plague is greater, and vices which corrupt the heart and moral life should be diligently repressed by public authority, lest they insidiously work the ruin of the State.”

 

Pope St. Pius X, Vehementer Nos, Feb. 11, 1906: “We, in accord with the supreme authority which We hold from God, disapprove and condemn the established law which separates the French state from the Church, for those reasons which We have set forth: because it inflicts the greatest injury upon God whom it solemnly rejects, declaring in the beginning that the state is devoid of any religious worship…” (Denz. 1955)

 

There is much more on this issue, the religious liberty issue and Vatican II’s heresies in this regard in the main document of this file: Vatican II - false council.

 

Reader on Teen Challenges Moment of Silence Law

 

Dear Dimond Brothers:

 

I read your most recent article featured on your News and Commentary page entitled, "Teen Challenges Moment-Of-Silence Law".  A quick search on the internet shows that Robert Sherman, the father who is filing a federal lawsuit challenging the moment-of-silence law, who claims to be an outspoken atheist, is actually a Jew.

 

Sherman told The Associated Press, "What we object to is Christians passing a law that requires the public school teacher to stop teaching during instructional time, paid for by the taxpayers, so that Christians can pray.”

 

What the article doesn’t disclose is the fact this issue started over a song that his daughter was taught in chorus class.  On his homepage Sherman states, “Over the weekend, I asked [my daughter] Dawn what songs she had been taught in chorus.  Dawn said that she would sing one of the songs for me:  "Hashkiveinu !   Hashkiveinu !   Adonai echod !"  I stopped her at that point.”

 

“My jaw dropped.  I couldn't believe it.  Having been Bar Mitzvahed on my 13th birthday, I knew what "Adonai echod" means.   "Adonai" is Hebrew for "The Lord," as in God.  "Echod" is Hebrew for "One."  …Adonai echod is a central principle of the Jewish religion and is repeated in numerous prayers throughout Jewish religious services.”…    You would think that Mr. Sherman, having been schooled in Judaism and the Hebrew language, would invite Jewish songs into a public school.  However, it seems, that Mr. Sherman is so threatened by the prospect of Christianity in public schools, that any thought of Jesus Christ in the minds of children must be violently rent. (recall King Herod’s slaughter of the innocents).  Such behavior describes his federal lawsuit, which seeks to ban even a moment-of-silence in public schools.

 

Truly yours in Christ,

 

John.

 

Charismatics and Guitars

 

Dear Brother Michael:

I've recently reviewed some of your work on youtube and wondered if you might be able to help me with a couple of questions:

1.  Is the Charismatic movement New Age?  Is it heresy?  (It makes me uncomfortable and I'm trying to learn more about it)

2.  Last Sunday, I was shocked when our quitarist put her guitar down to get the people clapping.  I have already spoken to our Priest about getting back to the traditional songs that we grew up with.  So far, we have had a slight change and have been playing some traditional songs.  Can you recommend another approach that I might take in letting Father know that the clapping and shouting out is irreverent (in my humble opinion)?

Thank you so much, in advance, for your help with these issues.  I've been battling the Charismatic question for a few weeks now as there is a woman at church that keeps pressing me to attend seminars at her private facility that she calls "The Bridge".  Also, she is very well versed on the topic of the New World Order.

God be with you,

Deb Matuzak
Blue Ridge, Georgia

 

MHFM: Yes, the Charismatic Movement is heretical.  This short article explains why it’s evil: EWTN and the Charismatic Movement.  To engage in it is to participate in a false sacramental system.  That's why there are an abundance of cases of people having bad spiritual results (demonic experiences, etc.) after having participated in it.

 

Regarding approaching your "priest" for different options for music, we must inform you that one cannot go to the New Mass at all.  The New Mass itself is invalid.  Jesus is not present there, as we show here: The Invalid New Mass.  One must avoid it under pain of mortal sin.  It's really critical that you investigate this, for it's a huge matter.  We're really glad you got in contact with us.  We strongly encourage you to take a deeper look at the material on our website, for it shows that the post-Vatican II Church is not Catholic and one can have no part with it.  The fact that you saw clapping after the guitar playing is another interesting example of an outrageous scandal at the already invalid New Mass.

 

Found and Investigating

 

Hello ~
 
I just discovered your website and have been making my way through the materials, but I'm a bit confused and hope you might help me.
 
I've been in the process of entering the Roman Catholic Church for several years now, but much of what I've seen, heard, and learned has bothered me.  I now understand from your website perhaps what that might be, I'm just not sure which direction to go now.  I haven't officially entered the Church yet, and I'm trying very hard to understand what The Tradtional Catholic Church truly is then.  I take it you don't refer to SSPX, and so I'm wondering if I want to be a Traditional Catholic, what church do I approach?  Is there a "denomination" known as The Traditional Catholic Church that I should seek out?
 
Thank you for your assistance.
 
Sincerely,
Anita LaRue
Saint Louis, Missouri

 

MHFM: Anita, thanks for the interest.  The Traditional Catholic Church is simply the Catholic Church of all times.  It's the Catholic Church that Christ established, the same historical Catholic Church that spread the Gospel all over the world.  But what's pointed out in Scripture and in Catholic prophecy - as the section on our website about how a counterfeit Church is predicted makes clear - is that in the last days there will arise a counterfeit Church (a.k.a. the Whore of Babylon) which will purport to be the true Church, but will not be.  This Counter Church will appear to be the true Church but will be a fraud which teaches false doctrines and leads people (who think they are following "Catholic" leaders) astray.  It will spiritually deceive people as part of the Great Apostasy, which will reduce the true Church to a remnant.  With abundant and irrefutable facts, our material proves that the post-Vatican II Church is just that counterfeit "Catholic" Church of the last days.  It shows that its leaders are invalid usurpers with no true authority in the Church.

 

So, to be a Catholic one must reject this counterfeit Vatican II religion: its false mass, false teachings and heretical leaders.  To become a Catholic, one simply needs to follow the steps which are laid out in the section of our website which concerns converts. 

 

We really hope you do follow up with this and embrace the traditional Catholic faith.  One can obtain a basic catechism at our online store.  We also strongly encourage you to pray the Rosary every day.  We have a How to Pray the Rosary sheet on our website, if you don't know how.  As far as where to go to church, that's a more involved question in these days.  We'd be happy to help you with that question or other follow-up questions if you called us. 

 

If you haven’t already, we would also strongly recommend that you obtain our DVD special offer which includes 6 DVDs (with 10 different programs), as well as 3 important books (including our 610-page book with 200 color photographs), an audio disc (with 20 hours of programming) and flyers for only $10.00 (no shipping charge in U.S.).

 

Everything has fallen into place

 

Dear Brothers,

 

I simply had to write to you to thank you all for this amazing information.  I am a 26 year old woman from Liverpool UK who was born and raised Catholic.  When I reached adulthood, I felt uncomfortable about going to The New Mass as I felt that a lot of the things that were taught were contradictory and I found that I felt closer to God when I was away from the church - now I know why!.  Over the past couple of years, I have been researching about The End Times and studying the Bible in great detail.  My relationship with God, Jesus and The Holy Spirit has improved immensly.  I moved to Liverpool a year ago from the Northeast of England and it was here that I formed a devotion to Our Lady.  We live 1/2 a mile from a place called Montfort House, which is ran by the Montfortian Fathers - concerned with the work of St Louis Marie De Monfort.

 

I still missed actually worshipping God in a church, but every time I tried to go to mass, it didnt feel right and I was left feeling more empty than when I went in.  I have been praying hard this last year for an answer from God as to where I can go next.  I missed the mass and most of all missed receiving Holy Communion.  I often sit in front of the computer and ask the Holy Spirit to guide me in my searches.  I ask the Spirit to reveal what I need to know next to move forward and this seems to work.  The other night, I was brought to your website (I still dont know how I found it!) and now everything has fallen into place.

 

I shared the information with my mother, who has always been a devout Catholic and continually complained about the lack of respect in churches today - she is 65 and remembers what life was like as a Catholic before Vatican II.  I have never really been able to relate to this as I was born in 1981 by which time the heresies of Vatican II had tight hold of the churches I attended.  I stayed up all night reading your page and printed pages out - we discussed them together and we both feel like we have been reborn!  We can't thank you enough!  Everything makes sense now.  My mother found a missal that she was given as a child in the 50's - it is mine now and I am studying it in great detail.  She met a lady in the village where we live the day after we had discussed your website.  This lady is 86 and has been attending one of the only churches in Liverpool that still provide the Latin Mass all her life!  She is taking us there tomorrow (Sunday).  Apparently the priest is 90 but still going strong!  I cannot wait to start my new Catholic life - and it is all thanks to the information you provided!  I am a little concerned that my Baptism, Holy Communion and Confirmation are not valid and would be greatful for your advice on this.  Should I be baptised again?  We would also like advice about adoring the Blessed Sacrament and how we know that the places we attend to do it are valid.  (Obviously, we will not attend any Catholic churches in the area that conduct the New Mass.)

 

We will be ordering DVD's and books from you to spread around our Catholic friends.  Thankyou from the bottom of our hearts for your comprehensive website.  We have been praising the Lord since we found it and will continue to pray for you all daily and the work that you do.

 

Your sister in Christ

Claire

 

MHFM: Claire, thank you very much for your e-mail and your interest.  It's really great to hear.  Regarding baptism, one doesn't have to be a valid priest or even a Catholic to validly baptize.  So, as long as the person who performed it did it seriously while pouring water on the forehead and saying the words of baptism, "I baptize thee in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost," then it was valid.  If that didn’t occur or if there is some doubt about it, then a conditional baptism should be done.  The conditional form of baptism is on our website.  If your confirmation was done in the Novus Ordo, then it was invalid.  The same is true of all the "Communions" made at the New Mass.

 

Regarding confession, since the New Rite of Ordination is invalid, any confessions of mortal sins which were made to priests ordained in the New Rite (which was promulgated in June of 1968) would need to be re-confessed to a priest ordained in the traditional rite of ordination.  This is explained in the section of our website for those converting to the Catholic faith or leaving the New Mass.  Regarding adoration, you definitely should not go to any adoration services at the New Mass, since Our Lord is not present there.  Regarding the 90 year-old priest, if he accepts that Benedict XVI is the pope (which he probably does), then a Catholic cannot financially support him because of that position.  Unfortunately, many of those priests also hold heretical views on the dogma Outside the Church There is No Salvation and other issues and so could not be financially supported for that reason as well.

 

Again, it's great to hear about your interest and we really hope things go well for you.

 

Reader on Heresy

 

Dear Brothers,

 

We appreciate your excellent apostolate which serves daily to reach many searching for the truth of our Catholic Faith.  Of the email comments by visitors posted on your site many are productive and reasonable; however a certain number are written in a spirit of bad will, and ignorant of the Church`s historic truth.  Whether a person is a heretic of Protestant or Novus Ordo variety leads down the same road, which is idolatry and loss of eternal salvation. We would like to cite something here connecting the two evils of heresy and idolatry so prevalent in history and now so evident with the development of the anti-Christ Conciliar Church.these past 45 years. 

 

From Tertullian, On Prescription of Heretics, c. 207 A.D. Chapter XL:  "The question will arise, By  whom is to be interpreted the sense of the passages which make for heresies?  By the devil, of course, to whom pertain those wiles which pervert the truth, and who, by the mystic rites of his idols, vies even with the essential portions of the sacraments of God.  ...Since, therefore, he (the devil) has shown such emulation in his great aim of expressing, in the concerns of his idolatry, those very things of which consists the administration of Christ`s sacraments, it follows, of course, that the same being, possessing still the same genius, both set his heart upon, and succeeded in, adapting to his profane and rival creed the very documents of divine things and of the Christian saints--- his interpretations from their interpretations, his words from their words, his parables from their parables.  For this reason, then, no one ought to doubt, either that "spiritual wickedness," from which also heresies come, have been introduced by the devil, or that there is any real difference between heresies and idolatry, seeing that they appertain both to the same author and the same work that idolatry does.  They either pretend that there is another god in opposition to the Creator, or, even if they acknowledge that the Creator is the one only God, they treat Him as a different being from what He is in truth.  The consequence is, that every lie which they speak of God is in a certain sense a sort of idolatry."

 

These words supply an insight into the nature of heresy.  Unfortunately, Tertullian himself severed from the Church by his acceptance of the error of Montanism.

 

Don – Omaha

 

Reader on Med. Science

 

Mary wrote: Do you deny that your traditional Church was in the past the cause of many mentally ill patients being treated as souls who were possessed with demons? Do you hold that line still or do you now accept medical science in relation to that matter?

People should really ask, “what science, where is it?”  Similar to the evolution hoax, I guess most people don’t realize that “Psychiatry” is nothing but a collection of theories.   The “profession” still honors Freud as their father, even though most in the profession have long ago written off Freud’s theories and no longer believe in the efficacy of Psycho-Analysis.  In the 1950s the profession was pushing the use of hallucinogenic drugs like LSD as a treatment.  That was discredited (and criminalized) within a decade and now we are in the age of the “chemical in-balance” theory.  Now understand, this supposed in-balance cannot be measured, it too is just a theory.  It is just assumed to exist.  (Seriously, this may seem hard to believe even for you, but it is totally made up, don’t believe me, look it up). 

 

So people, even little kids, are now drugged on a large scale to treat a theoretical in balance that cannot be observed or quantified.  Now they’re beginning to link use of these drugs (you know, the anti-depressants) to suicide!  There is nothing medical or scientific about psychiatry.  Honest Doctors will readily admit this.  Hey, Mary, it really is the Devil.

 

Bill Mulligan

 

Radio Program

 

OUR NEXT RADIO PROGRAM WILL BE FRIDAY, OCT. 26, AT 7:00 P.M. (Eastern Time)- Radio Program (to listen live click on the “Radio Program” link at the time of the program; if you have a question you want to ask during the program, call 1-800-275-1126 or 585-567-4433)

 

The Biblical uncleanness and effeminacy

 

Hi,


I notice in your piece on homosexuality on your site, you do not mention lesbians.  Your quote from the Bible refers to "effeminate". How does that tie in with lesbianism. They are women so by virtue of their gender will look effeminate anyway.  They cannot be guilty of sodomy either by reason of their physicality.  Do you know that medical science has found that homosexuality is the result of some physical abnormality? And here let me state that I believe that homo-sexual ACTS are mortally sinful.  I am as it happens not a homosexual but a practising Roman Catholic who is loyal to the Holy See and who believes that a lot of your stuff on your website is heretical and evil. It will be the cause of many people becoming mentally ill. I have suffered severe stress because of contact with a member of your sect. He has been telling me things such as that my parents are in Hell because they followed Vat 11! My parents were born before 1930 and were devout Catholics all their lives but stayed with the Vat 11 liturgy and never questioned it. How dare he!  Do you deny that your traditional Church was in the past the cause of many mentally ill patients being treated as souls who were possessed with demons? Do you hold that line still or do you now accept medical science in relation to that matter?  Jesus Christ was not cruel and vindictive. He was kind, loving and forgiving. He urged us to treat our neighbours as we would like to be treated and he forgave adulterers and anyone who asked his forgiveness received it.  To me you people are like the pharisees - whom Christ incidentally condemned - self-satisfied, self-glorifying, and holier than thou people who have no empathy with the sufferings of your fellow beings. Who the hell are you to judge people. You are not God. You are not even priests!

Mary Lawlor

 

MHFM: First, modern “science” and all of our “esteemed” universities today teach the fairy-tale of evolution as a fact.  Therefore, the fact that some study (probably conducted by liberals with an agenda) claims that homosexuality is natural means nothing.  Second, regarding the verse about the “effeminate,” St. Thomas Aquinas says that the “effeminate” and the biblical terms “uncleanness” and “unclean” refer to the mortal sin of masturbation.

 

St. Thomas Aquinas: “I answer that, As stated above (A6,9) wherever there occurs a special kind of deformity whereby the venereal act is rendered unbecoming, there is a determinate species of lust. This may occur in two ways: First, through being contrary to right reason, and this is common to all lustful vices; secondly, because, in addition, it is contrary to the natural order of the venereal act as becoming to the human race: and this is called "the unnatural vice." This may happen in several ways. First, by procuring pollution, without any copulation, for the sake of venereal pleasure: this pertains to the sin of "uncleanness" which some call "effeminacy." Secondly, by copulation with a thing of undue species, and this is called "bestiality." Thirdly, by copulation with an undue sex, male with male, or female with female, as the Apostle states (Romans 1:27): and this is called the "vice of sodomy." Fourthly, by not observing the natural manner of copulation, either as to undue means, or as to other monstrous and bestial manners of copulation. (Summa Theologica, Pt. II-II, Q. 154, A. 11.)

 

Ephesians 5:5- “For know you this and understand, that no fornicator, or unclean, or covetous person (which is a serving of idols), hath inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God.”

 

1 Cor. 6:9-10- “Know you not that the unjust shall not possess the kingdom of God? Do not err: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor the effeminate, nor liers with mankind, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor railers, nor extortioners, shall possess the kingdom of God.”

 

This very interesting passage from St. Thomas should tell those who are committing this mortal sin of masturbation that they are not only engaging in mortally sinful activity, but a seriously disordered mortal sin which is classified as one of the sins against nature.  The commission of this sin is probably one large reason why people are taken over by the evil spirit which causes that totally unnatural disorder of homosexuality. 

 

Now, regarding Lesbians, we think it’s pretty well known that many Lesbians exhibit unnatural, unwomanly behavior and act like men.  Homosexuality causes women to often act like men and men to often speak and act like women.  That’s because homosexuality is unnatural.  We simply made a special note of the frequency with which homosexual males exhibit effeminate external mannerisms.  Someone who doesn’t believe that homosexuality is a result of demonic takeover must consider this bizarre and enigmatic.  For how come and how can these males “naturally” come across as effeminate so often when they become attracted to men?  It’s not like they are acting effeminate, but this is what’s coming out of them.  This, in itself, is a powerful evidence of spiritual takeover in these individuals.  Romans 1 is clear that both female-to-female and male-to-male same sex attractions are unnatural – not instilled by God – and result from some form of idolatry.  So if you scoff at our position, then you scoff at Romans 1.

 

Regarding your other criticisms, you don’t even bring up one doctrinal point about which you think we’re wrong.  That’s because you know that your problem is not with us, but with the dogmatic teaching of the Church we bring forward to substantiate our positions.  You think that the Church’s hard truths are hateful and uncaring, but the truth is just the opposite.  They are liberating and truly loving, for they reveal the truth and the only way to true happiness.  Your e-mail exudes such modernism and liberalism that we’d be shocked if you don’t reject the solemnly defined dogma that all who die as non-Catholics are lost.  This liberalism is perhaps most in evidence in the parts of your e-mail where you seem to criticize the concept of diabolical possession.  You ask us if we accept what modern science says about mental illness, as if it has explained away the “myth” of diabolical possession.  The fact is that many things which are classified today as “mental illnesses” are, in our opinion, the result of diabolical possession. The fact that diabolical possession exists is seen throughout the New Testament (Mt. 4:24; Mt. 8:16; Mt. 8:28; Mt. 9:32; Mt. 12:22; Mk. 1:32; etc.).  If possession was such a prominent problem in the Lord’s time, then it has not ceased to be a problem in our wicked days.

 

Likes info

 

Re: Amazing Info

 

I'm sold... the analogy of the the frog in hot water comes to mind with the plan of satan..."if you put a frog in water and turn up the heat to boil the water, he will not know enough to jump out and save himself. if you throw a frog in boiling water he will jump out and save himself." 

The world is slowing changing for the worse and a lot of folks don't know when to jump out of the pot or where to turn...thanks for the info.

I'm spoon feeding myself all this info and read your response to an atheist about evolution.  It is amazing how man is playing with cloning now to try and take over God's job.  As history is rewritten over and over, it's easy to see how they could possibly say over 100 years time that man created man… We have consecrated ourselves numerous times to Jesus through Mary according to St. Louis de Montfort…

God Bless you and all your readers,

TM

 

Ten Commandments and Graven Images

 

Dear Brothers,

Just curious, how come the Protestant version of the Ten Commandments is different from ours?  Also, who was King James, of King
James Bible fame?   Thanks
                                                                 

 Rose B.

 

MHFM: The reason that the Protestants number the Ten Commandments differently is because the commandments are not numbered in the Bible and the Protestants divide them up differently.  King James was the Protestant King of England in the latter part of the 16th century and early part of the 17th century.  Your first question brings us to another point: the absolutely ridiculous objection of Protestants who say that the Bible condemns making a graven image, and therefore that Catholic statues, etc. are idolatrous.  The context of the commandment is clearly forbidding worshipping the graven image, which Catholics (of course) do not do.

 

Exodus 20:2-5- “I am the Lord thy God, who brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.  Thou shalt not have strange gods before me.  Thou shalt not make to thyself a graven thing, nor the likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or in the earth beneath, nor of those things that are in the waters under the earth.  Thou shalt not adore them, nor serve them: I am the Lord thy God, mighty, jealous, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me:”

 

The footnote in the Douay-Rheims points out the absolute absurdity of Protestant objections in this regard: “‘A graven thing, nor the likeness of any thing’... All such images, or likenesses, are forbidden by this commandment, as are made to be adored and served; according to that which immediately follows, thou shalt not adore them, nor serve them. That is, all such as are designed for idols or image-gods, or are worshipped with divine honour. But otherwise images, pictures, or representations, even in the house of God, and in the very sanctuary so far from being forbidden, are expressly authorized by the word of God. See Ex. 25. 15, and etc.; chap. 38. 7; Num. 21. 8, 9; 1 Chron. or Paralip. 28. 18, 19; 2 Chron. or Paralip. 3. 10.”

 

This is just another example of how Protestants pervert the teaching of Scripture.  If, as they falsely assert, this commandment forbids the making or keeping of statues, then they would also be breaking the same commandment by carrying and using coins to pay for things.  (Coins have graven images.)  They are thus condemned out of their own mouths.  Yet there are Protestants out there who will literally protest Catholic processions with signs “Thou shalt not make a graven image,” or something of the sort, which only display their ability to pervert the Scriptures. 

 

Abandoning “Orthodoxy”

 

Dear Father,

 

I have been a member of the Eastern Orthodox Church for 20 years. I converted from the protestant heresy, and was baptized in the Russian Orthodox Church. I did not join the Roman novus ordo church because I saw it was departing from the traditional Roman Catholic Faith.

For several months now, I have been questioning my own Church, and thought about going west. By chance, I found your site, and have watched some of the videos.  I really want to be in union with the true Catholic Church, but how can I if Rome has departed from the Faith? Where can I go? Are you in union with a true Catholic Bishop?

Please help me!!!

 

Ob…

 

Anti-Protestantism

 

Dear Sirs,

 

  I have been reading and listening to some of your information regarding protestantism.  What concerns me the most is the information in which you speak of protestants taking "specific phrases" from the new Testament--esp. the King James version, and using these phrases to support the thought of belief covers you by the blood of the lamb and admits you into heaven "automatically."  I believe that this is a teaching widely used by the Southern Baptists and other ultraconservatives to promote specific agendas.  Otherr groups such as The "Campus Crusades for Christ" also use these same tactics.  When growing up in the 60's and 70's we started hearing about "Born Again" Christians, and these people were telling me that I was not a true believer because I did not say that I was "Born Again".  I was raised in a family of ministers.  I have never heard any of these men take one line from the Bible to use it to prove a point.  Any intellegent  person, would know that without reading the entire scripture, and knowing the meaning of the colloquialisms of the time-- that all scripture can and will be "mis-interpreted".

  Confusion lies here in the fact that you might also be misinterpreting Biblical truth.  My pastor was raised Catholic as were many of my friends.  I was told by so many of these people that the Catholic church did not encourage their members to study the scriptures.  As a matter of fact several of them said, "Oh, well we never read the Bible in church." Mass, whatever you want to call it.  I also knew a lot of men in my youth that thought that they could sleep around on their wives as long as they went to confessional afterwards and the priest blessed them. 

    Don't you realize that what you are saying is a sin in and of itself.  To deny that there are true Biblical believers that are not Catholic is heresy itself.  You are placing yourselves on a pedestal and looking down upon good Christian people because you say "all proteststant religions misrepresent Biblical facts."  I believe that as a believer, I have a daily walk with God, that at times I may be filled with the holy spirit--none of ous think that we are God, or Jesus Christ…    Also, and well documented, historically is the fact that the Catholic church was formed on sacred land by the Roman Empire--where they themselves assasinated St. Peter.  The government at the time was losing control of the masses because, most wanted to follow the ways of Christ and not the government.  The Catholic church was formed by the Roman Empire to keep the masses loyal to the empire, and the Virgin Mary was added in for the pagans that believed in the divine feminine as creator of life. I know that the Virgin Mary was real, but she was raised to a higher level to serve a purpose.  All of this is well documented. Also, there is NOTHING in the scriptures about the Catholic faith, and by the way--some of your articles are contradicting each other.  You might want to ponder this:  I am totally NOT disagreeing with a lot of what you are saying about how messed up Vatican II is, but to say that all non-Catholic true believers that follow the ways of our Lord and Savior are not real Christian might just end you up where you say we are all going.  And, by the way--The Apostles Creed which is chanted in the Presbyterian Church every Sunday states, "I believe in the Holy Catholic Church". 

Your judgmentalism is a grievous sin upon itself and you.

 

Sincerely,

Nancy Hutcheson Abbott--TRUE CHRISTIAN

 

MHFM: Unfortunately Nancy, you are not a true Christian, but a deceived heretic.  From your letter, it seems like you are a faith-alone Protestant.  If you were honest, then listening to the audio selections we have on that issue should have shown you that your version of the Gospel is false and unbiblical.  The Bible clearly teaches the Catholic view of justification.  You also say that there is nothing in the Bible about the Catholic Church.  That’s nonsense.  That’s like saying that there is nothing in the Bible about the Trinity because the word is not mentioned.  The word is not mentioned, but the content of the truth is certainly there.   The Bible points to a Church founded upon Peter (Mt. 16), with confession (John 20:23), a real Eucharist (John 6:54), which teaches baptismal regeneration (John 3:5), which teaches the truth of Christ that believers can lose their salvation for grave sin (1 Cor. 6:9; 1 Cor. 9:27), etc (Refuting Protestantism and Eastern "Orthodoxy").  That Church must have been around since the apostles and there’s only been one since the time of the apostles, the Catholic Church.  If you cannot see it, then you are just a liar who is not of the truth.  Soon we will be posting more audio selections on other topics regarding how the Bible proves the Catholic Church’s teachings.  Also, the fact that Presbyterians and other denominations recite the Apostles’ Creed – which states that they believe in the Holy Catholic Church – and then admit that they are not Catholic demonstrates that they condemn themselves out of their own mouths.  They acknowledge the Catholic Church to be the one true Church, and yet fail to belong to the only historical, traditional and visible Catholic Church.  They thus prove by their own words that they are not part of the one true Church of Christ.

 

Thoughts

 

Greetings!
 
I am a fellow Roman Catholic from Croatia, although I live in Canada now. I have watched few of your video regarding abortion, freemasons, rock music and creation and miracles. It has enlightened me that I have found a site like yours. Im well aware of the Vatican II and what it has done to our Church. There is a large number of liberal Roman Catholic priests and bishops. That is in my opinion wrong for a priest to have liberal views regarding marriage and same-sex couples. The freemasons and zionists are behind it. They have infeltrated the Roman Catholic Church and the Vatican. This has caused many Catholics to take the jews for what they are not. The talmud is filled with anti-Catholic writing. Our followers dont know that. We cant expose it because the media is controled by the zionists (jews)… 
It certainty is great to knwo there are still true Catholics in the world. This is just a period of sturggle for us. We always come out on top in the end.
 
To say another thing, most of the Roman Catholic people these days who know about Vatican II, freemasonry, zionism and in-depth communist tend to lean to a far-right political site. I support these people 100%. The word far-right nowdays is immediately associated by the liberal and zionist media with neo-nazism, anti-semitism and racism. These patriots who know the truth have been coming out in large numbers in Spain, Hungary, Croatia, Slovakia and Italy. We have to rid our countries from zionist-masonic rule and re-establish the real Roman Catholic church in these countries. We cant ask for support from the Vatican, not in this day and age...

 

Deno…

 

Digesting

 

Dear MHFM,

I have read some of what you have posted on your website.  It is quite a bit of information and will take time to digest.  I can tell you what I believe:
I do not concur with the Second Vatican Council (it is illicit), I do not attend the Novus Ordo service (since I do not think it is a mass or Catholic), I do not believe that JPII should be canonized, and I do not believe everything that these last few Popes have been quoting , for example : I can in no way ever agree that Islam is a religion of high regard and esteem or that Muslims worship the same God as Catholics. 

As for Baptism of desire and Sedevacantism, I am not an authority on these topics but I am trying, as evidence by these emails, to determine the Truth.  I do not admire the last few Popes very much, and especially have issues with PaulVI, JPII, and BenXVI, since many of their words and actions are heretical.  If this suffices to say then I am Sedevacantist, than so be it.  I think Bugnini was a freemason, that the new mass is pagan/cult/even occultic, I agree with the Ottavani Intervention 100%, I do not believe the Vatican tells the truth, I do not think we have been told the truth about the 3rd secret of Fatima, I know Luther and Cramner are heretics and that the Pauline service is modelled after the 1549 Anglican Prayerbook, I believe that there is no salvation outside the Church, I do not believe that the Universal Church subsists within the Catholic Church, etc….

 

GOD Bless

 

Dip…

 

MHFM: What you have written about the Vatican II “Church” can lead you to no other conclusion: it’s not Catholic and the men who imposed it hold no authority.  Regarding baptism of desire, you don’t need to be an authority because the dogmatic teachings of the Church are our authority.  They tell us that no one can be saved without being born again of water and the Spirit in the Sacrament of Baptism.

 

Pope Paul III, The Council of Trent, Sess. 7, Can. 5 on the Sacrament of Baptism, ex cathedra: “If anyone says that baptism [the Sacrament] is optional, that is, not necessary for salvation (cf. Jn. 3:5): let him be anathema.”

 

Pope Eugene IV, The Council of Florence, “Exultate Deo,” Nov. 22, 1439:  “Holy baptism, which is the gateway to the spiritual life, holds the first place among all the sacraments; through it we are made members of Christ and of the body of the Church.  And since death entered the universe through the first man, ‘unless we are born again of water and the Spirit, we cannot,’ as the Truth says, ‘enter into the kingdom of heaven’ [John 3:5].  The matter of this sacrament is real and natural water.”

 

Pope St. Leo the Great, dogmatic letter to Flavian, Council of Chalcedon, 451:

Let him heed what the blessed apostle Peter preaches, that sanctification by the Spirit is effected by the sprinkling of Christ’s blood (1 Pet. 1:2); and let him not skip over the same apostle’s words, knowing that you have been redeemed from the empty way of life you inherited from your fathers, not with corruptible gold and silver but by the precious blood of Jesus Christ, as of a lamb without stain or spot (1 Pet. 1:18).  Nor should he withstand the testimony of blessed John the apostle: and the blood of Jesus, the Son of God, purifies us from every sin (1 Jn. 1:7); and again, This is the victory which conquers the world, our faith.  Who is there who conquers the world save one who believes that Jesus is the Son of God?  It is He, Jesus Christ, who has come through water and blood, not in water only, but in water and blood.  And because the Spirit is truth, it is the Spirit who testifies.  For there are three who give testimony – Spirit and water and blood.  And the three are one.  (1 Jn. 5:4-8)  IN OTHER WORDS, THE SPIRIT OF SANCTIFICATION AND THE BLOOD OF REDEMPTION AND THE WATER OF BAPTISM.  THESE THREE ARE ONE AND REMAIN INDIVISIBLE.  NONE OF THEM IS SEPARABLE FROM ITS LINK WITH THE OTHERS.

 

Thankful

 

Dear Brothers,

 

I suppose it is fair to say I thought I was alone in the Matrix!  I am thankful with all my heart that I stumbled across your web site!  Your work is truly anointed, the Truth finally is like food to my soul.  As the vestiges of the false teachings of Vatican 2 leave my mind, I truly feel like I am being born again.  I know you understand exactly what I mean by that.  Now it is the most ardent prayer of the Church that priests rise up from this remnant…. I cannot tell you how full of joy I am to see that finally I am not alone… We must endeavor to find remnant priests to help the Faithful continue on the road to salvation.  Praise be Jesus Christ forever.  We can end the Apostate Gospel of Modernism, Communism and Social Work. 

 

Let me conclude that I am NOT a nutt, I just seek the Truth!

 

God Bless

 

Deo Vindice

 

Robert Iacomacci

Abbeville County South Carolina

 

Novus Ordo particle study

 

Dear Brothers,  

 

You are truly my fellow brothers in the Faith.  I am so very thankful for your diligent studies and holy works which help assure the One, True Faith of Christ remains upon the face of the earth.  I email your daily spiritual and doctrinal quotes to others and they are very helpful in leading others into the Truth.  I also must say that because I gained a bit of world-wide attention for my eucharistic particle study and how the practice of communion in the hand causes particles detaching to be trampled underfoot, that I repudiate as false those parts of that study and letters which give any credence to John Paul II having been an actual Pope for you have convinced me he was not only a heretic, as I knew, but an anti-pope and anti-Christ, a destroyer.  I also repudiate that part of the study and those parts of my letters to anti-pope John Paul II which would lead one to believe the new mass is in any way valid, for it is absolutely invalid, but I did not know this for certain until your proofs convinced me.  The remainder of the particle study is true and scientifically valid and has been replicated independently by others.
         Further, I fully agree with every one of your doctrinal positions as they are all of them based on the soundest researches of the infallibly revealed truths of our Holy Religion.  When I challenge anyone to argue against your proofs, I am only met by silence or an "I don't agree" resistance to the known truth - a sin against the Holy Ghost which St Thomas Aquinas tells us requires a miracle of grace to reverse this resistance.  St Augustine says that "so great is the downfall of this sin that it cannot submit to the humiliation of asking for pardon".  Judas could not humiliate himself to ask pardon, and neither can proud heretics once they turn against the known truth.   Certainly, many are in error who simply require fraternal instruction and correction, but what joy to find the few who are blessed not to be scandalized by the Truth!  With great affection in His Sacred Heart,  

 

Charles Andre St-George  

 

Please publish this that my previous errors may be known and my adhesion to the Catholic faith of all time be manifest.  Thank you…

 

MHFM: For those who are not familiar with this study, it appeared in The Angelus.

 

No exceptions

 

Dear MHFM

 

The story of the automatic underlining of those words WITH NO EXCEPTIONS is truly amazing.  It seems to be connected to your work, as this person was helped by MHFM.

 

I'm reading stories from my little blue books (Catechism in Examples) and this kind of thing happens all the time.  You clarified BOB and BOD for me as well…

 

PM

 

MHFM: This reader is referring to the story against baptism of desire that is posted a few e-exchanges down.

 

Fellowship?

 

Dearly Beloved Brother in Christ ,

 

Greetings from India! We are so glad to meet you through this mail. I happened to visit your website just now and so happy after reading the contents. First of all, I would like to introduce myself and my ministry: I am pastor ravi, serving the Lord full-time for the last over 8 years. I am married and have a daughter & son. My wife christina also works full-time in the ministry. We would like to fellowship and connect with your  ministry. Would you please let us know your heart for our nation so that I can share more about my vision and burden of the Ministry. Thank you. !

In Christ,
Pastor Ravi nadava
AWRANGAL INDIA

 

MHFM: Thank you for your e-mail.  It was nice of you to write to us.  However, one must understand that we could only fellowship with those who embrace the one true Church of Christ, the Catholic Church, and the fullness of its traditional teachings.  If you are a minister of a Protestant or non-Catholic "church," it's imperative for you to abandon that ministry and embrace the only Church established by Jesus Christ, the Catholic Church.  Belonging to the Catholic Church is necessary for salvation.  We strongly encourage you to consult the material on our website in this regard; for one cannot save his soul as a non-Catholic minister.

 

Shocked by truth

 

Dear Brothers,

 

I have spent hours reading your website. I am shocked at the imposter Sr Lucy. The photographs sold me. While I still have problems with the 911 conspiracies, You are correct with every assertion on your website. This is life changing. I do not drive a car due to a slip and fall. I am forced to go to the local Novus Ordo parish on an electric scooter. How can I just stay home? All I have is the Tridentine Mass on video. I agree completely about EWTN. Thank you for clearing up all of the confusion surrounding the Consecration… I am so confused and sick at heart that I am totally overwhelmed by all of this truth. No one will ever believe me. Not that I care now. I just feel so "out in the cold."

 

Nancy M Finch

 

MHFM: Nancy, we’re glad to hear about your interest, but you MUST GET OUT OF THE NEW MASS!  It’s an invalid Protestant service: The Invalid New Mass.  Not only is there no obligation to go, but you have a positive obligation under pain of mortal sin not to go.  There were many Catholics in history who had nowhere to go to Mass.  Popes put cities under interdict at times and the sacraments couldn’t be administered there.  Japanese Catholics were without the Mass for many decades.  Many other examples could be given.  There is no obligation to attend Mass on Sunday if the Church doesn’t provide you with a fully Catholic one in your area.  People need to realize that the Catholic faith is more than showing up at a building on Sundays – especially an invalid Protestant service which one must avoid under pain of grave sin.

 

Dear Brothers Dimond,

 

No need to reply to all of my previous e-mails. I continue to methodically review all of your meticulous research work. I know beyond all doubt that Our Blessed Mother Mary brought me to your website. It was no accident and I intend to go to Confession to my Pastor ordained validly in 1957 and remain in a state of grace. This is my greatest concern. I will have to stay home and no longer attend daily and Sunday Mass in the Novus Ordo. I have no way to attend a Latin Mass that is valid; I doubt that there is one. I have my Grandmothers St Joseph Sunday Missal that is Pre-Vatican II... Thank You for your website. I will order your series when I can afford to do so. I will support you in prayer and financially as I begin to work full time again. You have saved my soul. May Almighty GOD reward you abundantly. I literally had no idea what I was doing and that the Chair of Peter has been empty since 1958…

 

Nancy M Finch

North Palm Beach, FL

 

MHFM: That’s great to hear.

 

Benedict XVI’s heresy on religious liberty

 

MHFM: If you haven’t seen it yet, make sure to check out the Heresy of the Week for this week.  It’s truly outrageous heresy from Benedict XVI on religious liberty.

 

Reader shares an interesting story against baptism of desire

 

I wanted, also, to take this opportunity to thank you and Most Holy Family Monastery for all the years of textbook training your publications and videos, and too your DVDs and other literature, have provided.  For the great majority of us, there has been no other source.  Not only is the “Pulpit” silent on Catholic dogmatic truth, to a great degree, but the parish book stores have nothing.  I, admittedly, have used a great deal of your research material in my letters…

 

There is a side story to my letter to Bishop Pivarunas that you must know about.  In typing up my first draft from the “chicken scratch” it took me several days to compile, there was something very miraculous that took place.  About two days before, I had said a fervent prayer to the Holy Ghost to somehow show me that my theology on “baptism of desire” was correct.  Well, when I typed my way to page three, paragraph three, and proceeded to type in WITH NO EXCEPTIONS, the underscoring lines automatically typed in at the very same time!  This is totally impossible to do on any electric typewriter.  One must go back and set the underscoring key and hit it for each letter and space that you want underlined.  I sat back for a few moments in great awe but then remembered my prayer just a short time before.  I thanked and praised God for His answer as I do now each time I reread this letter.  Please share this with others…

 

Sincerely in the Faith,

 

Robert B. Mann

 

Baptism of Desire heretic P.W.

 

MHFM: Heretics are truly pathetic.  We don’t have the time to refute all of their attacks, simply because there are so many of them and most of them aren’t worth the time.  Most importantly, the attacks almost always rehash things that have already been addressed and refuted by our material.  That’s the case with a person named P.W. and his “proofs” of baptism of desire.  P.W. recently made this argument.  He actually thinks that it proves that the Catholic Church teaches baptism of desire. 

 

P.W. writes: “My first condemnation on your theory of Baptism of Desire lies in the fact that St. Augustine has already upheld this to be a fact and even gives an example of such by stating that if a person were to become a catechumen and had vowed to become a Catholic, he would be saved if some unforeseen event prevented him from doing so, and baptism would be supplied by desire… I take this opportunity to make you aware of the paramount importance of the writings and teachings of the Doctors of the Church which are upheld in the decrees of the Magisterium. What the Doctors teach we are obliged to obey as they have been sanctioned by the Church.”

 

This is the “quality” of argument that these people make.  It’s pathetic.  All of their arguments are addressed and refuted in detail in the book: Outside the Catholic Church There is Absolutely No Salvation [pdf file].  This book contains a section on St. Augustine, by the way, with numerous citations of his views on the baptism issue.  The argument quoted above from P.W. is so ridiculous, in fact, that only one who is utterly dishonest to his core could actually think that it “condemns” the position that there is no baptism of desire.  For even if St. Augustine had been consistently categorical that there is a baptism of desire (which he was not, as we will see), he’s only a saint and a doctor of the Church.  He’s not the magisterium.  The teaching of doctors of the Church is not binding, P.W.  Try to get that through your heretical skull.  If it were binding then the Catholic Church contradicted itself on baptism of desire, since St. Gregory Nazienzen (another doctor) explicitly denied the idea.  The fact that P.W. has been made aware of these facts and still makes these false arguments simply reveals that he possesses a bad will that is truly diabolical.

 

Pope Benedict XIV, Apostolica (# 6), June 26, 1749: “The Church’s judgment is preferable to that of a Doctor renowned for his holiness and teaching.”[26]

 

Read this one, weep and convert, P.W.

 

Errors of the Jansenists, #30: “When anyone finds a doctrine clearly established in Augustine, he can absolutely hold it and teach it, disregarding any bull of the pope.”- Condemned by Pope Alexander VIII[27]

 

Since P.W. has already been made aware of this particular error of the Jansenists (he has read our book in which it is quoted), he is therefore outside the Church for obstinately advocating the position condemned in it.  He is obstinately asserting that something said by St. Augustine proves that theological position and makes one “obliged to obey” it.  That is condemned.  So much for the fact that St. Augustine also wrote an entire book of corrections. 

 

Pope Pius XII, Humani generis (# 21), Aug. 12, 1950: “This deposit of faith our Divine Redeemer has given for authentic interpretation not to each of the faithful, not even to theologians, but only to the Teaching Authority of the Church.’”[28]

 

Second, as pointed out in our book (which refutes all the objections), St. Augustine wavered on this issue and also taught against the concept of baptism of desire many times:

 

St. Augustine, 391: “When we shall have come into His [God’s] sight, we shall behold the equity of God’s justice.  Then no one will say:… ‘Why was this man led by God’s direction to be baptized, while that man, though he lived properly as a catechumen, was killed in a sudden disaster, and was not baptized?Look for rewards, and you will find nothing except punishments.”[29]

 

Here we see St. Augustine completely rejecting the concept of baptism of desire.  He says that God keeps sincere catechumens alive until their baptism, and that those who look for rewards in such unbaptized catechumens will find nothing but punishments!  St. Augustine even makes it a special point to affirm that the Almighty doesn’t allow unbaptized catechumens (i.e. those who desire baptism) to be killed except for a reason!  Those who say that St. Augustine held to baptism of desire are, therefore, simply not being complete with the facts.  They must add the qualification that he also rejected the idea and was on both sides of the issue.  And in the early Church St. Augustine was the only father that the baptism of desire advocates can quote who stated that a catechumen could be saved by his desire for baptism.  The one father they can quote for the concept of baptism of desire was on both sides of that issue. The rest were against the idea that unbaptized catechumens could be saved.  Moreover, the practice of the Church forbade burial to such unbaptized catechumens. 

 

St. Augustine: “However much progress the catechumen should make, he still carries the load of his iniquity: nor is it removed from him unless he comes to Baptism.”[30]

 

Further and most importantly, none of the baptism of desire advocates have any response to any of the dogmatic arguments which contradict baptism of desire, such as the Church’s infallibly literal understanding of John 3:5 as it is written.  That’s simply because there is no response.  So not only do doctors of the Church uphold the necessity of water baptism against baptism of desire; but, most importantly, the dogmatic teaching of the Church is definitive.  Hence, we can see that in his very first attempted argument in favor of baptism of desire, P.W. has fallen flatly on his face.  He not only put forward an argument that 1) we’ve refuted in depth in our book; but 2) that has been condemned by Pope Alexander VIII; and 3) which dismisses the complete record of St. Augustine’s other statements against the concept of baptism of desire; and 4) which remains oblivious to the fact that many other doctors of the Church (most explicitly St. Gregory Nazienzen) made statements which contradict baptism of desire.   Truly pathetic heretics and obstinate liars, they will find out in Hell just how wrong and deceived they are unless they convert beforehand.

 

Strange “Mass” and Judaism

 

Dear MHFM,

 

I am pleased to have found your website just recently. I was raised Catholic, and remember how strange the “new” mass was to my mother, sisters and me. My mother, having had a longer time in the true Church, suffered a great deal from the changes and was quite confused by them. I think she found little help from our parish priest when speaking to him about her “uncomfortable-ness” with the changes. I think she sensed their invalid nature, but, struggled with her belief from then on—truly, a shame, as she  was/is loved for not only being a wonderful mother, but for also raising me in the faith; the faith I wish to return to. My sisters and I strayed from Church attendance for many years. I have just recently been frightened by what I have learned about the “End Times”, and am desperately trying to understand so much. What little I have been able to read on your website is helping me to understand the pathetic changes in the world today (wrong being right, right being wrong, the move to one world order, the plethora of moral degradation, the socialism overtaking our country) and I will continue to study from it, and will probably e-mail often with questions I hope you’ll have the time and patience to answer. I desperately need to return, in earnest, to my faith. You have helped me to understand the strange, new mass that has always made us feel uncomfortable.  The most pressing question at this time is why did God choose that Jesus come to the earth as a Jew, if the Jewish faith is not valid? We hear over and over that the Jews are the “apple of God’s eye”.  Thank you for your time and thank you for your website.

 

Sincerely, Marcia

 

MHFM: Thanks for the interest.  The Jewish faith, the one true faith in the Old Testament, pointed forward toward its Messiah: Jesus Christ.  When Jesus came, He fulfilled the Jewish religion and instituted a new and eternal covenant centered around Him.  The religion of Jesus and His Church are that to which the Old Testament pointed forward.  So, when Jesus came those prescriptions of the Old Testament were set aside. Hence, the true faith of the Old Testament continued with all those who accepted the Messiah and His Church.  Those who continued to practice the Old Testament religion (while rejecting the Messiah and His Church) ceased to be the people of God.  The Church replaced the Jews as the people of God.  That’s why St. Paul calls the Church “the Israel of God” (Galatians 6:16).  To put it another way, all the true believers and followers of God (e.g., Abraham, Moses, Daniel, etc.) would be Catholics if they were alive today.  Those who continue to practice Judaism are practicing a false religion which missed its Messiah and has thus ceased to represent the people of God or “the apple of God’s eye.”  Judaism is no longer the true religion because when the Messiah came Judaism became Catholicism.

 

In fact, the idea that the Jews (even though they reject the Church of the Messiah) are still the “apple of God’s eye” is one of the most heinous errors in the world today.  It comes from Judaizing evangelical Protestant heretics who totally pervert the message of Scripture.  It’s one big reason why Jewish lobbies have been able to garner so much influence.  (The Jewish media will make sure to promote, assist, cover and feature Protestant preachers who are pro-Israel.)  St. Paul makes it clear that the children of Abraham are those who accept Jesus Christ (Galatians 3).  Those who do not accept Him are not the true children of Abraham, even though they might be according to the flesh.  That’s why, as stated above, the Bible teaches that the Church has replaced the Jews as the people of God and the spiritual Israel (Galatians 6:16).  Therefore, the Jews who reject Christ are no different from any other group following a false religion.  They are not the people of God.  The idea that God confers special blessings on a group which completely rejects Him and has ceased to be His Israel – and that He will even look unfavorably upon those who don’t make an effort to help them acquire land so that they can have a country of Christ-rejecters – is an abomination beyond words.  The heretics who promote this will receive a very grave punishment in Hell indeed.

 

Mary as Mother of God

 

Dear Brothers,

 

When I was a little boy seven decades ago I was taught by the Catholic Nuns this prayer from the catechism  "God always was, is now and ever shall be, world without end Amen"  It truly incredible how you can recall these prayers from childhood.  How then is it possible for you to believe that the Virgin Mary is the Mother of God?  I believe now that she was the Mother of Jesus's humanity.

 

Furthermore how is that Mary is claimed by the Catholic Church to be the Immaculate Conception, whereby she exclaims in Luke 1:46-47: And Mary said "My soul exalts the Lord, and my spirit rejoiced in God my Savior"  If she was indeed the Immaculate Conception and as the church teaches was given a "dispensation from sin", she then would have had no need of a Savior.  Sacred Scripture doesn't address this issue. This appears to be a contradiction between Scripture and Sacred Tradition. I would truly like to hear your apologetics in explaining this to me.

 

Respectfully submitted,

Thomas Ross .

 

MHFM: It’s a fact that Mary is the Mother of Jesus.  The Bible says so.  It’s a fact that Jesus is God.  Therefore, it logically follows that Mary is the Mother of God.  Jesus Christ is only one divine person with two natures.  He is not two persons.  So, even though Mary gave birth to His human nature, she gave birth to God who is truly a man.  She gave birth to God whose human and divine natures are inseparably united in one person.  To hold what you are holding, that Mary is not the Mother of God, is to divide Christ into two persons – a human person and a divine person.  It is precisely the Nestorian heresy that was condemned by the Council of Ephesus in 431, which held that Jesus is two persons. 

 

Regarding your statement that Mary couldn’t have been immaculately conceived because then God wouldn’t have been her savior, that’s not true at all.  God can save a person either by freeing that person who has contracted sin from the state of sin or by preventing that person (as He did only in the case of His mother) from contracting it.  In both ways He is the savior of that person.  It’s just like a doctor who can prescribe a remedy that will save a person from illness or prescribe one in advance that will prevent a person from contracting it.  In both ways he is saving that person from illness.  It was in the latter way that He saved Mary.  Further, the truths about Mary which Protestants reject are clear if one understands the deeper truths that Scripture teaches.  One must understand that Mary is clearly presented in Sacred Scripture as the new Eve and as the Ark of the New Testament.  The Ark of the Old Testament had tremendous powers over God’s enemies, housed the words of God and was made with the purest gold with no stain of alloy.  The new Ark, being that much greater, has tremendous powers over God’s enemies, housed the Word of God Himself in her womb (Jesus) and had to be conceived completely pure and without sin.  That’s why she says she is “full of grace” (Lk. 1).  This is developed in more detail on pages 47 and following of the Padre Pio book online [pdf file, takes 1-2 minutes to load].

 

Miraculous Image?

 

Bros. Dimond:
 
I feel like I ought to e-mail you.  Pray for my faith to be strengthened.
 
I'm 52, a Euromutt male, native of the Seattle area.  My background is...well, if I ever find a valid priest, my first confession is going to take a long time.  I have no hope of making a good one right off, for even though I have no criminal record there is still just too much.  The videos on your website are...most convincing.  I've learned the Hail Mary and the Our Father.  15 decades of the Rosary is...I'm working on it.
 
The other day, the sky was blue...except for the chemtrails being laid down.  There was one straight overhead, north-to-south.  I was standing out in the open.  I asked for...guidance.  Then I looked up.
 
There, in the chemtrail, was the most terrifying thing I have ever seen.  It was an image of The Virgin, formed in the chemtrail, extending from head to foot across about 1/5 of the sky, with her head toward the south and feet to the north, in a pose of grace; she looked like the very beautiful image in wood carvings on sale at the gift shop of the monastery at Ettal, Germany when I visited in 1994; her face was at the zenith or just slightly to the north of it, looking straight at me.  The barium streamers coming off the main chemtrail, falling away from the image, looked very much like the "flames" radiating from the Virgin of Guadalupe, except there was no color, i.e. the whole thing was white-with-shadows-on-blue like clouds.
 
To say that I was stunned, would be an understatement.  I was unable to bear looking at Her visage, but was riveted, unable to look away or move for about a second, with her looking straight at me, then I had to look away--I just could not bear it, and when I looked back again it was just an ordinary chemtrail.
 
I really don't know what more to say, except, it scared hell out of me.  And now I must get back to learning my 15 decades...
 
Philip

 

MHFM: That might have been a special grace for you to let you know that you are moving along the right path and that you need to continue with it.  We hope you continue your progress.  But when you go, you need to make a good confession.  Making a sacrilegious one won’t help you.

 

Novus Ordo baptisms

 

Dear Most Holy Family Monastery,

 

First of all, I wish to say how informative and useful I find your website.  As a convert from the Protestant religion, I was able to recognise the Novus Ordo church as simply a modern form of Protestant heresy.  However, your website has given me great help in realising how this happened and in explaining the sedevacantist position, which I now embrace (I should note that there are quite a number of sedevacantists within the SSPX in the United Kingdom)

 

 I am therefore hoping you can give me some advice on the difficult situation I now find myself in.  My cousin is due to be baptised in a Novus Ordo Church.  I now refuse to attend any non-Catholic services but there will be no 'Mass' at this baptism.  Since a baptism is valid even if administered by a heretic, and not attending may be considered a sign that I am against the baptism itself, would it be permissible, under Catholic Law, to attend this baptismal?

 

Many thanks for any reply.

 

Yours in Christus et Maria,

 

Scott George McCombe

 

MHFM: Thanks for the words about the website.  To your question, you definitely should not go to the baptism.  Not attending it will be considered a sign that you are against the Novus Ordo and having one brought up in the Novus Ordo.  Going would be a sign that you are in some way celebrating a person being baptized to eventually partake in the Novus Ordo.  Further, anyone who would inquire about your absence (presumably close friends and family) should already know why you are not attending because hopefully you’ve made it clear to them.  If they do not yet know, then you should explain it to them. 

 

Hi,  I recently attended a Novus Ordo Baptism where the presiding Priest added the word "Amen" at the end of the Trinitarian formula.  Would this addition invalidate the Sacrament?

 

MHFM: No, it wouldn’t invalidate the baptism; but you should not have gone to it, as explained above.

 

Israeli mauling

 

Dear Dimond Brothers:

 

Below is a link to an article about a recent Isreali attack against a Palestinian farming village.

 

http://judicial-inc.biz/9_30.israel_mauls_a_farming_village.htm

 

It is quite possible that these attacks are part of an unofficial policy to perpetuate violence against the State of Isreal in order to justify the expansion of Jewish power and control in the middle east.  The worst part about this policy is that innocent people have to die in the process.  This behavior is consistent with Judaism's most "sacred" book, the Babylonian Talmud, which, as you may be aware, teaches that non-jews are sub-human and, therefore, should be treated like cattle.

 

-John.

 

MHFM: Well, it certainly seems like America’s foreign policy is to keep Israel’s enemies in check so that Israel can eventually become the sole power in the Middle East.

 

Insanity

 

I just visited your site, and was reading the sections on heresies of the popes. 

 

Normaly, I'm not inclined to even dignify such obviously biesed remarks with a response, but to state that John Paul II was a heritic is both unchristian and moronic.  The man was a great follower of christ.  There was so much crap in those articles that I cant even think of where to begin arguing my points against it.  Please, if you are honest christians, stop attacking great holy men and start being christians.  Sitting around discrediting someone who did so much good in the name of god is not christian.  Its stupid and unkind.  Do something helpful, like feed the poor, or fight abortion, not holy men.

 

Kuru…

 

MHFM: We’re at a loss for words to describe your e-mail.  Knowing the Catholic faith and also what John Paul II taught, it’s difficult to express how diametrically opposed what you have said is to the facts and to the truth.  It demonstrates that you are alien to any traditional Catholic reality and any concept of the Catholic faith of twenty centuries.  Any sane and honest person can look at the undeniable mountain of evidence of the heresy and apostasy of John Paul II in this file: John Paul II (manifest heretic who claimed to be pope 1978-2005) and can see that it’s not those who recognize the obvious who are moronic, but those who defend clearly one of the worst heretics in history who made a career of spreading religious indifferentism and trampling upon Catholic truth. 

 

Also, it’s interesting that you close your e-mail by stating that we should feed the poor and fight abortion.  You obviously dismiss all the teachings of Jesus Christ on the faith, on His person, the dogmas, etc.  This is because you are a humanist and nothing more.  That’s why you love and defend Antipope John Paul II, who promoted the worship of man.  You have no faith in the dogmas of divine revelation and so Antipope John Paul II was just your kind of heretic.

 

Confused

 

Hi, my name is Terese and I was born and raised in the Catholic Church in Norfolk, NE.  When doing some research on the internet I came across your website and began reading it.  I am very confused about the Vatican ll problems that I read about.  I was born and baptized in 1960.  Does all this that you are saying about the heresies of Vatican ll mean that I am not truly Catholic.  My Grandmother was Catholic all her life and was very religious and followed all the Catholic teachings.  She never mentioned that after Vatican ll, there was any kind of change in the mass.  Does this mean that she didn't notice it or that she believed it must be ok if the Vatican approved it, or is the Catholic Church in my area is still doing the old mass?  I grew up believing that I would be saved because I was baptized in the Catholic Church and follow it's teachings, is this not true?  Please help me to understand just what I need to do.  According to your writings my whole life has been a lie.  Can you please help me??

 

Thank You,

 

Terese

 

MHFM: Terese, we're very glad to hear about your interest.  God definitely wanted you to come across this information about the traditional Catholic faith and the fraud of the Vatican II Church.  Yes, we are unfortunately living in unique times.  The post-Vatican II Church is not the Catholic Church.  It's a clever counterfeit of the Devil, which has been predicted (in Catholic prophecy and Sacred Scripture) to arise in the last days as the final spiritual tribulation of mankind.  This false “Church” has a new Protestantized "Mass," which has changed the words of consecration and does not confect the Sacrament of the Holy Eucharist validly.  It teaches people a general religious indifferentism which accepts false religions and rejects the defined Catholic dogma Outside the Church There is No Salvation.  Those who have imbibed this new kind of Catholicism, one must say, do not possess the true and traditional Catholic faith.  For you, it's necessary to embrace the traditional Catholic faith and all its dogmas, get out of the invalid New Mass and reject this false Vatican II Church.  Pray the Rosary every day, all 15 decades if possible, and you will see this is the truth.  You cannot be saved in the Vatican II Church or if you continue to go to the New Mass.  Regarding your grandmother, the sad fact is that most of those who claim to be Catholic and even conservative and "devout" (we've talked to so many) are actually ignorant of the traditional Catholic faith.  Most of them don't understand the Papacy, Papal Infallibility, dogma, magisterium - a basic knowledge of Catholic history and key historical pronouncements of the Church on faith.  They generally don’t know these things because they haven’t put out the effort to acquire a basic knowledge of these matters, which is crucial for people to have in order to preserve the faith and identify false doctrines so that they can reject them.  The information on our website should answer most of your questions.  There is a traditional profession of faith from the Council of Trent which we point out that all people coming out of the New Mass should make.  It's in the red section about 3/4 down our site which is entitled: "Steps to convert… and for those leaving the New Mass."

 

You are not alone.  We are contacted all the time by professing Catholics just like yourself who are new to the information because all they have known is the post-Vatican II Church.  But, as they learn more, they see that the post-Vatican II Church is not Catholic and how it has robbed millions of the traditional Catholic faith and morality.

 

Hurtful?

 

Dear Brothers,

I have just spent several hours reading your articles that were linked through a Home Business web site.

As a Catholic Christian, I am compelled by Our Lord to accept your beliefs and interpretations about the Church.  However, I simply cannot understand, or embrace them. They were troubling to read and caused me to feel such pain that I felt the need to write to you.

I am an excloistered Franciscan Friar. Leaving community to serve Christ in a special way was a joint decision between my superiors and myself. I am an adoptive father of three special needs sons. I also work with special needs children in my apostolate as a teacher.

The boys enjoy our frequent Sunday dinners at my "home" friary, and the brothers are enlightened as we discuss the daily struggles of a single parent, and of a parent with special needs children.  I cannot tell you how spiritually rewarding my mission is. It is certainly unique in reference to your community's beliefs.

I was so disheartened to read of your willingness to move foward with the church. I cannot help but believe that Jesus would not have wanted our church to remain stagnant, unrefreshed and living in the middle ages.
I find it interesting that, even though your thoughts are in the past, you use ultra modern ways to commuicate them.

I was extremely hurt to read of your beliefs that every Pope who embraced Vatican II has been branded a heretic.  I was extremely hurt to read of your beliefs that modern day saints as Mother Teresa and John Paul II have been branded, by you, as apostasies.

I know that this letter will not change your beliefs, any more than reading your articles has strengthened mine. But,  I have shared with you the beauty of a modern day mission, and how your words are so personally painful to me. My only other thought and prayer is that your articles as you promulgate them will not cause any young person to leave the church or to move towards your beliefs.

No, they do not worship the Holy Father, they show exhuberance for the Presence of the Spirit, as felt in the presence of a "holy person" who represents Christ, not only as His Vicar, but also as all the Pope represents.
Should Paul VI have sold the papal tiara ? Yes, and I feel all the collected treasures and holdings of the Vatican were to be sold ... can you imagine the amount of simple water we could put into the mouths of starving children ?

My brothers in Christ, please accept my prayers, as I ask for yours.

Br. Michael ofm-ecl. +

 

MHFM: Yes, to those who are resisting the truth and the import of God’s Word, the truth comes across as hurtful.  But to those who want and value God’s message, the truth is and should be liberating.  The question you need to ask yourself is not: is this hurtful/does this shake my confidence in people I thought were good and holy?  The question you need to ask yourself is: is this information true and consistent with Catholic teaching?  Did Mother Teresa actually endorse and encourage false religions?  The answer is yes, as we prove here:  The Religious Orders in the Vatican II sect: Totally Apostate [PDF File].  Is that apostasy and a mortal sin against Catholic teaching?  The answer is yes. 

 

 

In the picture on the left we see Mother Teresa worshipping Buddha in 1975.  In the left corner of the left side of that picture she is kneeling.  In the other picture we see Mother Teresa venerating the Hindu Gandhi.

 

Did Vatican II teach heresy?  The answer is yes: Vatican II - false council.  Those are the questions you need to ask yourself; forgo the sentimental nonsense.  God made Hell and made it eternal because His truth and law matter.  These matters of Catholic faith are very serious.

 

Regarding your complaint that the Church should move forward, the idea that the Church changes its message or its teaching according to the advancement of time has been condemned. 

Pope Pius IX, First Vatican Council, Session 3, Chap. 4, Canon 3:
"If anyone says that it is possible that at some time, given the advancement of knowledge, a sense may be assigned to the dogmas propounded by the church which is different from that which the Church has understood and understands: let him be anathema."

Pope Pius IX, First Vatican Council, Session 3, Chap. 4, on the true progress of knowledge: "For, the doctrine of faith which God revealed has not been handed down as a philosophic invention to the human mind to be perfected, but has been entrusted as a divine deposit to the Spouse of Christ, to be faithfully guarded and infallibly interpreted."

Pope Pius IX, First Vatican Council, Session 4, Chap. 4:
"For, the Holy Ghost was not promised to the successors of Peter that by His revelation they might disclose new doctrine, but that by His help they might guard sacredly the revelation transmitted through the apostles and the deposit of faith, and might faithfully set it forth."

Pope St. Pius X, Pascendi Dominic Gregis (# 26), Sept. 8, 1907, Condemning the doctrine of the Modernists: "To the laws of evolution everything is subject - dogma, Church, worship, the Books we revere as sacred, even faith itself, and the penalty of disobedience is death. The enunciation of this principle will not astonish anybody who bears in mind what the Modernists have had to say about each of these subjects."

Our use of modern means of communication to spread that unchanging message is drastically different from changing the message itself.  So your analogy doesn’t work.

 

Buddhist scandal

 

Thank you for that recent news Post titled, "Catholic" Univ. of San Diego Conf. will feature Buddhist monk and pro-abort

I am a 1986 graduate of that institution of "fashionable Catholicism" and I can unequivocally state there is no substance of true Catholicism there. The only indicator of its once Catholic Heritage is the religious iconography that still dots the  landscape.  Ironically, the San Diego Diocesan headquarters is  located on campus. Or maybe this is not ironic.

This posting stirred up a rather unpleasant memory that I hold of their fake catholism. I had a Spanish professor who was the most brilliant academian and individual I have ever known. One day, he took an opportunity in our Spanish II class to expose the abortion agenda with a lecture. It wasn't long after this that the University began to discipline, ostracize and  to apply subterfuge to him until they found cause to terminate him. So much for academic freedom. I am sure all you Notre Dame and Boston College graduates of good conscience can identify with similar hypocrisy…

 

Bill Burns
Fredonia, New York

 

Judging Benedict XVI

 

Dear Brothers,

 

First, I want to thank you for all of your hard work and dedication to the true Catholic faith. Through the information on your site God has led us out of the novus or do and back to the true Church. I was hoping to get your thoughts on the following issue.

 My family attends the local SSPX Mass so that we can receive the Sacraments. Whenever the opportunity arises I let people know that I don't believe in any salvation outside the Church, Baptism of desire, or Benedict being the pope. However, whenever I come to Benedict not being the pope they all respond the same way. They all argue that it is not for us to decide whether or not he is a heretic or an anti-pope. They all agree that he is terrible but they still hold their ground that it is for the Church to condemn him as a heretic, not us as individuals. And that God doesn't expect to know for certain whether or not Benedict is an anti pope. I am never quite sure how to respond to this. Could you please help?  Also, in your opinion do you think someone who believes in absolutely no salvation outside the Church, no baptism of desire, or any other false teaching, but refuses to say whether or not Benedict XVI is an anti pope or not, can get to heaven? Just curious. Thanks again for your time and all your hard work. Your in our prayers. God Bless

 

MHFM: To your last question first, the answer is no.  One who has seen and digested all the evidence against Benedict XVI, and obstinately refuses to say that he is not the pope after having had time to digest the information, is demonstrating bad will and heresy.  In canon law, six months is a period of time mentioned after which those who are suspected of heresy and persist in the cause which makes them suspect of it are considered heretics.  The evidence against Benedict XVI is so clear that to affirm that he can be considered Catholic, after having seen the facts presented in our material, is simply to deny the Catholic faith.  It is to lie and to assert that a person can utterly reject numerous dogmas and still be a Catholic.  That is a mortal sin against the faith.  Such a person is denying the dogma that heretics are not members of the Church of Jesus Christ.  For instance, it is documented in our material that Benedict XVI repeatedly states that the leaders of “Orthodox” schismatic sects are “pastors in the Church of Christ.”  If a person knows that and denies that it proves Benedict XVI to be a heretic, he is asserting that one can regard the “Orthodox” schismatic leaders as in the Church of Christ.  That means he is asserting that one can hold that it’s okay not only to join the Orthodox schismatic sect (which denies Vatican I) and still be Catholic, but that one can lead it and still not be guilty of heresy!  That’s what those who obstinately refuse to say that Benedict XVI is outside the Church are saying.  Further, Benedict XVI holds, as we prove, that Protestantism is not heresy, that non-Catholics can receive Communion, that Protestants don’t need conversion, that false religions are good (basically weekly, as our Heresy of the Week proves).  It’s as clear that he’s a heretic as it is that John Kerry or Rudy Giuliani are heretics.  So, a person aware of these facts who refuses to consider him a heretic is a person with no faith.  He is unable to distinguish between a true believer and a non-believer.  His Church is not visible and has no unity of faith, for in his false Church there is no way of distinguishing between Catholics who accept the rule of Catholic faith and heretics who manifestly reject it.

 

In regard to your question about the obligation to judge Antipope Benedict XVI, we have written on this matter.  The responses to Objections 2, 3 and 7 in this file deal with the issue of judgment, but the one you want to look at is called: The Devastating Dilemma.  It starts in Objection 11, labelled as page 322 of this file: Responses to 19 of the Most Common Objections Against Sedevacantism [PDF file].  This is very important, for it proves that those who refuse to regard Benedict XVI as a heretic – even though his actions and words clearly prove he is – cannot consider any other professing “Catholic” a heretic.  They cannot denounce the pro-abortion John Kerry as a heretic, nor the radical modernist Hans Kung, nor Rudy Giuliani, etc.  They would have to admit that, for example, a man who claims to be Catholic, but says that the Council of Trent doesn’t bind him, must be considered a Catholic.  But that’s a mortal sin against the faith, and that’s why those who obstinately use that argument are mortal sinners against the faith.  That’s proven in the Devastating Dilemma, and we recommend that you drive that point home when discussing this matter with those who hold the “no one can judge” false position.  Also, if they cannot judge Benedict XVI as a heretic, then the people at the SSPX have no right to be leaving the diocesan structure under Benedict XVI and going to a completely independent chapel of the SSPX.  If they cannot judge, they must go back to the diocesan chapel and accept its religion.  But no.  They judge when they want to judge.  That’s what this file shows: The File on the Positions of the Society of St. Pius X   [PDF file].

 

Heretical Novus Ordo priest

 

Good Morning Brothers,

 

I have just finished a long discussion with a validly–ordained, yet fully Novus Ordo priest. Although he presents himself as conservative, he is extremely “new age”, liberal (‘Pierre Teilhard de Chardin is one of his favorites’).

 

UNBELIEVABLE:

During the discussion, according to him, when Scripture refers to our Lord’s “brothers”, “The most logical explanation is that it is referring to children St. Joseph had from a previous marriage.”

 

You do not have to be Catholic to attain salvation.  Praying with pagans, heretics, schismatics, and idolaters was OK because you are praying for a common cause (referencing Assisi)  “Placing a “buddha” on top of a tabernacle is OK if the Blessed Sacrament is not inside.”  “Most people are going to Heaven, not just Catholics”  “A man came to me that was extremely distressed. He was trying to follow the “Spiritual Exercises” and I told him to forget that stuff and loosen-up.” When asked why he didn't offered another structured spiritual practice such as “True Devotion”, he stated, “That was used in the past and I don’t believe in a step one, step two, step three type of approach to spirituality.”

 

He referred to me as being like the Pharisees – stiff and not having love.

 

MHFM: Yes… interesting e-mail… That’s basically what you will hear from almost all the diocesan “priests.”  Examining what’s believed at the local/parish level, as you have done and as we’ve done extensively in our book and material, is extremely revealing about the true malice of Vatican II and the Counter Church.  It’s also extremely revealing about why the salvation dogma – adhering to Outside the Church There is No Salvation without any exceptions – is so critical.  What you encountered in that priest is why Antipope Benedict XVI could afford to give back the Latin Mass at this late stage of the Great Apostasy.  Not only are almost all the priests invalid, but the few who are valid (such as the one you spoke with) are blatant promoters of heresy and apostasy.  Since this is unfortunately imbibed by the Counter Church, it doesn’t matter what Mass they have. 

 

Padres’ collapse

 

I enjoyed your analysis of the Padres’ playoff collapse.  I thought it very insightful.  I loved baseball as a child when I was a Phillies fan; and I was sort of following it out of the corner of my eye this year.  While I remembered your original post on San Diego’s Gay Pride Night, and while I knew the Padres had lost a heart breaking playoff against the Rockies, I hadn’t made the connection which you make seem obvious!

 

I forwarded copies of this post to people whom I ordinarily would not try to interest in the purely dogmatic arguments.  Unfortunately, stories like this are the only ones that seem to interest so many.  In my introduction I gave a brief summary of who you guys are.  I told my recipients that you are traditional Catholics who reject the new mass (briefly defining the “new” mass for younger recipients) and the Vatican II reforms.  I’m interested to see if anyone will be interested.

 

Bill Mulligan    

 

Appalling?

 

I just wanted to let you know that your extreme fundamentalism is disturbing to say the very least. The close-mindedness of your website is appalling.  It's people like you that have led me to denounce Christianity as a false religion much like you claim that every other religion is false.  The slander with which you write reminds me of being back in middle school.  Grow up.  We're all humans which must mean that someone put us here.  Logically the same God that created Jews and Muslims created Christians so what is your problem with either of those religions?  You even go as far as to say that Islam is a product of the "devil".  It concerns me when Christianity does nothing but talk down on every other religion while Muslims actually mention Christ in the Quaran and believe him to be a prophet.  Was Mohammad ever mentioned in the Bible?  Of course not because Emperor Constantine did a nice little job of leaving out anything controversial when he, in essence, created the Bible. 

In closing, Jesus had some amazingly good ideas about proper ethics that people should live by.  Like many other religions however it appears that you have totally abominated those ethics and morals and perverted any good that can possibly come out of Christianity.  God help you.

I will leave you with this: Mahatma Gandhi is one of the most respected leaders of modern history. A Hindu, Ghandi nevertheless admired Jesus and often quoted from the Sermon on the Mount. Once when the missionary E. Stanley Jones met with Ghandi he asked him, "Mr. Ghandi, though you quote the words of Christ often, why is that you appear to so adamantly reject becoming his follower?"

Ghandi replied, "Oh, I don't reject your Christ. I love your Christ. It's just that so many of you Christians are so unlike your Christ."

 

Bmb…

 

MHFM: A couple of things: First, it’s not we who have declared Islam to be a product of the Devil.  We certainly believe that and know that to be true, but it’s not like we cited ourselves for the position on this matter.  It’s the traditional teaching of the Catholic Church, the one Church founded by Jesus Christ.  It also flows logically from the teaching of the New Testament.

 

Pope Eugene IV, Council of Basel, 1434:

“… there is hope that very many from the abominable sect of Mahomet will be converted to the Catholic faith.”[31]

 

Pope Callixtus III: “I vow to… exalt the true Faith, and to extirpate the diabolical sect of the reprobate and faithless Mahomet [Islam] in the East.”[32]

 

Second, you state that Mohammed was not mentioned in the Bible because Emperor Constantine did a “nice little job” of leaving out anything controversial.  This demonstrates the profound level of confusion under which you presently labor.  Even if we suppose that your ridiculous claim, that Constantine was really responsible for the Bible, is true for the sake of argument, Mohammed couldn’t have been known to Constantine because Mohammed was born in the 6th century and Constantine died in the 4th.  Unless you are prepared to say that the “real” text of the Bible contains prophecies about a future “Mohammed” – something so absurd I doubt you would affirm – then you should see that your argument is utterly false.  Hopefully that should cause you to reassess your rejection of true Christianity.  Hopefully it will cause you to see that it is based on the same nonexistent grounds that the claim we’ve just discussed is. 

 

Further, if Christianity is the true religion (which it is), then of course it would be against those who deny the truth of God.  Of course it would “talk down every other religion.”   Wake up.

 

List of Antipopes

 

Dear Sirs,

 

Do you know of a link to a list anywhere that identifies the names of all the anti-Popes? Thank you for any help you could give me.

 

Horace Andante

 

MHFM: Yes, we have the list of antipopes in our book, The Truth about What Really Happened to the Catholic Church after Vatican II, which we strongly encourage you to obtain.  We also have a list in this file: A complete list of the 42 antipopes in Church history [PDF].  This file can be found on our mainpage.

 

Transgender?

 

i read some of your artivcles on here, i am catholic, went to catholic school.  i am also transgendered. i have felt like that since i was 10.  being gay and  having a gender problem is totlayy diferent. i dont think i was possesed by a evil spirit whn i was 10 . i didn't even know what was  wrong with me for yrs. its a real struggle. you dont know until your in that persons shoes. i went to confusion many times when i was young. and i  was feeling like a girl when i was in catholic school. i would go home and dress and stuff , feeling really confussed , because you dont know what you are… but as  me as a woman , since i was about 12 .  so i guess i  was going to hell since i was 10 according to  you and what  i am reading .  everything your saying has been around for centuries ,  

 

MHFM: You obviously committed an act of apostasy/idolatry in your early years, either through mortal sins of the flesh or worshipping your fellow man some way.  Read Romans 1, that's what happened to you.  You can get out of it if you pray the 15 decade Rosary each day, embrace the traditional Catholic faith, make the profession of faith for converts (when you truly believe) – which repudiates your past heresies – stop committing mortal sins and stop frequenting the occasions of sin, and then (after all that) make a good confession.  But this conversion and your liberation from this spiritual nightmare and grip of evil over you – which God can easily give you and wants to easily give you – won't happen until you stop believing the lie that you've always been this way.  It’s interesting that you mention that this started around 10 years of age.  Well, people reach the age of reason before 10 and so it’s clear that you weren’t this way from the beginning of your age of reason.

 

Also, you mention that such things have been around for a long time.  That’s correct.  That’s because apostasy and mortal sins of the flesh have been around for a long time.  In this short article, we discuss some instances where Catholic missionaries many centuries ago encountered grave problems of homosexuality in different parts of the world.  Guess what?  A major problem with idolatry was also always present: The Idolatry of the Vatican II sect is connected with its rampant homosexuality [PDF File]

 

Nonsense


Hi there, I accidentally stumbled on your website when doing some research into the arguments for and against the existance of God and I have to say that I am absolutely appalled at what I have read on your site.  I have NEVER seen such deep levels of closed mindedness and hatemongering.  Christianity is a religion that is supposed to teach acceptance and peace and you appear to have misconstrued the philosophies found in the bible and used them as an excuse to hate.  This is highly disappointing from a group claiming to be "Most Holy".  Other people are not there to be dispised, converted or hated.  It would be a wonderful world if we could all live in harmony, but you seem adamantly against it. 

I would be very interested to see your reply to this.

Thanks for your time,

Ryan

P.S. I am an atheist, meaning that I do not believe in a god and would certainly not be afraid of hollow threats of my own damnation...

 

MHFM: It’s interesting that you don’t reveal until the end of your e-mail that you’re an atheist.  One would have thought from your words at the beginning, in which you attempt to tell us what Christianity is about, that you claimed to be an adherent of Christianity.  It’s always interesting when atheists try to tell people what Christianity really is and should be.  What outrageous arrogance and stupidity.  You say that Christianity is a religion that’s supposed to teach tolerance.  That shows that you don’t know a thing about true Christianity.  Jesus said many times that unless you accept Him you will perish (e.g., Mark 16:16).  Does that sound tolerant to you?  Christianity is intolerant of falsehood and lies and only accepts those willing to accept the truth.  It doesn’t promote hate or racism or anything of the sort, contrary to what you imply, but it doesn’t tolerate false religions and it teaches that it alone must be accepted as the true religion.  You also err when you say that our group claims to be “Most Holy.”  The “Most Holy” refers to the Most Holy Family (Jesus, Mary and Joseph), after whom our monastery is named.  Similarly, if our monastery were called “Most Holy Trinity Monastery,” the “Most Holy” would refer to the Trinity.  So you have erred in understanding that as well.

 

Interest and a story

 

Dear MHFM-

I have been reading your website with great interest.As a Catholic I have been disturbed at the trends that have developed in the Church for a long time.  What I am about to relate is,in relation to your works (website,books,DVDs,etc),just a minor blip in the entire picture to be sure.  Two years ago,at Christmas Eve Mass at Holy Angels Church in St Thomas,Ontario,Canada we had a visiting priest from the missionary church do the homily.The Father,who's normally "runs" said church was flitting about here and there in the background doing "other" things.  On this most holy of occassions the Church was filled with an assortment of parishioners.I'd say about 35% were children.During the homily the visiting priest was describing the shepherds lot in life at the night of Jesus' birth.He explained the reason the shepherds were not welcomed inside the nearby towns was because they smelled "like sheep [bleep]”.... quote.  You could hear the crowd gasp for a second or two and the priest carried on,never missing a beat.After the service I approached the father who runs the church and expressed my concerns that of on all nights and in front of such a diverse crowd of parishioners (especially the children!), and in a holy place, that this father should use such language was quite offensive not only to us but to God and totally unacceptable.  He basically dismissed what the other father had said,saying  a)he hadn't heard it to begin with b)it was Christmas Eve and c) to go home and enjoy the holidays.  Out I went alright but I have never been the same since.  I eventually wrote the local Bishop.  To make a long reply short,he (of course) backed his priest and explained that what he had said was NOT swearing but  "slang".....nothing to worry about.  That is where it has been left ever since.  I have returned to that Church very little since.And to even attend any Church in the Bishops' jurisdiction has been unbearable.  This is just another example,though I realize very minor in the grand scheme of things,of what you write about.In my case it is 1)bad enough that what was said("sheep…") was said at all,considering the place,the day it was and the people present but to 2) play semantics with me ,try to asuage my feelings and to  cover up an abomination which is so obviously wrong from the local priest to the Bishop....is faith shaking to me,and WRONG! What goes on here?  Just thought you might like to know.  Keep up your diligence.We need it.


Bob Badgley

 

MHFM: We’re really glad to hear about your interest.  Wow, that was really a “prudent pastor” – NOT.  As you continue to read we hope you will come to the conviction that you cannot attend any of the New Masses, no matter if one “priest” or church is more conservative than others: The Invalid New Mass.

 

Debate?

 

Hi,

Your debate with William Golle was excellent, and masterfully organized. You very easily proved the sedevacantist position while destroying the position of Mr. Golle, who is so blind in his refusal to assent to the truth, who has been given over to a reprobate mind because he has not received the love of truth, who was not able to see that he actually lost the discussion, blinded by his pride, and who now flaunts the fact that he debated you thinking that his position achieved the victory; who unfortunately will be lost in his pertinacious heresy. By the way, are you planning on doing another debate, perhaps with someone more credible than Golle, anytime soon, either on the topic of salvation or the Apostasy of Rome?

God Bless,

Leo P.

 

MHFM:  Thank you for your comments.  Golle actually admitted to us recently that we won the debate, even though he still doesn’t agree with us and is as hardened as ever in his bad willed heresies.  He also said that he thinks that most people would think that we won the debate.  Regarding another debate, it doesn’t seem like very many are willing to come on our radio show to debate the issue.  But we’ll see what happens.

 

Mysteries of Light?

 

TO WHOMEVER IT MAY CONCERN:

 

MY QUESTION IS THE FOLLOWING : THE MYSTERIES OF LIGHT , ADDED ON TO THE ROSARY BY POPE JOHN PAUL II , ARE VALID ?

 

ELIZABETH FROM VERACRUZ, MEXICO.

 

MHFM: No, no Catholic should say them as part of the Rosary.  They are not part of the traditional Rosary and they were added by Antipope John Paul II to change the traditional Rosary, just like the Vatican II sect changes everything else.  That is not in any way to suggest that those mysteries in themselves are bad, of course, for everything about Our Lord’s life is good.  But they are not part of the traditional Rosary and shouldn’t be included in it.

 

Eastern “Orthodoxy”

 

Dear Holy Family Monastery,
 
Your web site was a real blessing today.  As I continue to ponder which church to go to.  While reading your letter on Orthodoxy, I got the sudden understanding that I cannot have headmanship in my family unless I have headmanship in my church!  I am not the least bit offended by this.  Our Holy Lady is so good to us!... 
 

In Christ,
 
Felicity

 

Regarding Jewish Power watch

 

http://www.mostholyfamilymonastery.com/Jewish_power_watch.html   I just found this article!!... it is awesomely well done with truth as usual. I was looking for your 9 11 information with a Catholic view. still looking.  

 

Bev

 

Demeaning Antipope John Paul II

 

You shouldn't be demeaning our Popes especially Pope John Paul II.  He will become a Saint soon and you will have to face him one day with all the lies.

 

Bobbie Carlisi

 

MHFM: So, you think that John Paul II was a saint.  Wow, if that isn’t a major sign of the darkness enveloping our world and the Counter Church – the absence of any true concept of the traditional Catholic faith – then we don’t know what is.  John Paul II promoted all the false religions and demonstrated the condemned heresies of false ecumenism and religious indifferentism.  You are a prime example of why God allowed the post-Vatican II apostasy to arise.  You are a prime example of why he allowed antipopes to take over the buildings of the Vatican for this period of the Great Apostasy and bring in an invalid New Mass and invalid new rites.  It’s called bad will: since people don’t want or care about the dogmas of the faith, God allowed this Counter Church with the consequence that the true Catholic Church (which still exists) is reduced to a remnant in the last days.  You obviously don’t believe in or care about the traditional Catholic faith.  Thus, the fact that we prove in tremendous detail that John Paul II was an outrageous heretic and apostate who promoted false religions, held Christ to be meaningless encouraged people to be Jews, etc., etc. (see: John Paul II, manifest heretic who claimed to be pope 1978-2005) obviously doesn’t even faze you.

 

Spiritual devastation in the Caribbean

 

Hi Brothers,
 
I live on a small island in the Caribbean (St.Lucia - 238 sq. miles), which was a very dorminant catholic country 90% to be exact until about 17-20 years ago we got not only the New Rite of the Mass but also an Arch-Bishop who has been promoting this new ecuminism.  To date we are 65% catholic and only a handful of priests to serve.  My problem right now, is that all of the priests attended seminaries since the implementation of the Vatican II council or entered the priest-hood much later than 1968.  The Tabernacle has been moved to the side of the church, the musice is mordern with drums and guitars, people are dancing during the liturgy, communion in the hand, it is just plain simple crazy!!
 
I remember as a child kneeling at the alter-railing to receive communion in the mouth, and the most beautiful thing to me was the tabernacle on the main alter with all the candles and flowers.  All of this has disappeared.  Some of the priests in the various parishes only do confession by appointment or it is being rushed.  After visiting your web-site I realized that I am in a serious situation, who can I turn to?  The priests now wear ordinary clothing, that you wouldn't even know that they were in the priesthood unless you were told so, We have quite a lot of priests from India and Africa, some of whom the locals have difficulty understanding because of their accents.  I don't enjoy going to the loud services and of course they all follow the new mass.  My main reason for going though, is because of the Holy Eucharist.  I don't want to be separated from the Eucharist for it is my strength and my guide, but what do I do now if I am not too attend these services or if the consecration is being done incorrectly?  I have two young daughters, and I don't want them to stray away from the Church of Christ.  The faith is being watered-down, and acts more like a penticostal church than a catholic church with this charismatic chaos.
 
The Arch-Bishop's concern is more about money and the churchs' property than the souls of the people, not too mention I have been told by his grand-niece that he is a member of P2 Masonic Lodge.  Not many of the priests are Marians and the Bishop does not encourage it either.  I need some serious help here!
 
I do Eucharistic Adoration, but yet I feel a hunger for more and was not sure why until I came upon your website.  Please give me some guidance in whatever way you can because I have to find a way around the chaos and confusion.
 
Thanks,
Yours in Christ Jesus
Andrina

 

MHFM: Andrina, it’s great to hear about your interest.  Your e-mail reveals the almost universal devastation wrought by the apostate Vatican II sect (a.ka. the Great Harlot), reaching almost every island and continent.  But you need to understand that the New Mass is not a real Mass and that Our Lord is not present there.  A Catholic cannot attend it under pain of mortal sin, since it’s invalid and Protestant, as we show in this article: The Invalid New Mass.  You need to come to the firm conviction that the Vatican II “Church” is not the Catholic Church and that one cannot be part of it and be an authentic Catholic.  Just stay home on Sundays since the New Mass and “priests” ordained in the invalid New Rite of Ordination seem to be your only option.  There is (of course) no obligation to attend Mass on Sunday if the Church doesn’t provide you with a fully Catholic and valid one in your area.  Once you come to that conviction and accept all the other traditional dogmas of the Church, including Outside the Church There is No Salvation, you should make the profession of faith from the Council of Trent and consult the section of our website about options for confession.  One needs to confess having attended a non-Catholic service and for however long.  And since the priests ordained in the New Rite of Ordination are not valid, you would need to re-confess any sins that might have been mortal and confessed to priests ordained in this new rite.  If you pray the Rosary every day, all 15 decades, and continue to study the material on our website you will come to the firm conviction that this is what a Catholic must do.  

 

Talk about distortion

 

MHFM: A person named Lionel has been writing to us.  He claims to believe in Outside the Church There is No Salvation without exception and then goes on to admit that there are exceptions.  He also claims that Vatican II upholds the absolute necessity of the Catholic faith for salvation.  He claims that Vatican II’s teaching is not heretical against this defined dogma.  We have communicated to Lionel that his position is completely false (as if Vatican II didn’t deny the necessity of the Church) and we have provided him with documentation.  But we present his latest e-mail to demonstrate the profound level of blindness and dishonesty of so many people out there.  It’s another striking case of profound dishonesty begetting incredible spiritual blindness.

 

MHFM WROTE: You are very much a corrupting heretic.

 

LIONEL RESPONDS: I believe that Vatican Council II says that non-Catholic religions are not true religions(Unitatis Reintigratio) and that the Catholic Church is the one true Church. So do you. I believe that the baptism of water and Catholic Faith are needed for all people without exceptions. So do you.  I believe that God can choose to make an exception and you and I do not know who are the exceptions, when we meet non-Catholics. On this point your website shows that you acknowledge the exceptions.  So when I meet a non-Catholic  I assume that he needs Catholic Faith and Baptism to be saved, this is the priority as given to us by Jesus' Great Commission.If a person is saved or has an experience of the Holy Spirit (your reference to the Centurion at the foot of the Cross), or the criminal on the Cross who went into Paradise even though he refused baptism from the Apostles and Disciples, then these exceptions are known only to God.  Our Catholic missionary priority does not change.

 

Notice that Lionel says that we agree with him that Vatican II said that non-Catholic religions are not true and that the Catholic Church is the one true Church.  Huh?  Perhaps Lionel expressed himself poorly in the process of defending his heresies, for we obviously don’t agree that Vatican II affirmed those truths.  The fact is that we document that Vatican II praised the false religions of Buddhism and Hinduism; that shows that Vatican II taught that these false religions are not false, but good.  We also document that Vatican II taught the heresies that members of Protestant sects can be saved and that schismatics and Protestants are part of the one true Church. 

 

Then notice that Lionel lies and says that he agrees with us that there are no exceptions to the necessity of the Catholic faith and water baptism.  In the VERY NEXT sentence, however, he changes his position and says there can be an exception!  He then lies again and says we agree with him.  Wow.  He continues by quoting us and then adds more heresy:

  

MHFM WROTE: We document that the Vatican II antipopes teach that members of false religions can be saved and that they esteem false religions themselves. That is condemned heresy; the latter is apostasy. 

 

LIONEL RESPONDS: They teach that in general non-Catholics need Catholic Faith and Baptism to be saved (Ad Gentes 7, Lumen Gentium 14 etc). However God can choose to make exceptions and who these exceptions are only Jesus will know.  The ordinary way of salvation is the Catholic Church for all people.  Through the extraordinary way non-Catholics can be saved if God wishes it.  To assume that the extraordinary way is the normal way of salvation is your personal interpretation of the official teachings of the Catholic Church.  It is a first class heresy to say that non-Catholics do not need Catholic Faith and Baptism in general for salvation. It is contrary to the Creed and the First Commandment and the Church Councils. A first class heresy is a grave sin.

 

MHFM WROTE: You are very blind to attempt, to no avail, to reconcile the heresies in Vatican II and the Vatican II antipopes' writings with Catholic teaching.   It's an evil endeavor.

 

LIONEL RESPONDS: The material you have placed on your website shows that you are reconciled with Ad Gentes 7 and Lumen Gentium 14. Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church says all people need Catholic Faith and Baptism.  Just like me you do not deny the existence of Ad Gentes 7 and Lumen Gentium 14. You do not mention it on your website.  You also are  in agreement with Dominus Iesus(2000) and the Notification on the book by Fr.Jacques Dupuis (2001) but these documents are not quoted by you and not made available on your website. The Recent, Responses... says outside the Catholic Church there is no salvation.  So you are already in agreement with the Catholic Magisterium and Vatican Council II as interpretated by Pope Benedict XVI.

 

In Christ with the love of Our Lady.

Lionel

 

First of all, the Vatican II antipopes don’t even teach that the Catholic faith is necessary in general.  In fact, there is not one statement from any of the Vatican II antipopes in which they clearly say that any group of people (Muslims, Jews, Protestants, schismatics, etc.) must abandon their religion and become Catholic for salvation.  On the contrary, both Antipope John Paul II and Antipope Benedict XVI have stated publicly that Eastern “Orthodox” schismatics don’t need to be converted.  They have also approved official agreements stating this.  They have also taught countless times that members of false religions are in a good state before God by praising them and their false religions.  So Lionel is simply uttering lies.

 

Then Lionel says that our material shows that we are “reconciled with Vatican II.”  Excuse me?  Lionel then speaks falsely when he says that we don’t bring out the teaching of Lumen Gentium, Ad Gentes, Dominus Iesus and the recent “responses” document.  We have a separate article exposing the heresies in the recent “responses” document: Benedict XVI's new "conservative" Vatican document on the Church reaffirms only Vatican II's heresies and denies the true Church.  Further, our main article on Vatican II (Vatican II - false council) quotes heresies from Lumen Gentium and Ad Gentes, including one in Ad Gentes which denies the necessity of the Church for salvation.  On our site we also have proven that Dominus Iesus is heretical: it denies the necessity of the Church for salvation.  In short, Lionel’s responses constitute a pack of lies from a very dishonest and confused heretic.  His e-mails illustrate, once again, how bad will and dishonesty work and how they are present in people who think they are dedicated Catholics but are, in fact, corrupting heretics headed for damnation.  We closed our last e-mail to Lionel with this message: About half of what you've written in your e-mail is a lie.  We leave you with this clear heresy of Vatican II.

 

Vatican II vs. The Dogmatic Council of Florence

 

 

Nostra Aetate #4 of Vatican II: “…the Jews should not be presented as rejected or cursed by God...”

 

 

 

Vatican II, Nostra Aetate #4, Original Latin: “…Iudaei tamen neque ut a Deo reprobati neque ut maledicti exhibeantur…”[33][i]

 

Dogmatic Council of Florence: “Therefore it [the Church] condemns, rejects, anathematizes and declares to be outside the Body of Christ, which is the Church, whoever holds opposing or contrary views.”

 

 

The Latin of the Council of Florence: “Quoscunque ergo adversa et contraria sentientes damnat, reprobat et anathematizat et a Christi corpore, quod est ecclesia, alienos esse denuntiat.”[34][ii]

 

 

In making the infallible dogmatic declaration that all who have a view contrary to faith in Our Lord or the Trinity are rejected, the original Latin of the Council of Florence uses the word “reprobat,” which means “rejects.”  It is from the Latin verb reprobo, which means “I reject” or “condemn. 

 

But here’s the bombshell: In Nostra Aetate #4 (Vatican II’s Decree on Non-Christian Religions) to declare exactly the opposite, Vatican II uses the same verb!  Vatican II uses “reprobati,” which is the past participle passive of reprobo – the very same verb that the Council of Florence used!  This means that Vatican II and the Council of Florence are talking about the exact same thing – they use the exact same verb – and they teach exactly the opposite!  The Catholic Church defines that all individuals (Jews, etc.) who have a view contrary to Faith in Christ or the Trinity the Church “reprobat” (rejects).  Vatican II tells us that the Jews should not be considered as “reprobati” (as having been rejected).  Vatican II could hardly contradict Catholic dogma any more precisely!

 

There can be absolutely no doubt that Vatican II denies the dogmatic teaching of the Council of Florence.  Although there are many blatant heresies in Vatican II, as we will see, this is the most specific one.  Anyone who would deny that Vatican II teaches heresy, in light of these facts, is simply a liar. 

 

This heresy in Vatican II’s Declaration Nostra Aetate is the theological foundation for the Vatican II sect’s current teaching on the Jews.  It is the reason that the Vatican currently publishes books which teach that the Jews are perfectly free to live as if Christ had not come.  It is the reason that the Vatican II sect teaches that the Old Covenant is valid.  It is the reason why John Paul II and Benedict XVI both made trips to the Synagogue to attempt to validate the Jewish religion.

 

Most Active of “traditional websites”?

 

Hi, you made mention on your program with Joseph Myers that you have increasing web hits. Do you show a counter on your website?

Thank you and God bless.

 

Barbara

 

MHFM: Another website, which begins with “tr..”, recently stated that its website is the most active traditional Catholic website.  This is not true.  Our website is not only by far the most active of all the sedevacantist websites, but it is significantly more active than “tr...”  (Our website is currently ranked 192,000 websites higher than “tr…”.  Our one week traffic # is 346,000 websites higher than “tr…”)  Our website is also ranked as #1 in the world of those websites considered “not in communion with Rome” (even though, in fact, we are in communion with the Rome of all the true popes).  Our website is currently ranked in the top 40 in the entire world of websites under the title “Catholicism.”  This current week’s traffic # would put us in the top 20 of “Catholic” websites in the entire world.  Just last month, Sept. 2007, we received over 2.4 million hits and 122,000 unique visitors.  We want to emphasize that the value of a website is obviously not in numbers.  Many heretical organizations, in fact, deceive themselves by thinking that they are reaching so many even though they are watering down the truth.  But considering how uncompromising our material is, and how we do not refrain from denouncing any heretics when we deem they need to be denounced, and how the hard truths of the faith which we promote necessarily alienate so many, especially in our day, we’re very happy to say that very large numbers of people are getting the chance to hear the full truth of the faith. 

 

Last month’s activity on www.mostholyfamilymonastery.com

 

We’re contacting tons of people; people are converting; people are finding out about the truth and being changed by the power of the traditional and undiluted Catholic faith.  Please spread the website and help spread this information.  We need your financial support to continue to make such a massive impact and to go further.

 

Baptism of desire and Vatican II

 

… I agree with you there is no baptism of desire in the sense that everyone needs the baptism of water to go to Heaven and avoid Hell.  One cannot say that this person or those persons do not need  Catholic Faith and the baptism of water, because they can have the baptism of desire. Wrong. There is no baptism of desire for them.  All people need the baptism of water to go to Heaven (Ad Gentes 7) and those who know they need to enter the Catholic Church through  the baptism of water, and yet do not do so are oriented to Hell-fires.(Lumen Gentiums 14 also Catechism of the Catholic Church).  However  in your writings you admit that Our Lord could make an exception, when he wants to and how he wants to- we do not know.  So if Our Lord has made an exception for someone, we will know about it in Heaven.  Example you tell the story of a priest in mortal sin, who at the las moment is sent back to earth because Our Lady, intervened.  You mention that the Centurion before the Cross experiences an exceptional grace, to have the Holy Spirit.  You acknowledge that the repentant criminal, on the cross, is told by Our Lord that he will go to Heaven- without the baptism of water.  So you make allowances for exceptional cases. So do I.  Would you agree with me?

 

In Christ.

Lionel.

 

MHFM: You say that you agree with us that there is no baptism of desire, and then you go on to argue that there are exceptions in this regard.  You are thus unfortunately typical of those who deny the truths of the Church in this matter: you speak out of both sides of your mouth.  You deny that you hold it because you don’t want to seem to be embracing something liberal or compromising, and then you argue in favor of it.

 

Also, we have not said that Our Lord could make allowances for salvation without baptism of water.  He cannot make allowances in this regard simply because He has set it up as His requirement that all men must be born again of water and the Spirit (John 3:5).  He said that all who enter Heaven must be baptized and He cannot lie (Hebrews 6:8).  Thus, He doesn’t make any exceptions.  Regarding the Good Thief, he’s not an exception at all, as discussed in Outside the Catholic Church There is Absolutely No Salvation [pdf file], since he died under the Old Law.

 

Regarding Vatican II, which you quote and obviously accept, if you carefully review the first file in this section Vatican II - false council and are not convinced that it was heretical then we cannot help you since you are unfortunately of bad will at this time.  Vatican II contains many bold heresies, as we prove, including the fact that it uses the exact same verb as the Council of Florence to teach exactly the opposite on Jews being rejected by God.

 

Sacrilegious confession

 

Dear Most Holy Family Monastery,

 

I am at the point of despair and don't know what to do.  A few years ago, I was sincerely sorry for the sins of my life, mortal and venial, and wrote an 11-page confession so I would remember all my sins.  In confession, I did sin because as I confessed, I lessened my guilt as I confessed certain sins, but I spent an hour with the priest in tears sincerely sorry for my sins.  When I left, I had no peace and realized my sacrilege.  I did not want to go back to the priest again after wasting his time and one thing he said bothered me.  He said in the Gospels, that the only sin Jesus said never do again was adultery.  So he is one of those Novus Ordo priests who don't really believe in the reality of mortal sin.  I tried three other priests who either scoffed at me or said no priest has time for such a confession and one, when I told him that I was not totally honest in my confession with the first priest, he basically said that it was okay and to "Smile, God loves you!".  How many sinners like me are "smiling" all the way to Hell?  Since then, I tried being good, but I have fallen into even more sin than before.  God recently has given me the grace to feel sorrow for my sins again…

 

I am on the point of despair and having some kind of mental breakdown because I know the reality of the Hell I am facing, a Hell that I deserve.  I fear for all souls.  Who can be saved?  I have tried praying at least a third of the Rosary everyday in hopes the Blessed Mother will help me.  Do you have any suggestions of how to find a priest who believes in the terrible consequences of mortal sin and believes in the sacrament of Confession?

 

I am sorry to trouble you with such a question, but I have few places where I can turn to trust a traditional Catholic answer.

 

Thank you and may God bless you.

 

MHFM: There’s no need to despair, since all one needs to do to be forgiven and set right with God is to take the proper steps.  First of all, we assume that you hold the fullness of the Catholic faith, that you're in agreement on all the issues: sedevacantism, no salvation outside the Church, no baptism of desire, etc.  If not, you should not receive the sacraments until you are.

 

A priest ordained in the Eastern Rite would perhaps be your best option for confession.  But if you contacted us about where you live there might be a better one.  You would look in your phone book for "Catholic churches" and it will list Novus Ordo (which you don't want) and Eastern Catholic or Byzantine Catholic.  Ukrainian Byzantine would be the ones you want for confession.  As long as the priest was ordained in the Eastern Rite, that would be valid and you could go to confession to him.  They are heretical, so you could not support them.  You don't want anything that is "Eastern Orthodox."

 

You should try to pray the full Rosary each day, especially if you spend much time at home.  We cannot emphasize that enough.  We’ve seen a profound difference with the people who pray the full Rosary each day.  Also, when you do go to confession you need to mention that you committed a sacrilegious confession by withholding the full truth or minimizing your sins when making your general confession.  And then proceed with your general confession.

 

Praying to the Holy Ghost and 3 Hail Marys before confession (that you make a good one) is something that should be done.  Another point that we think would help you is that when making your general confession, you should simply confess the sin and the number of times it was committed, and then move on.  You should not spend unnecessary time on unrelated matters or unnecessary elaboration.  Don’t misunderstand us: you must provide all the information necessary to mention the sin, but avoid unnecessary information.  For example, if someone (God forbid) had committed a grave sin against purity or fornication at a party (and those types of parties no traditional Catholic should ever be attending of course), he or she doesn’t need to say: “well, I didn’t want to go to the party, but my friend pressured me to come to McDonalds and we met a group of people and got in a car with them, and they drove us to the party and I didn’t feel comfortable and… etc.”  People who provide such unnecessary information often wind up justifying themselves in the process and making bad confessions.  (St. Teresa of Avila said that bad confessions damn a great number of people.)  That might have happened in your last confession, considering the amount of time you say that you spent.  Cut to the point and name the mortal sin that was committed and then move on.  We will say a prayer that you rectify your situation and your interest in the faith makes us confident that you will do so.  We will pray for you.  Your e-mail also reveals how horribly heretical and evil the faithlessness of the Vatican II sect and its “priests” are.  They justify everything and leave souls adrift.

 

Website

 

Dear Holy Family Monastery,

 

I have been reading and watching your site for quite some time now and amongst the good and very important work that you do, I applaud in particular the work that you do to defend the Roman Catholic faith.

 

Can you please let me know if you ever send out weekly email updates from another website or source as I very interested on more information.

 

Kind Regards,

 

In Domino,

 

Anthony

England

 

MHFM: We don’t have an e-mail list because all of the latest updates are posted on our website.  So if you come back there you will have the latest information or information about how to obtain it.  We update our website all the time.  If you haven’t already, we would also strongly recommend that you obtain our DVD special offer which includes 6 DVDs (with 10 different programs), as well as 3 important books (including our 610-page book with 200 color photographs), an audio disc (with 20 hours of programming) and flyers for only $10.00 (no shipping charge in U.S. but add shipping to England).

 

No pope

 

Do you really take the position that the Church of Rome doe not have a valid Pope?  With all due respect wouldn't that be calling our Lord a liar?  I mean, if there is no Pope then there is no flock and there is no Church...and the gates of Hell have prevailed?  Do you really think that God would allow all of the innocents suffer without a sheperd?

 

Kirk Timothy Mulhearn
Long Beach, Ca.

 

MHFM: We certainly take (and prove) the position that the manifest heretic Benedict XVI is not a true pope, but an antipope.  Benedict XVI is the biggest denier of the dogmas about the office of the popes (e.g. Vatican I’s definitions) in the world, as we prove: Benedict XVI (The Heresies of Benedict XVI File). You need to think about what you’re saying.  The Catholic Church has been without a pope over 200 times.  It’s called a papal interregnum.  It happens every time a pope dies.  The Church doesn’t cease to exist when it occurs; otherwise the Church would have defected and ceased to exist over 200 times already!  This and similar objections are covered in our file: Responses to 19 of the Most Common Objections Against Sedevacantism [PDF file].  There have also been over 41 antipopes in Church history.  It’s also predicted that there will be a great apostasy.  This apostasy will (and does) feature an absence of a visible pope for an extended period of time, in which the Church is “in eclipse.” 

 

Prophecy of St. Nicholas of Fluh (1417-1487): “The Church will be punished because the majority of her members, high and low, will become so perverted.  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 to have expired.  But, after this, she will be victoriously exalted in the sight of all doubters.” (Yves Dupont, Catholic Prophecy by Yves Dupont, Rockford, IL: Tan Books, 1973, p. 30.)

 

Our Lady of La Salette, Sept. 19, 1846: “Rome will lose the Faith and become the seat of the Anti-Christ… the Church will be in eclipse.”

 

But the point that we really want to drive home is that it’s precisely those who regard the schismatic and heretical Antipope Benedict XVI as the pope who deny the Papacy and call Christ a liar.  The popes of the Catholic Church teach that you cannot accept as a true pope a manifest heretic such as Benedict XVI.  Christ also said, through His Church, that heretics are outside of the Church.  Further, the official teachings of the Vatican II sect are precisely the opposite of the teaching of the true popes in history.  If you defend the “authority” of the heretics who promulgated these false doctrines, you blaspheme the Church and hold that the gates of Hell have prevailed against the Church because you assert that the Church has authoritatively promulgated heretical teachings.  That’s proven in the second file of this section: Vatican II - false council , which shows that Paul VI promulgated the heretical teachings of Vatican II with what would have been infallible authority if he had been a true pope.  So, either he was an antipope (which is the truth) or the Catholic Church officially contradicted itself at Vatican II (which is impossible, of course.)  There is no way that one can be consistent and reject the heresies in Vatican II (as one must) and also recognize the legitimacy of the post-Vatican II “popes.” 

 

Shocked

 

I have been very shocked and disturbed to read the information that you have put on the internet regarding the alleged heresies of Pope Paul VI, the Pope who gave the world the new mass and the Vatican II.  It is unbelievable that people even so remotely connected to God can be perpetuators of such deep hate and opposition to the pillar of faith.  In viewing other non-christian religions as demonic, and glorifying the myth that only Catholics can be saved, you have gone on to establish deep schisms in the core of human existence and displayed such hegemony that even God the Father must find despicable.  I am a Catholic lay person myself but I have felt very disheartened by the direction I see the church to be taking; Open, unapologetic criticism of the non-christian faiths as has emanated from the Vatican lately has left my mouth agape!  Pope John Paul II, once prayed in a Mosque and I consider him a true saint of our time.  The new mass has liberalised worship in my part of the world here in Africa and a call to return to the old mass is a myopic view of people who have not the Spirit of St. Peter, of spreading the Gospel, but of creating an empire where they can reign supreme.  I have committed you to the intercession of our Most Blessed Virgin Mary and I know She will not fail me.

 

Sh…

 

MHFM: So, you claim to be Catholic.  Let’s repeat that: you actually claim to be a Catholic?!?!?!  Based on what you’ve written in your e-mail, one might be shocked at your unspeakable hypocrisy: to actually claim to be Catholic yet to ridicule two infallible truths of the Catholic faith in just a short e-mail.  But, in our experience, we’ve seen so many people of bad will – people who are mired in total spiritual blindness like yourself and cannot see themselves or the truth one bit – that it’s just not shocking anymore to come across people like you.  You ridicule us for, in your words, “viewing other non-Christian religions as demonic.”  Well that’s exactly what the Bible and the Catholic Church teach, you apostate!

 

Psalms 95:5- “For all the gods of the Gentiles are devils…”

 

1 Cor. 10:20- “But the things which the heathens sacrifice, they sacrifice to devils, and not to God.  And I would not that you should be made partakers with devils.”

 

Pope Pius XI, Ad Salutem (#27), April 20, 1930: “…all the compulsion and folly, all the outrages and lust, introduced into man’s life by the demons through the worship of false gods.”

 

Then you complain that we glorify “the myth that only Catholics can be saved.”  What you call a “myth,” that only Catholics can be saved, is exactly what seven popes have defined infallibly from the Chair of Peter and what the Catholic Church has taught for 2000 years, you blind abomination! [Link: Outside the Catholic Church There is Absolutely No Salvation, pdf file]  And then you have the audacity to feign devotion to the Mother of God, as if the “powerful” prayers from a total blaspheming, faithless heretic like yourself will bring about our “conversion.”  The Mother of God detests your faithlessness and your apostasy.  You need to pray for yourself, that you begin to receive a little bit of light about your true state before God, which is not good.  You need to pray for yourself, that you have the grace to see that you have no faith in Jesus Christ’s revelation at this time and that you are mortally sinning against His truth and outside His Church.

 

Based on what you’ve said above, it’s not at all surprising that you don’t agree with our exposé of Paul VI’s many heresies.  That’s because his two primary heresies were to teach that non-Catholics can be saved and that false religions are good – heresies you hold as well.  But for those who do care about the truths of Catholicism, the exposé proves to any sincere person that Paul VI was one of the worst heretics ever to walk on Earth: The Heresies of Paul VI, the man who gave the world the New Mass and the Teachings of Vatican II [PDF file].

 

Stumbled

 

I wish to thank you in the name of Our Lord and saviour Jesus Christ, whose divine Providence made it possible for me to stumble on your site and I have enjoyed every time spent going through your articles. They are edifying but challenging… You know we in Africa and Nigeria in particular have had the faith for less than 100 years when the changes of Vatican 11 set in. The faith of most of us have been shaped by Vatican 11 and just a few of us were lucky to have had the Tridentine Mass before the changes.  Only our Lady, the Ever Blessed Virgin Mary has been our guide and enabled us to know something of our faith but I am particularly scared after reading your articles as we are on the wrong side. What must we do in the face of what is happening in the church since we don't have an alternative than the new mass?  I would like to hear from you and please kndly send me a copy of your books, ``The truth of what really happened to the Catholic chuch after Vatican 11 and Outside the Catholic church there is no salvation''.

 

I am Peter Agbebaku    

 

MHFM: Thanks for interest, Peter.  But one must avoid the New Mass under pain of grave sin (as our material documents from the teaching of the Catholic Church), since it’s Protestant and invalid.

 

EWTN heresy

 

Brothers,
   

If you need more info about heresy, catch the latest show of Carmelite spirituality on EWTN.  I just watched your movie about how JPII taught all people are God, and the first thing I watch on ewtn after that this, priest says thru Christ incarnation, all humanity is united to God, under various different forms, under different symbols.  He was teaching universal salvation and hinting at all people are God.

 

Bill from Comstock Park Michigan

 

MHFM: Very interesting e-mail… thanks for sending it.  It’s also very interesting that you came across this particular heresy right after watching our video: John Paul II preached the Gospel of the Antichrist, in which we exposed how John Paul II taught that very heresy.  That doesn’t sound like an accident, but sounds like a providential confirmation of how the Antichrist doctrine which was exposed on the video is being circulated and imbibed in the Vatican II sect.

 

Likes website

 

Please keep up this excellent website; your answers are brilliant.  We are in desperate need of genuine Catholicism.

 

Donna Erba

Lynchburg, VA

 

Atheist

 

Your video has to be the most absurd piece of garbage I have seen to date. It baffles me that people like you indoctrinate people with you supposed facts. The Shroud of Turin has been disproved. Quite frankly there is little proof Jesus even existed. You scare people with eternal damnation…

 

Signed

Atheist in a foxhole

 

MHFM: Atheism is the most stupid thing men ever came up with.  Deep down in your heart you know God exists.  You just don't want God to exist.  Think about the human eye, the instincts of cats (e.g., to walk along a ledge of a building or a staircase and know that they can only safely jump so far or so many stairs), the complexity of the human reproductive systems, or a million other things.  That last example, by the way, provides a devastating refutation of the folly of evolution: for if man and creatures evolved by processes of natural selection, why would they ever have evolved so that they could only reproduce themselves by finding a totally separate creature, who is not only distinct from themselves, but very different?  That’s exactly the opposite of what one would expect.  If evolution were true (and it’s even painful to write that for argument’s sake, since evolution is literally infinitely stupid), creatures would have evolved in a way that they reproduced from themselves.  Did male and female evolve simultaneously, for every kind of creature?  Think about the idiocy of it, you blind atheist. 

 

To believe that all of creation happened by chance is not only to believe the impossible (e.g., the many parts of the eye would be useless unless they all came together simultaneously, thus proving they were created at once), but it is to believe in the most ridiculous fairy tale ever imagined.  The videos we have on the Shroud of Turin prove its authenticity to anyone who is of the truth.  Sadly, this doesn't apply to you at this point.  Unless you humble yourself and begin to be honest, you will die and receive the eternal punishment of misery which all people like you - who are liars to the core - deserve.

 

Speaks for itself

 

I am not certain to whom I should be addressing this. I have seen your web site and have so many questions. If I were to respond to what I have read here through the filter of my feelings I would undoubtedly have great difficulty.  I prefer, however to try to respond from the more distant perspective of intellect and cognition. I am not a gifted thinker or theologian. I am a convert to the one true faith of The Catholic Church, but if I were to take at face value what is being presented here. ( http://www.mostholyfamilymonastery.com/) I would be forced to question what church I actually  belong to. I am only trying to gain greater insight into your thinking as a means of adding greater clarify to my thinking. I have given up a great deal to enter into Christ's True Church.  I was born into the Jewish faith and spent the greater part of my adult life as an atheist. I have been scorned by friends and shunned by family (wife, children, mother, siblings). I have been forced to step down from a very successful career.  I am now gainfully employed and one of my children has come into the Catholic Church. My life has only recently entered a slightly more comfortable phase, but at a great cost. (divorce, ridicule, familial alienation) Even though I have custody and I am very busy, I make time to volenteer often at church, and teach in the R.C.I.A. program. I serve on the parish council of my parish. I have gone on to develop new relationships with members of the church. I have such an unsettled feeling after reading some of your material. Am I following heretics or pagans or worse? Have I given up so much for so little? Do you have any provable answers?  I pray for you and wait for your response, 

 

Gary

 

MHFM: Gary, the information speaks for itself.  It presents and defends the traditional teachings of the Catholic faith, the magisterium and the dogmas.  To reject it is not to reject us, but the Catholic faith of all times.  The post-Vatican II Church is not Catholic.  The New Mass you are attending is not valid, it’s not Catholic and it’s not traditional.  Our website proves this.  You must get out of it.  The Vatican II “Church”  is a modernist counterfeit sect which has been predicted to arise.  Please consult the information carefully.

 

If you haven’t already, we would also strongly recommend that you obtain our DVD special offer which includes 6 DVDs (with 10 different programs), as well as 3 important books, an audio disc (with 20 hours of programming) and flyers for only $10.00 (no shipping charge in U.S.).  Having the books in your hands really adds something when you have all the documentation at your fingertips.  Pray the 15-decade Rosary each day, and we’re confident you will see that this is the truth.  It’s a matter of salvation to get out of the New Mass and the Vatican II sect.

 

Greetings

 

Dear Father,

 

Greetings and warm wishes from Father. Don Bosco, st. Joseph's Orphanage, Gunadala, India. I am very glad to write to you few words. I got your mail ID from a priest in our diocese. I am sending you this mail particularly to request you to send some mass intentions. I was ordained last year as a priest. The orphanage I am in has 250 boys. Some of the boys has no body to look after, if you send me some mass intentions, I can offer mass for the intentions you send and it can also be of some support to the orphans staying here. I hope I am not burdening you. You please help me only if it is possible. I look forward to your kind and favourable reply.

 

with lots of love, prayers and affection

 

Yours fraternally in Christ

 

Fr. D. Don Bosco

St. Joseph's Orphanage

Gunadala, India

 

MHFM: Thank you for your interest.  It's nice of you to write to us.  But we are a traditional Catholic monastery.  We don't accept the New Mass or the New Rite of Ordination which were instituted after Vatican II.  Have you carefully reviewed our website?  It shows that the post-Vatican II Church is not truly Catholic, and that the New Mass and the New Rite of Ordination are not valid.  I pray that you carefully consider this information, and what a person would need to do about it.

 

The Invalid New Mass

 

Why the New Rite of Ordination is Invalid [PDF File]

(This article explains why the New Rite of Ordination – which was instituted by Paul VI on June 18, 1968 after Vatican II – is not valid.)

 

Peter and Rome

 

Hello. I am not Roman Catholic. The reason that I do not agree with you that there is no salvation outside of the Roman Catholic church, or that the bishop of Rome could possibly be he leader of the church of Jesus Christ, or that Peter handed anything down to any one in Rome, or to any Roman, (except for the Gospel, which as preached to the whole world) is that, A - The only city ever deemed holy was Jerusalem (Hebrews 12: 22. But you have come to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to myriads of angels) and Jerusalem is the only city said to be the home of the representative of God, now Christ (Matthew 5: 35. or by the earth, for it is the footstool of His feet, or by Jerusalem, for it is THE CITY OF THE GREAT KING.) The first church was founded in Jerusalem (Acts 2:38-47, Acts 6:7.The word of God kept on spreading; and the number of the disciples continued to increase greatly in Jerusalem, and a great many of the priests were becoming obedient to the faith.) Peter himself lived in Jerusalem (Galatians 1 :18. Then three years later I went up to Jerusalem to become acquainted with Cephas, and stayed with him fifteen days.

So seriously, how can you say that Rome has any part to play in the leadership of Christ's church? And above all, how can you you allege that any one that believes in Christ but follows the orders of some one other than the King of Jerusalem cannot be saved?

 

Em…

 

MHFM: You’re missing the point.  You have to start first with the undeniable fact that Christ made St. Peter the leader of His Church (Matthew 16:18-20; John 21:15-17).  To deny that is simply to be dishonest.  Second, you have to acknowledge that the Bible teaches a succession of authority in the Old and in the New Testament.  In the Old Testament, we see that spiritual authority is passed down through the laying on of hands (e.g. Moses to Josue in Deuteronomy 34:9).  In the New Testament, we see that Paul (not one of the original twelve) establishes Timothy as Bishop of Ephesus and Titus as Bishop of Crete to lead the Church.  The laying on of hands is again involved in this passing on of authority, so that the Church can continue its mission in the years following the Ascension of Jesus Christ.

 

2 Timothy 1:6- “Wherefore I put thee in remembrance that thou stir up the gift of God, which is in thee by the putting on of my hands.”

 

Titus 1:5- “For this cause left I thee in Crete, that thou shouldest set in order the things that are wanting, and ordain elders in every city, as I had appointed thee.”

 

In Acts 1:20 we see the same succession of authority.  We see the concept of replacement of those whose Episcopal Offices (or chairs) have become vacant.  The Apostles choose a replacement for Judas.  His “bishopric” (Acts 1:20) had to be filled.  Even in that decision, we see, once again, that the head of the Church, St. Peter, plays the prime role (“rising up” – Acts 1:15).  So, since St. Peter was clearly established by Christ as the leader of the Church, and since the Bible clearly teaches (and the early Church took it for granted) a succession of authority in these positions, it logically follows that since St. Peter established his permanent bishopric in Rome by his death there in 67 (as the early Church fathers acknowledge), the successor to that office receives the keys of authority that St. Peter had (leadership in the Church) and thus that office possesses the primacy over the Church, as the early Church fathers testify.   

 

St. Irenaeus, Against the Heresies, A.D. 203: “But since it would be too long to enumerate in such a volume as this the successions of all the Churches, we shall confound those who, in whatever manner, whether through self-satisfaction or vainglory, or through blindness and wicked opinion, assemble other than where it is proper, by pointing out here the successions of the bishops of the greatest and most ancient Church known to all, founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious Apostles, Peter and Paul, that Church which has the tradition and the faith which comes down to us after having been announced to men by the Apostles. For with this Church, because of its superior origin, all Churches must agree, that is, all the faithful in the whole world; and it is in her that the faithful everywhere have maintained the Apostolic tradition.” (Jurgens, The Faith of the Early Fathers, Liturgical Press, Vol. 1: 210.)

 

Those who resist this resist the one Christian Church (i.e. the Catholic Church) and are in schism. 

 

“Chance” Encounter

 

Dear Most Holy Family Monastery,

   

I have no idea how I first came upon your website (a "chance" encounter, as they say) but I quickly saw how important your various articles are.  Previously, I had been raised among those who only held the Catholic Faith in derision, eager to point out each and every "fault." Your articles have helped clear up so many misconceptions I have held, while also explaining the need for sound doctrine.  Your examination of The Abomination of Desolation was gripping.  I have ordered your introductory materials and am now actively seeking to become a member of the true Catholic Faith.  Thanks be to God, our saviour, for directing me to your site, and for seeing to it that there are still faithful to minister the truth to people like me.

   

Suther

 

MHFM: That’s great to hear.  God definitely wanted you to find out about the information, and we’re really glad you did.

 

Blood miracle?

 

Brothers,
 
As usual, awesome job and keep up the good work. 
 
Today, I noticed the article about the liquefaction of the blood of Saint Januarius.  I don't understand why God would allow continuous miracles to give credence to this false Novus Ordo Church.  Wouldn't it have been better if the blood stopped liquefying on these 3 days during the year starting at the date that the Catholic Church was hijacked by freemasons? 
 
I believe that the liquefaction of the blood did stop.  If the Novus Ordo Church ministers can kill off Sr. Lucy and plant an imposter in her place, then they can conspire together and liquefy some blood!  Isn't this a "lying wonder?"  Your comments would be appreciated.
 
-Kelle

 

MHFM: Thanks for the words of support.  We don’t think that the miracle of Saint Januarius’s blood lends credence to the Vatican II sect.  It’s a miracle that has been occurring for centuries.  In our view, a key point is that it’s a miracle which is connected with the authenticity of his life and the traditional Catholic faith, not with any priest in the church or bishop in the diocese where it occurs.  Certainly that church has seen a great variety of them over the centuries.  You ask: wouldn’t it have been better if the blood stopped liquefying around the time of Vatican II?  That would be an obvious sign to people that something is wrong, but God doesn’t always give such obvious signs about the spiritual dangers and tests He allows.  He allows heresies to arise to see who will fall for them and who will cling to the faith.  He allows false teachers and the construction of a Counter Church to take place to see who will reject them and who will follow the false teachers to Hell.

 

1 Cor. 11: 19- “For there must be also heresies: that they also, who are approved, may be made manifest among you.”

 

It’s sort of like: how come God didn’t reveal to Padre Pio that Paul VI was an antipope so that he could have informed the whole world about it in the 1960’s?  Similarly, why didn’t God reveal to St. Vincent Ferrer, who was working miracles at the time, that he was supporting an antipope when supporting Antipope Benedict XIII during the Great Western Schism?  The answer is that God doesn’t reveal everything to saints (a truth which some people out there refuse to recognize), nor does he always make things as obvious or as easy as we would like by way of signs.  We think the latter is the answer to your question about St. Januarius’s blood.  (It might also be worth pointing out that the Shroud of Turin and the image of Our Lady of Guadalupe are both housed in heretical churches belonging to the Counter Church, yet they still display all of their miraculous qualities.)  The blood continues to liquefy as a continual sign of the authenticity of the traditional Catholic Church, its saints and the communion of saints; but people are not given, by its failure to liquefy, a sign that something is drastically wrong with the churches they are attending and the faith they are promoting.  They must recognize what’s going on based on the teachings of the Church and through fidelity to the dogmas of the faith.  And they will recognize the problem if they care about the faith and are diligent in their duties toward God. 

 

Hatred?

 

Your website is hatred!  if you are a Catholic, and you believe in God, then why would you dog any sect or religion that promotes belief in your same God?  I am Catholic, vatican II to be precise, and for you to speak out against your brothers and sisters like this is the REAL heresy!  You need to get back to your roots, where there is only one thing that matters:  God!  So quit going around, spewing hatred.  God wants his followers to bring more people to him, not scare them off with anger!  You're not being a good representative of my God!  Change your ways, He's watching!!

I appreciate it,
Daniel

 

MHFM: As is usually the case with heretics who write to us, you don’t bring up anything specific in your attack.  This is because pointing to your specific problems would reveal the fact that your problem is not with us but with the faith and the dogmas we are defending and promoting.  What we have on our website is based solidly on the traditional Catholic faith of all times, the dogmas, the magisterium, the teaching of Jesus Christ.  Jesus Christ said that those who don’t believe in Him are condemned (Mark 16:16, etc.) and that most go to the fires of Hell (Mt. 7:13).  Surely you would denounce that as hateful.  Thus, you blaspheme Him by calling His traditional faith hateful.  You would also consider hateful all the past saints who were uncompromising in their denunciations of false religions and forceful in their charitable admonitions to non-Catholics to embrace the one true faith.  The problem is that you have no respect or faith in God, His power, His true Catholic faith and the truth and obligations of His commands.  You receive not the love of the truth, so truth is hatred to you.

 

Outside the Church book

 

Subject: Book - Outside the Catholic Church there is absolutely no salvation

 

THANK YOU SO VERY MUCH FOR THIS...!!!!!!! (I just finished reading it).

 

By God’s good providence, I was (conditionally) Baptized on July 19th of this year in the Traditional form of the Rite with the profession of faith holding to the council of Trent… I intend to hold to what has been revealed to me in your book (as it is irrefutable)…

 

The theory of the hypothetical “good man” who seeks God through his own desire or through some other religion is also refuted by Divine Revelation in Psalm 52 (Douay-Rheims) “no one is good….no one seeks God.” God is saying that no one of his own accord seeks Him much less attains to salvation outside of His established means.

 

It is dangerous to say God’s Church and its Sacraments are so imperfect and so limited that God allows for other ways and means of salvation. That would also deny the universality (all people – everywhere- throughout time) of the “Catholic” Church. If we profess a “Catholic” Church, then we must believe in its universality.

 

Soon, I plan to order copies of your book to give out to those I know will give it the consideration it deserves.

 

Thank you so very much once again,

 

God Bless you.

 

Charles

 

MHFM: We’re glad you benefited from the book.  People can order the book at our ONLINE STORE.

 

Indefectibility

 

I do not want to deny Christ by continuing to be part of the PIUSX society or the NOVUS ORDO SECLORUM counterfeit church....therefore i have come to a (conjectural) conclusion:

 

The TRUE CHURCH ended and ceased to exist between 1962-1965....and the "leaders" (antichrist henchmen) of the Liberal Academic International Religion (LIAR) ie the Luciferians from the corrupt banking system, the freemasons, the skull and bones , and all those whom convened there and made a whore of our originally special language (latin) to be able to communicate in a WORLDWIDE abduction of the church

 

as soon as VATICAN II convened the Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church ceased to exist

 

the church began with Jesus and Paul....and it ended with VATICAN II

 

I reject any priest ordained in the vatican ii church as an instrument of Satan

I reject any bishop or "cleric" claiming to be catholic even if they are shizmatic because it is not possible to be catholic.......

 

Matt

 

MHFM: What you are believing is heresy; it contradicts the Catholic dogma on indefectibility and Jesus's promise that the gates of Hell will not prevail and that He would be with His Church all days until the consummation of the world (Mt. 16:18-20).  You cannot believe what you are presently believing and be a Catholic.  As we have explained, the Church can be reduced to a remnant, has been reduced to a remnant in the past (e.g. Arian crisis) and it's predicted that at the end there will only be a remnant left (Luke 18:8).  And that’s exactly what there is.  The Catholic Church still exists; it’s just smaller and “eclipsed” by the Counter Church of the last days, as Our Lady of La Salette predicted.  You must abandon this heresy you are presently holding.

 

No sense?

 

Hi

 

i am a true beliver of jesus christ and i am a true roman catholic.. well you guys dont make any sense at all.. pope is a sheperd he is a high priest and god as anionted him. he is a wonderful person who really care for human race no matter he is a muslim or jews. i guess you guys are bad. and seriously need prayer.

 i will pray to jesus and holy ghost and mother mary, and almighty father for you guys.. to be forgiven..

 

a true roman catholic.

 

praise the lord.

 

Ashley

 

MHFM: No, we prove from the teachings of the popes of the Catholic Church that the post-Vatican II “Church” is not Catholic.  You need to look more carefully at the information.  What they are teaching now is not what the Church has always taught.  It's predicted that there will be a great apostasy at the end.  Below is a radio program which discusses all of these issues in-depth and, if you listen to it, we think it will help you better understand what’s going on.  But you need to put out more effort and carefully look into the facts that are provided on our website.  This radio program provides an overview of the situation.    You can download it by right clicking and "save target" as.  You should listen to it and look at the other information.  You are not correct about this.

 

First Radio Program: An Overview of Present situation (First Show) (click here to listen, about 2 hrs.)

*This show contains a very important overview of the present situation of the Catholic Church and the reasons why the post-Vatican II Church is not the Catholic Church.  It discusses the facts, the evidence and the arguments which prove that the post-Vatican II Church is not the Catholic Church.  This is a show people should listen to.   It covers the heresies of Vatican II, the apostasy of John Paul II, Benedict XVI, Paul VI, that there have been antipopes, that our present situation has been predicted, and more.

Former Catholic

 

As a former catholic who was called by God (justification by faith), I wish to refute you in your saying that our interpretation of the doctrine of justification by faith is wrong.  I question anyone who teaches confession and absolution by a priest, praying to Mary, praying to saints and what ever other anit-Biblical dribble you preach.  God hears you and will hold you accountable for spreading such wrongful doctrines to millions of people, just think you are responsible for causing the damnation of all of those people. When I was in catholic school, I was told we could not read the Bible.  I wonder why?  Could it be that they did not want us to know the Truth?  Your religion kept me away from knowing the Jesus of the Bible, but praise God he took me away from your church.  Why should we confess our sins to a sinner himself?  READ THE BIBLE, we only confess to Jesus to God and God to Jesus.  As far as praying to Mary, is wrong, we are to pray only to Jesus to God and God to Jesus.  "Let no man stand before Me", ever hear or read that verse?   Saints, again read the Bible, saved Christians are called saints by Jesus in the Bible and that includes me because I am a saved Christian, called by God and God alone and not by works, that comes after salvation not before.  You preach works will get you to heaven you could not be further from the Truth.  It is our personal relationship to Jesus Christ that does it by justification by faith. 

 

bp…

 

MHFM: Confession is in the Bible.  Read John 20:23.  Jesus would never have given them the power to forgive sins if they weren’t meant to hear confessions of sins.  Duh!  Regarding devotion to Mary, Luke 1 is very clear about how her soul “magnifies” the Lord and how all generations of Christians (which unfortunately doesn’t include you at this point) will call her “blessed” (as in the Hail Mary).  But something more in-depth on that issue will be posted at some point on our website. (In the Padre Pio book online, on pages 51-55, there is some very important scriptural proof that Mary is the Ark of the New Covenant.  That PDF File takes a few minutes to load.)  For the purpose of this response, we must simply emphasize how strikingly unbiblical your position is.  You state: “You preach works will get you to heaven you could not be further from the Truth.”  Are you completely oblivious to the fact that the Bible says:

 

James 2:24- “Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.”

 

You really need to hear these audios.  They prove, from the Protestant Bible, that your present position on justification is completely unbiblical.  Are you open to what the Bible teaches?  It’s a matter of salvation that you listen to this information, for your present position is heretical and against the teaching of the Bible.  

 

[Audio]

The places in 2 Cor., Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, 2 Thessalonians, 1 & 2 Tim., Hebrews and James in the Protestant Bible which refute the Protestant view of Justification by faith alone [37 minute audio] * see how the Bible devastates Protestantism – a must listen!  It also responds to and explains key verses from Ephesians and Galatians which Protestants like to quote and how they have misunderstood them.

[New Audio]

The places in Matthew, Mark, Luke and John in the Protestant Bible which refute the Protestant view of Justification by faith alone [31 minute audio] * see how the Bible devastates Protestantism.  It also addresses key verses brought forward by the Protestants from the Gospels, such as John 3:16.

 [Audio]

Radio discussion of the places in 1 Corinthians of the Protestant Bible which refute Protestantism and especially Justification by faith alone [10 minute audio] * non-Catholics should take the 10 minutes and listen

 

Substance

 

Wow! I'm in the state of shock! I read some of your articles.  I will say this...being a Pre-Vatican II Roman Catholic a lot of what you say has substance.  But I think your trying to catch the wind.  One of the , so called, clever saying during Vatican II was..."open the windows...let fresh air blow in the Church"  Who would have ever imagined it blew ...almost...everything away!  Do you have an exact word by word translation of the third secret of Fatima? Or, do you know where I can obtain a copy?

 

Pray for me as I pray for you,

Mel Fox

 

MHFM: We’re glad you’re reading the articles.  Not just some of the information has substance, but all of it does.  The conclusions are based on facts and the teachings of the Catholic Church.  We hope you continue to look at the information.  Regarding the Third Secret, it hasn’t been released.  So there is no copy you can read.  But people can form an idea of its basic contents based on what those who have read it have said and based on the last statement prior to the undisclosed Third Secret of Fatima.  This is discussed in our articles on Fatima.  It can be concluded that the Third Secret concerns a prophecy about the Vatican II Counter Church and the Vatican II apostasy from the Catholic faith, which is led by those who purport to be the leaders in the Catholic Church but aren’t.

 

The Message of Fatima: a heavenly sign marking the beginning of the end times and a prediction of apostasy from the Church [PDF]

 

The Whole Truth about the Consecration and Conversion of Russia and the Impostor Sr. Lucy

 

Thanks

 

Dearest Brothers,

 

The articles and videos presented in your website were absolutely amazing and very useful indeed. I am a Catholic raised in the traditonal way. My entire family doesn't go to church since in has become modernized and secular. When I was still in the Philippines my country, I used to have the necessary documents to defend the faith if it is being attacked, but since we moved here in Canada, I did not bring along with me all my documents only my old Latin missal and some prayer book for me to use for my kids. Thank God I can now print all the necessary documents to show to my friends what has happened to the Catholic Church and the heresies that are engulfing the entire world right now. I have also ordered books and DVD from your monastery which I am still waiting. Currently, I am full time mother so I have all the time to read more…. Thank you very much and May the Most Blessed Holy Trinity and the Most Holy Mother of God Bless you and your endeavor to defend the Catholic Faith. Indeed it is true that "Outside of the Catholic Church there is absolutely no Salvation". God Bless.

 

Yours In Christ,

 

Candace A. Diala  

Edmonton, Alberta, Canada

 

Faith in Croatia

 

Subject: Greetings from Croatia

 

Dear MHFM,


Blessed be the God who gave us the one and only true Faith, and Who always provide for the means to keep the Faith  whole and  unviolated.

I just want to tell you how much I appreciate your work on exposing the apostasy of V2 sect. I know from my own experience how confused and disordered are the poor souls who adhere to the V2 sect. They are filled with so much contradictions that very often they are not able to see the most banal incompatibilities of what they are saying with what they are supposedly believing.  For example, some adherent of V2, who called JPII and BXVI the "princes of the Church", said to you:"Repent now...", totally disregarding the undeniable fact that these very "princes of the Church" on many occasions claimed that nobody is obliged to convert-- be they Protestants, Muslims, Jews or even atheists--
in order to be saved. In the doctrine of V2 sect everybody is saved. Except the followers of the Truth.

Keep up the good and God's work on upholding the Truth. May our Savior through the intercession of The Immaculate bless you, and have mercy on all poor
souls.

Vladimir D.

 

MHFM: It’s great to hear about your interest.  It really is an outrage that supposed “Catholics” defend these heretics even after it’s made clear to them that they hold that non-Catholics don’t need to be converted for salvation.

 

St. Peter’s unfailing faith

 

Dear Brothers, where in your writings to you discuss the passage in the Bible where Jesus tells St.Peter that He has prayed that Peter's faith doesn't fail him?How are we to understand this in light of the faithless Vatican 2 anti-popes?  Thank you and God bless.

 

Barbara

 

MHFM: For those of our readers who might not be familiar with what you’re referring to, you’re asking about the unfailing faith that Jesus promised to St. Peter alone in Luke 22:31-32.  This is a scriptural proof for the Catholic dogma of Papal Infallibility.  To your question, the Vatican II antipopes have no impact on this truth whatsoever.  This is because they never validly assumed the office of St. Peter to begin with, since they were manifest heretics (and also conspirators) prior to their “elections.”  Thus, in reality, their heresies have as much impact on the purity of the Papal Office and St. Peter’s unfailing faith as any other Freemason or heretic out there: no impact whatsoever.  Related: The Catholic Teaching that a heretic cannot be a valid pope [PDF file].

 

Waking up

 

i have been studying the antichrist issue on your website.  i have found it to be very comprehensive and a real hoodwink remover.  i met a messianic jewish person at a jack in the box the other day. he states openly that a pope will indeed call himself god

 

however, i am unsure whether to associate with this character since he is not one of us.  i would like your opinion on the matter if you get a chance but if there are too many emails i will understand

 

i have other questions but i will not waste your time with them unless i finish reading the entire website and still do not understand

 

… i thank you......i grew up in the V2 sect but i know better now thanks to you.  i have begun attending a chapel that holds the latin rite mass......and i have finally been baptised legitimately.  Soon i will begin studying for my first communion and confirmation and this is a joyous time for me indeed… one of the priests says that no pope or council had the right to remove the tridentine mass as a true pope from the 1500's stated that it would be the "mass for all times throughout the world"  i think it is sad and scary what has happened...even scarier that my generation grew up in this sham church

 

is the clown mass a myth?  i hope so.  this is getting really weird and i took a good look at the dollar bill today....and of course it has a picture of the illuminati and words "novus ordo" and on the front washington the first freemason president.....its scary but its starting to make sense now i am "waking up a little"

 

i have a lot to study....so i will stop wasting your time now and read some more ( i always wondered why liberal professors are so hellbent on political agendas....now i know.....i wasted 4 years in university but today i have begun my REAL education about the way the world really is.)

 

-Mike

 

New Audio: The Four Gospels against the Protestant view of Justification

 

[New Audio]

The places in Matthew, Mark, Luke and John in the Protestant Bible which refute the Protestant view of Justification by faith alone [31 minute audio by Bro. Peter Dimond] * Fast-moving; see how the Bible devastates Protestantism.  It also addresses key verses brought forward by the Protestants from the Gospels, such as John 3:16.

 

This has been added to our: Refuting Protestantism and Eastern "Orthodoxy" section.

 

Bulletin

 

DEAR,

I AM ITALIAN, 26 YEARS OLD, MY NAME IS PIERGIORGIO. I HAVE VISETED YOUR WEB PAGE WITH PLEASURE. I WOULD ASK YOU A QUESTIO: DO YOU HAVE THE BULLETIN OF YOUR MONASTERY TO SEND ME. THANK YOU VERY MUCHE. I PRAY FOR
YOU.  YOUR SINCERELY IN CHRIST

PIERGIORGIO VALETTO

ITALY

 

MHFM: Thanks for the interest.  All of our latest updates are posted on our website, and our latest materials are made available for order at our online store.  So, if you check back to our website frequently you will be up to speed on our newest projects, posts, articles, items, etc.

 

Videos and Question

 

Good day. I have just watched some the videos on your website. Being a staunch defender of my Catholic faith, I stand rather lonesome  as a so called traditionalist and conservative in my friend and family circle. Anyway, I never had thought I would find anyone who represents the same strong attitude as I do- and then to find the best men on the subject, that is Priests, is quite something. My review and empression of your documentaries :Sensational! Fantastic! Fascinating! Great! It really makes you think about the personal conviction. I`d like to know from you therefore wether or not it is possible to bring the whole dispute over heresy or not to an investigation from the competent church department and if positive outcome to an ecclesiatistical court?! I`d be thankful for a short answer.

 

Most respectfully Christopher Benham

 

PS The evidence against rock music and freemasonry is wonderfully described and done. Keep on the wonderful work. God bless

 

MHFM: We’re glad you like the material.  No, it wouldn’t be possible to bring the dispute over the heresies of Vatican II and the Vatican II antipopes to any department inside the Vatican II sect because all of the authorities are fully in favor of Vatican II and the Vatican II antipopes.  It’s simply a situation, just like during the Arian crisis (4th century), where the heretics are in control of the buildings and the true Church has been reduced a remnant – a remnant which appears to most to be on the outside but is, in reality, the true Church.

 

Fighting for the Devil

 

Reading through your virulent attack on the most noble princes of the Church in the persons of Pope John Paul 11 and Benedict XVI places me at a loss of which purpose you guys 're out to achieve. I get the impression from perusing through your write-ups that you guys are the real heretics and schismatics. I also get the sense of the lack of basic understanding of logic and history of the church which you proudly manifest.

I personally do not want to join issues with you guys but only to let you people know that you are not fighting for God but for the devil who is the father of falsehood and confusion. You simply need to take a journey to the Papal visits like the last one that happened in Mariazell in Austria to see that you are fighting a loose game. We the catholics have absolute faith on our spiritual leaders and will always be by their side.

If you people have no other thing doing than to attack them, you better go and have your heads examined very well. People that claim to fight for God cannot be as mean and wicked as you people appear in your write-ups. Our God is a merciful God and the fathers of the church and the saints you always made referenceto were obedient to the leaders of the church. If you guys have issues to trash out with Vatican, you better take a flight to Rome rather than dirtying our computer screans with this garbage you paste on your website. We are not deceived by the antics of the evil one in the name of fighting for the church.

Repent now you still have the time lest Jesus will tell you guys that you have laboured very well but not for him. A word is enough for the wise. Chau.

Gerald.

Berlin Germany.

 

MHFM: You don’t want to “join issues” or point out anything specific because you would be refuted.  The truth is not on your side.  The fact of the matter is that we prove the case with undeniable documentation and based on the teaching of the Catholic Church.  It’s irrefutable because it’s true.  We are defending the Catholic faith, the dogmas, the Magisterium, the necessity of the Church and the necessity of Jesus Christ.  You are the one fighting for the Devil by defending some of the most pernicious heretics in Church history, who mock by their false ecumenism the deaths of the martyrs and trample under foot all Catholic dogmas by their religious indifferentism.  You mock Jesus Christ by claiming to believe in Him while defending men who so clearly repudiate the necessity of Him and His holy Catholic Church and its teachings.  You are blind and have no real faith.  If any saint from the past saw the actions of John Paul II and Benedict XVI alone, without even reading a word of their heretical teachings, they would immediately denounce them as total apostates who represent Antichrist in the Vatican.  You have no concept, not even a whiff of the true faith. 

 

Opened

 

You really opened up my eyes.  Thank you so much, and God bless.

 

Michael Dennie

Troy, MI

 

Pakistan

 

FROM MCA CHURCH OF PAKISTAN

 

Dear in Christ

 

I am pastor salamat gill serving the Lord in my local church very effectively. So I have read about you by net.

 

 I want to work with you in future.

 I am waiting your reply here soon.

  

 God bless you richly.

 

  Pastor Salamat Gill

 

MHFM: It’s very nice of you to contact us, but we could not work with anyone or any group that is not traditionally Catholic.  Christ only founded one Church, and that was the Catholic Church upon St. Peter (Mt. 16:18-20).  We encourage you to listen to the programs in this section:Refuting Protestantism and Eastern "Orthodoxy."  Soon we will be adding more things which show, against the many Protestant denominations, that the Catholic religion is the only true and biblical Christian religion.  We truly pray that you will consider this information and how critical it is for you to embrace the one true Christian religion, the Catholic religion.

 

Islam

 

Brother

         

I think That you people dont know anything about Islam. All the muslims believe From Adam(a) to Hazrat Isa(a)(Jesus) as you believe.But we believe one thing more that Jesus is not a God. He was one of the Most Great Prophet of God . We believe in virgin Mary.We believe in every Prophet. God send them to our world to teach us about God. They are the messenger of only one God.God is one. God told us by the Holy Quran to believe in all of this.Last Prophet Hazrat Mohammad(S) teach us to believe on that. Jews dont believe Jesus, we believe. We dont crusified him, Jews did. We are not unbelievers ,we believe more than you. I am not requesting you to learn about Quran,Please  Learn your  real Holy Bible first and learn that properly, Than Learn the Holy  Quran. You can read the Book named "Bible Quran And Science" writer,Dr Moris  bukaily.Buy

 

                                                                                                A Muslim

 

di…

 

MHFM: Contrary to what you state, we do know something about Islam.  And we can demonstrate, in just one minute, why it’s a false religion.  The true religion (which is the Catholic religion) cannot have blatant illogic at the heart of its teaching.  Islam has blatant illogic at its heart.  Islam considers Jesus to be a prophet, but it denies that He was God.  Islam says that God had no Son and it repudiates the Trinity. 

 

The illogic is this: Jesus said and indicated that He was God many times (e.g., John 8:58).  If He was not God (as Islam says), then He was a false prophet for claiming to be God when He was not.  According to Islam, he would logically – and we say this for the sake of argument for those who, God forbid, might accept Islam as true – have to be considered a blasphemer and a false prophet.  He could not logically be considered a prophet.  That proves that Islam is a false religion and that it has an official teaching which is blatantly false and illogical.  It proves it without even getting into the other false teachings of Islam which demonstrate that it’s a false religion which was inspired by the enemy of mankind to lead souls astray.

 

Jesus Christ was God, and the Catholic religion is the one true religion.   You need to convert to it and be baptized for salvation.

 

Deuterocanonical

 

Good morning Brothers,

 

While reseaching protestant removal of books from the bible - came across: In the New Testament, Hebrews 11:35 refers to an event that was only explicitly recorded in one of the deuterocanonical books (2 Maccabees 7). Even more tellingly, 1 Cor 15:29 "Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at all? why are they then baptized for the dead?", is an allusion to 2 Maccabees 12: 44, "for if he were not expecting the fallen to rise again, it would have been useless and foolish to pray for them in death". 1 Cor 15:29 is an obvious reference to suffering to help the dead be loosed from their sins. (Baptism also means salvific suffering for others in the New Testament, cf. Mat 20:22-23, Mk 10:38-39 and Lk 12:50) - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deuterocanonical

 

I think you have mentioned several of these examples in the past - what reasons did the proteatnts cite for the elimination of Biblical Books? This is important when I speak with protestants that state, "I believe only in the King James Bible translated from the original Greek. This and only this Bible"

 

This assumed freedom, 1500+ years later, to say it's a valid book or not should be something that would make a protestant pause and wonder.

 

The reading from Judith 13:22-25 today (Seven Sorrows) is another gorgeous example of a book being eliminated that coincides directly with Catholic Teaching and therefore "had to be removed" (our blessed Mother prefigured).

 

Would appreciate you continuing the work you do on refuting protestantism…

 

Please continue your work,

Gary

 

MHFM: Those points are interesting.  For those of our readers who are not familiar with the “deuterocanonical” books, these are the seven books of the Old Testament which the Protestants reject.  It’s also interesting that the New Testament, when quoting Old Testament passages, can be shown to be quoting the Septuagint version in many passages.  This is the Greek Translation of the Old Testament, compiled by 72 rabbis from the 1st to the 3rd century A.D., which included the seven books with the Protestants reject.  Thus, the New Testament writers quote the version of the Bible which the Protestants reject.

 

Jew from Israel wishes to convert

 

I am Jewish, from Israel.  As surprising as it may sound, I wish to convert to the one true faith.  Can you give me instructions and a list of TC churches in Europe?

 

Only two ex cathedra pronouncements?

 

Could you tell me how many times and which popes have spoken ex cathedra in the history of the church? Or where I can find out this 
information. I am discussing with at deacon and he claims that the popes have only spoken ex cathedra twice in the history of the 
church. Is this true? Please advise Thanks

 

D

 

MHFM: What that “deacon” said is completely untrue, but it’s something that’s very commonly stated by members of the Vatican II sect and also by “traditionalists.”  Below it will be explained why these people say this.  A very quick way to refute it is this:

 

Pope Leo XIII, Providentissimus Deus (# 20), Nov. 18, 1893:
"For all the books which the Church receives as sacred and canonical, are written wholly and entirely, with all their parts, at the dictation of the Holy Ghost; and so far is it from being possible that any error can co-exist with inspiration, that inspiration not only is essentially incompatible with error, but excludes and rejects it as absolutely and necessarily as it is impossible that God Himself, the supreme Truth, can utter that which is not true. This is the ancient and unchanging faith of the Church, solemnly defined in the Councils of Florence and of Trent, and finally confirmed and more expressly formulated by the Council of the Vatican." (The Papal Encyclicals, Pierian Press, Vol. 2, p. 335; Denzinger 1952)

 

The phrase “solemnly defined” refers to an ex cathedra pronouncement.  Thus, Pope Leo XIII is stating that the parts of the Councils of Florence and Trent he is referring to are ex cathedra pronouncements.  That proves that there are, of course, more than two ex cathedra pronouncements in Church history.  It’s very interesting to note that the part of the Council of Florence he is referring to  – namely, the statement on the Bible and its inspiration – is from the Bull Cantate Domino (Denz. 706).  That’s the same bull which declares that all who die outside the Catholic Church are not saved.  So, this is an interesting way of proving that the Council of Florence’s definition on salvation, that all who die as non-Catholics are lost, is “solemn” or ex cathedra.

 

Now, as stated above, the modernists of the Vatican II sect commonly state that there are only two ex cathedra statements in Church history.  This is completely false, as we’ve just shown.  They say this because they are ignorant of Church history and the true nature of dogma.  Some of them think that papal infallibility only became true when Pope Pius IX defined it as a dogma in 1870.  Hence, they falsely think that ex cathedra statements only could have occurred at the same time (1870) or after the definition of papal infallibility in 1870.  And since there have only been two “big” solemn pronouncements since 1870 – namely, Vatican I’s definition of papal infallibility itself, which occurred in 1870, and the definition of the Assumption in 1950 by Pius XII – only those two are ex cathedra pronouncements, according to the modernists’ argument.  Such a view is not only ridiculous, but heretical; for when a pope defines a dogma, he doesn’t make it true from that point forward, but defines the truth that Christ already revealed and what has been true since the death of the last apostle. 

 

Pope St. Pius X, Lamentabile, The Errors of the Modernists #21: “Revelation, constituting the object of Catholic faith, was not completed with the apostles.” (Denz. 2021) - Condemned

 

Thus, when Pope Eugene IV defined in 1441 that all who die as pagans, Jews, etc. are lost, he wasn’t making that true, but declaring what has always been true since the death of the last apostle.  Hence, all statements, going back to the beginning of Church history, which fulfill the language requirements which were defined by Vatican I, were ex cathedra.

 

Now, other Modernist heretics in the Vatican II sect think slightly differently.  Some “traditionalists” also hold this view: They say there were only two ex cathedra statements in Church history, but they say that the only two were: the definition of the Immaculate Conception in 1854 by Pope Pius IX and the definition of the Assumption by Pope Pius XII in 1950.  Why do they say this?  They say this because these are the only two statements in Church history in which the popes, when making the definition, actually said that they were defining what “was revealed by God.”  (Or, as is probably the case with most, they say it because they heard it from someone else and they simply regurgitate it.)  In the definition of the Immaculate Conception, Pius IX says that what he is defining “has been revealed by God” (Denz. 1641.).  In the definition of the Assumption, Pius XII says that what he is defining “was revealed by God” (Denz. 2333.).  But there is nothing in the definition of Vatican I which says that the pope must say that what he is defining has “been revealed by God.”  There are many different ways in which a pope can indicate that a point of faith or morals is a truth of faith which must be held.  As Vatican I defined, to speak ex cathedra a pope doesn’t have to say “revealed by God,” but must simply define a point of faith or morals while using language that makes it clear that he’s speaking as head of the Church and that his statement binds all Christians.  Popes can and have indicated this in many different ways.  Such a truth is necessarily revealed by God. 

 

Regarding the number of times popes have spoken ex cathedra, the Church has never given a number on how many times these requirements have been fulfilled.  However, whether a document is ex cathedra is known by looking at and understanding the significance of the language used by popes for different pronouncements.

 

Pope Pius IX, Vatican Council I, 1870, Session 4, Chap. 4:

“…the Roman Pontiff, when he speaks ex cathedra [from the Chair of Peter], that is, when carrying out the duty of the pastor and teacher of all Christians in accord with his supreme apostolic authority he explains a doctrine of faith or morals to be held by the universal Church, through the divine assistance promised him in blessed Peter, operates with that infallibility with which the divine Redeemer wished that His Church be instructed in defining doctrine on faith and morals; and so such definitions of the Roman Pontiff from himself, but not from the consensus of the Church, are unalterable.” (Denz. 1839)

 

Hopefully that explains why these two modernist misconceptions are false.

 

Cardinal Newman

 

I am a Catholic and I am wondering what your position is in regard to the teachings of Cardinal Newman. Is there anything about his works that is questionable or truly and clearly in error and if so what?  And If so, how should we approach his writings?

           

Thank you,

Bob Gates

 

MHFM: Newman held a heretical view of the dogma Outside the Church There is No Salvation.  He believed that there are exceptions to that solemnly defined truth.  Such a view is heresy.  His view was so heretical, in fact, that even certain heretics in our day who deny that dogma by watering it down have said that they consider Newman’s expressions to have been offensive to Catholic doctrine.  Newman’s writings should be approached with extreme caution, and only by those who are formed and well grounded in the traditional Catholic faith and what is going on today – by people who will not be swayed from the faith by reading passages of a modernist.

 

Depression

 

Re: Your site, and questions

 

Hi,

 

I wanted to ask you something thats kind of important to me. But not really quite sure how to ask it. So I will just jump right in, and hope that what I mean is clear.  I have not really been wanting to talk about this. Its been something that I have kind of kept hidden. But with the book out about all of Mother Teresas letters on her faith crisis, I feel that I can say a bit more in regards to myself.

 

I have a kind of cold, dark feeling myself when it comes to faith. Nor to be fair, I am not sure of it the Bipolar depression, or just my "self" having issues with faith itself.  Do you know what I am refering to?

 

Any advise?

 

R

 

MHFM: Regarding people with issues of depression, we discussed this on one radio program some time back.  We would recommend praying the 15 decade Rosary each day, and getting out of mortal sin (if you are committing it).  Also, carefully consider your life and see if there is a grave sin you committed that has not been confessed.  Also, depression can arise from spiritual sloth.  If people are not doing things that are productive in their lives for their salvation, or helping other souls, a deep emptiness can set in; for deep down they know they should be doing more that is truly productive and valuable than what they are doing and it bothers them. 

 

A Protestant converts to the traditional Catholic faith and enters our community

 

MHFM: Below is a link to an interesting audio interview with Joseph Myers, a new convert to the traditional Catholic faith from Protestantism (from evangelical Protestantism and Calvinism).  After receiving our material recently, Joseph converted to the traditional Catholic faith and joined Most Holy Family Monastery.  Hear about his story and the graces he has received.  Among other things, Joseph talks about the change in his life, coming out of a spiritual fog, the power of the Rosary, hearing angels sing the first day he arrived here, etc.

 

Audio interview with Joseph Myers, convert from Protestantism and newest member of our religious community.  He speaks of his recent conversion and entrance into religious life [31 min. audio]

 

Joseph Myers, convert from Protestantism

 

“Catholic” funeral for Pavarotti

 

Dear Brothers,

Once again, with the elaborate "Catholic" funeral of Pavarotti, the Vatican II church promotes the heresy that there are no eternal consequences for the mortal sin of adultery. Even Benedict XVI sent his condolences to a man who dumped his wife after 35 years of marriage and "married" his secretary. Here is a link to an article in which a novus ordo priest, who stated that the whole funeral amounted to "profanation of the temple", was criticized by the funeral director.  This funeral director stated that the NO priest should have "kept his mouth sewn shut".  This is quite telling of the funeral director, since that is one of the things they do to the dead. 

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/5118751.html

The whole event shows once again TOTAL APOSTASY of the Vatican II church.

Bridget

 

MHFM: This is quite a scandal.  Divorced and remarried, yet he’s given a “Catholic” funeral by the Counter Church, in the cathedral with 18 priests and the “archbishop” in attendance!  Wow, this is really an outrage.  As you mentioned, Antipope Benedict XVI also sent his words of praise for the adulterer.  This is just another proof that the Vatican II sect is apostate, and that it totally rejects basic Catholic teaching on morality, to say nothing here of its innumerable heresies against dogmas of faith.  It is truly a Counter Church, and who will refuse to see it? 

 

These people in the Counter Church stand for absolutely nothing!  They refuse to excommunicate the most notorious pro-abortion politicians, and put “Catholic” funerals for adulterers right in the public’s face.  What an abomination!  What a grave sin and an expression of faithlessness and no love of the truth for anyone to obstinately defend as Catholic this manifest heretic and abomination, the evil and wicked apostate Antipope Benedict XVI!  Woe to those that do not expose and denounce this heretic and his apostate “bishops.”

 

Works

 

Hello, if you do not mind I would like to add a few things to share the Grace message of our Lord with you. In searching the scriptures, I do not see where the Lord gives divisions to anyone..meaning... He does not judge man by being Catholic, Protestant, Lutheran, Methodist...etc. These divisions are man's doing. There is the Jew, the gentile,the saved person, and the lost. Salvation is through grace and faith alone with nothing added as the Lord did all of the saving while we did all of the being saved. If Christ wasn't enough and we had to add works or anything else to it, then God the Father would have to be one of the most cruel gods around. To send His Son..His only begotten Son to the cross to die the most awful,  ugly and totureous death and NOT have His Son be the ONLY way to salvation, is the meanest thing anyone could do...and yet we know that this would be impossible for our Lord to be that way. Say for instance Jesus saved you 99% of the way and it took you the other 1% to be saved,  you would still be 100% lost. You cannot be your own savior and yet that is what you would be doing in adding that 1%. A person needs to come to Calvary hat in hand with the Lord doing all of the saving . The only thing that we could do without doing anything is believe. Many people have different doctrines and they will all be straightened out once we go to be with the Lord. The most important thing is"Are you saved?" Was there a time  that you had asked the Lord to be your Lord and Savior and do you know without a shadow of a doubt that when you take your last breath here on earth that you will be with Him forever? That salvation is all of Him and none of us, for He will not share His glory with anybody. It is all of His work...praise the Lord. I pray that you are saved and that I meet you one day in heaven with all of the other saints. I love talking about the Lord and His word…

 

Denise

 

MHFM: You say: “He does not judge man by being Catholic, Protestant, Lutheran, Methodist...etc. These divisions are man's doing.”  He certainly does judge men for what doctrine of Him they hold.  That’s why He says that unless one hears the Church he is as the heathen (Mt. 18:17).  The men who reject the Catholic Church have divided themselves from the teaching of Christ.  You believe in justification by faith alone.  You have a grave misunderstanding of the Bible’s teaching on works.  Justification by faith alone is condemned right in the Bible (James 2:24).  You really need to hear this audio:

 

 

The places in 2 Cor., Galatians, Ephesians, Phillipians, Colossians, 2 Thessalonians, 1 & 2 Tim., Hebrews and James in the Protestant Bible which refute the Protestant view of Justification by faith alone [37 minute audio]

 

 

You also say: Salvation is through grace and faith alone with nothing added as the Lord did all of the saving while we did all of the being saved. If Christ wasn't enough and we had to add works or anything else to it, then God the Father would have to be one of the most cruel gods around.”  Well, you don’t even believe this.  You believe that one must believe in Christ, so Christ didn’t do it all; one still must believe, even according to you.  If He did it all, then one wouldn’t even have to believe.  But the idea that He won’t condemn people on the basis of works is totally unbiblical and refuted by loads of passages, as the above audio shows.  But here’s one verse which is covered in the audio which refutes your common Protestant view that God does all the saving and we are merely saved without our doing anything.  Yes, God saves because one needs His grace to do all good things; but man must cooperate with His grace by choosing to accept the grace and then choosing to do (or not to do) things which will bring him to salvation, as we see here:

 

1 Timothy 4:16- “Take heed unto thyself, and unto the doctrine; continue in them: for in doing this thou shalt both save thyself, and them that hear thee.”

 

We see that one must not only continue in the faith (i.e. one could lose it) but also do things to be saved.  In doing these things (which God gives one the grace to do) one saves himself, as St. Paul clearly teaches.  By failing to do them, one damns himself.

 

Benedict XVI in Austria

 

Dear Brothers, 

 

I was flipping channels and came across EWTN's live transmission of Benedict XVI adoration of the Blessed Sacrament in a church.  The Blessed Sacrament was exposed, Benedict XVI incensed the Blessed Sacrament and went back to kneel before the Blessed Sacrament.  THEN A VERY INTERESTING CEREMONY HAPPENED.  First, a couple, in some sort of Hindu garb lighted some candles in a platter with flowers in it, came forward and placed it on the floor in front of the Blessed Sacrament.  Then, another couple, black, in African garb, also with a platter full of small candles lit the candles, came forward and placed the platter on the floor in front of the Blessed Sacrament.  Then, an Asian couple, also dressed in Asian garb, came up, the woman spooned a substance on a platter that was full of candles, the candles were lit, then they both came up and placed the platter on the floor in front of the Blessed Sacrament.

Brothers, PLEASE EXPLAIN, were these couples Hindu Catholics, African Catholics and Asian Catholics or were they of other religions placing who knows what in front of the Blessed Sacrament IN THE PRESENCE OF BENEDICT XVI?  Even if they were Catholics, this hideous ritual in front of the Blessed Sacrament was totally out of place.  Is there any way of finding out who these people were and why this was done?  Thank you for your kind response.

 

Maria

 

MHFM: Thank you for the information.  Without seeing exactly what occurred, it would be difficult to say precisely what happened.  However, it sounds very much like the superstitious practices of various false religions were being incorporated into the ceremony.  This is very common in the Vatican II sect.  John Paul II had it as basically a staple on his trips abroad, as we show in this file: The Heresies of John Paul II - a comprehensive presentation [PDF file]

 

 

Above: John Paul II’s “Mass” in 2002 in Mexico City, which incorporated the customs of the demonic Aztec culture.  Indians danced before the altar wearing headdresses and breastplates.  As they performed, the snake-like hiss of rattles and the beating of tom-toms could be heard.  John Paul II himself was actually the recipient of a pagan “purification” ritual which a woman performed.

 

 

We would also point out that one should not refer to what’s occurring at a Novus Ordo church as adoration or to the piece of bread they are worshipping as the Blessed Sacrament, since the New Mass is not valid and Our Lord is not present there.

 

Heresy of the Week

 

MHFM: This week’s Heresy of the Week will be posted on Tuesday, Sept. 11.  If you missed last week's, it’s a pretty bad one from Benedict XVI on Buddhism.

 

Like a veil is being lifted

 

Hello

Thank you so much for your website! You mention a book that explains the basic catechism. Which one is that?  I went to CCD in the late 80's and it was pretty liberal. I don't want to attend the New Mass because, not only now I am realizing it's wrong, but because it always seemed so Protestant to me. My older relatives (born in the 1920's) always said there were so many things wrong after Vatican II. It was so strange for them to adjust. What is the position on these people who are older and still go to the New Mass every Sunday? Will they be allowed into heaven, because they just don't know.

Also, do you post a list of valid places to go to Confession or Mass? Do you know of any in Evansville, IN or Owensboro, KY?

Thank you so much. I have a lot to learn. It's like the veil is being lifted from my eyes.

God bless!
Elizabeth

 

MHFM: We’re really glad you came across the information, Elizabeth.  The catechism we sell for $5.00 is a basic catechism.  The package we'd recommend if you're familiar with the basics of the Catholic faith is: our 6 DVD special for $10.00, which includes 6 DVDs (with 10 different programs), as well as 3 important books, an audio disc (with 20 hours of programming) and flyers for only $10.00 (no shipping charge in U.S.).

 

Regarding your question about where to go to receive sacraments, if you called us here at 1-800-275-1126 we'd be happy to answer your question about that. What you said about CCD in the Vatican II "Church" (i.e. that it was Protestant) is very interesting.  We've heard so many similar stories from other people.  It’s very important to note because what goes on at the parish level really drives home that the Vatican II "Church" is not the Catholic Church, but a heretical counterfeit constructed for the last days. 

 

Regarding your question about the older people in the Novus Ordo, they are being given invalid sacraments and being taught a religion of religious indifferentism.  It's a matter of salvation for them to find out about the traditional faith and get out of the New Mass.  The new religion and the New Mass kill souls.

 

Your comment about it’s “like a veil is being lifted” is very similar to what we’ve heard from many others.  When people begin to recognize what has gone on and the truth of the traditional catholic faith, and how what’s being offered at the parishes is not the traditional faith, they then are able to put their finger on the emptiness and the problems which they perceived at those parishes before but couldn’t precisely identify.  It all makes sense to them that this Vatican II “Church” is the counterfeit sect predicted to arise in the last days to lead people astray.

 

More on Popular Music

 

Dear Brothers,

 

I totally agree with your analysis of rock-style music.  Although many people seem to think that "lite rock" or "easy listening" music is harmless, in a way it is the most dangerous of all because what it does, as you mentioned briefly, is deify human love.  They go on and on about perfect love, everlasting love, true love, even "heaven is a place on earth."  The quotations could be endless, but it all ends with attempting to pass as divine what is simply human love at best, or mostly, actually, human lust.  Anyway, I'm glad you brought this up.  It is a bad habit to be addicted to -- listening to this "safe" music, and I think the spiritual detriments are much graver than most realize.  It is making man into god, and leaving no room for the One True God.

 

Sincerely,

Bruce

 

Watching

 

Hi, my name is Juan and im from Texas. For this past week i have'nt been able stop watching the videos in which brother Michael Daimond explains salvation and everything esle. I want to be saved and i need spiritual
guidance…

 

Juan

 

New Audio: 2 Cor., Gal, etc. through James totally refutes the Protestant view of Justification

 

[New Audio]

The places in 2 Cor., Galatians, Ephesians, Phillipians, Colossians, 2 Thessalonians, 1 & 2 Tim., Hebrews and James in the Protestant Bible which refute the Protestant view of Justification by faith alone [37 minute audio by Bro. Peter Dimond] * see how the Bible devastates Protestantism – a must listen!  It also responds to and explains key verses from Ephesians and Galatians which Protestants like to quote and how they have misunderstood them.

 

The evidence cannot be denied.   Many passages are covered in this audio, including crucial points regarding a verse in Ephesians which (to our knowledge) have not been emphasized before.  One should spread the link to Protestant acquaintances.  This has been added to our: Refuting Protestantism and Eastern "Orthodoxy". 

 

Comment on Prot

 

I posted the link to your refuting Protestantism radio program on myspace so everyone that is on my list will be able to access it, hopefully it gets passed around. I just thought I would mention before I became involved with the occult I was a protestant and one of the reasons I thought it was that Christianity was a joke was because of justification through faith alone. There was one particular time when my youth pastor was talking about  following the Ten Commandments and I asked him why it was necessary to follow them if we were just going to heaven anyway. He said that we had to follow them because God wanted us to. Then I asked if my faith wasn't enough to get into heaven. Then ,of course, he said it was. When I pointed out the contradiction he told me that I was asking too many questions.

 

God Bless You,

 

Misty

 

Refuting Protestantism

 

MHFM: We have expanded (and will continue to greatly expand) our Refuting Protestantism and Eastern "Orthodoxy" page.  You can now listen to an audio discussion of 1 Corinthians and how it refutes Protestantism as a separate (and short) audio file.  (We will be adding many others relating to Protestantism soon.) You can spread the link to your Protestant acquaintances.  We hope that these discussions will be well circulated and effective because people generally don’t like to spend much time.  This discussion of 1 Corinthians is short (only 10 minutes), to the point and uses the Protestant Bible.

 

Audio Programs: (more on other books of the Bible and other issues relating to Protestantism coming soon)

Radio discussion of the places in 1 Corinthians of the Protestant Bible which refute Protestantism and especially Justification by faith alone [10 minute audio] * non-Catholics should take the 10 minutes and listen

 

Exorcism

 

Greetings:

I recently reviewed your website.  I don't know if it is true or not, although I agree with you about Post Vatican II Catholicism.  I just don't know if what you say about Pre Vatican II is true.

I do know that I need an exorcism, as I have been tormented by demons for about 10 years.  Can you help me?

P S

 

MHFM: We believe your problem could be solved without an exorcism.  First, get out of mortal sin, if you are committing it.  Second, be convinced and accept the fullness of the traditional Catholic Faith.  The profession of faith from the Council of Trent is also something you should make once you are convinced of the material on our site.  The comments in your e-mail show that you are not yet aware of the traditional Catholic faith (the one true faith).  Pray the 15 decade rosary every day.  When you are at the point of doing this consistently and convinced of at least the basics of the traditional Catholic faith and what’s going on today, make a good confession of all past mortal sins to a priest ordained in the traditional rite of ordination.  If you do all those things, then we believe your problem can be solved without an exorcism.  But you need to have the true faith completely to be freed from the Devil's grip; that's why you need to research the material on our site which presents the traditional teachings of the Church and what’s going on today.

 

Popular Music

 

Hello, just wanted to let you know that I love the videos that you made. They're very informative. I watched the Abortion, Rock music, and Freemasonry exposed one tonight. It was very good, but a couple things that bothered me was the way that you stereotyped rock music, and totally bashed one of God's greatest plant's and compared it to satanism. It's obvious that you've done your homework on alot of things, but obviously not rock music and marijuana. Marijuana has a ten thousand year medical history and is used to make all types of things like clothing and paper for example. And I noticed that you only mentioned the occult rock musicians, and left out alot of the positive ones like Chris Cornell, Zach De La Rocha, KRS-One, Tupac Shakur, Jim Morrison, John Lennon, Johnny Cash and other's who are trying and did try to spread Peace and Love through their music and art. It's those kinds of statement's that spread negative energy and hate to good men and women like you who are only trying to make this world a better place the only way they know how to do it. Although I believe that everyone has the right to their own beliefs, I thought it strange that you are spreading hate through your word's when you claim to be a minister of God. To say that all rock musicians are satanist's is the same thing as saying all of you minister's are satanist's just like the Pope. That is clearly not true, as is the case with rock music. Thank you for taking the time to read this. I sincerely hope you take what I've said into consideration and expand your mind so as to spread love to everyone. Thank you, hope you have a great day.
 
Peace and Love 

 

C

 

MHFM: Smoking marijuana for recreational purposes is a mortal sin, just like getting drunk is.  The point was that Satan wants people to smoke marijuana because when they get into it he’s got them in mortal sin and often locked there.  That’s why they very often become zombie like, or more apathetic about their responsibilities, or even moved into harder core drugs. 

 

Regarding your other comment, there are no positive rock musicians.  As musical experts could explain, rock music is inherently disordered.  Among the ones you mentioned as “positive,” you included Jim Morrison, John Lennon (of the Beatles) and Tupac Shakur.  You really need to obtain this video on rock and other popular music.  It’s excellent.  It’s 3 and ½ hours and it covers some of these very names you mentioned who you think were “positive” and shows how they were also involved in the occult.  It shows how they are all guided by the Devil.  The “peace” and “love” you mentioned is a false peace and love about the universal brotherhood of man to be held in this life, regardless of religion and moral values.  This is an anti-gospel which attacks the necessity to accept the true faith of God and deceives men who are on the road to spiritual death because they are without the true faith and the worship of the true God.

 

You mentioned John Lennon as “positive.”  He convinced the masses to “imagine there’s no Heaven” – that is, imagine there’s no God.  That’s totally evil.  If you cannot see the evil of that then you are spiritually blind.  Tupac was a rapper and, although we’re not familiar with his lyrics, we would find it shocking if he didn’t promote violence, fornication, impurity – mortal sins.  Such persons are the spiritual slime of the Earth, wallowing in mortal sin after mortal sin and corrupting the youth with such evil.  You really need to get that tape; it was done by a man who was deeply involved in this music and saw that the music was simply being given to him from a spiritual source (i.e. demons). 

 

1 John 5:19- “… the whole world is seated in wickedness.”

 

The fact of the matter is that almost all of the music that would be played on mainstream popular music stations today is not something a person should listen to.  Most of it is inspired by the Devil to mezmorize people with thoughts of this life, to shut them off from aspirations for the supernatural, to capture them in worldly pleasures.  Even something like country music, which some might consider innocuous, is not.  It’s worldly, sensual and ingrains upon a person a sensual (and often mortally sinful) way of looking at life.  This music often preaches the idolization of human beings through the worship of one’s spouse or “partner.”  It’s bad stuff, and if people listen to this music they are closing off graces for themselves and being moved away from God.  People absolutely should not listen to it.

 

Debate

 

Dear Brothers,

 

I recently had the opportunity to sit back and listen to your debate with William Golle about the Sedevacantist position from your archived radio shows.  I listened to all 3 hours of the debate last week but reserved judgment on a few things until now.  You guys hit Mr. Golle hard with facts for which he readily admitted he did not have answers, but that he would be glad to debate again if you would pick 5 of your best heresies and give him time to prepare.  I didn't hear you say whether you accepted his challenge, but regardless, what strikes me the most about the entire debate is this: Mr. Golle's entire case rests on one thing: His disbelief that such a thing could ever happen.  He lacked thoughtful refutes and evidence, but pounded away at the incredulousness that this could in fact be the case.  That's it! That's all he had for the most part.  Sedevacantism can not be true because such a crisis has never happened before to this extent and he can't humanly see how we could get out of this mess. That was his entire argument.  Wow!!  So I'd like to ask him if he believes that Jesus actually resurrected from the dead, or if saints and mystics have carried the stigmata or if Moses parted the Red Sea.  You see, just because we humans don't understand something does not make it untrue.  The entire Catholic faith is based on things that are mortally impossible.  There are many things we simply don't know the answer to but he would be wise to concentrate on what we do know and worry about figuring the rest out later: this church is not The Catholic Church and hasn't been since day 1 of it's commencement.  This debate kind of reminded me of 9-11.  Depite mounds of blatant, irrefutable evidence that the official story of 9-11 is complete hogwash, stubborn and foolish people refuse to believe it, but instead focus on the questions that are still unanswered such as what exactly happened to the passengers on the planes etc.  As soon as someone can't tell them exactly what happened to the passengers, they claim that the official story must be true.  Same here with the sedevacantist position.  The overwhelming evidence that this church is counterfeit is clear as day once you begin to objectively look.  I argue that that is all we need to know at this time.  Get the heck out of that false church immediately, convert to the true faith, and let God worry about how God is going to deliver us out of this chastisement.   The longer these stubborn and prideful people such as Golle defend the Homo Ordo Church, the longer God may see fit to keep us in the dark. 

 

JP (Buffalo)

 

MHFM: We agree with your points.  Mr. Golle called us just a few days ago, by the way.  He admitted that we won the debate, but he’s as hardened as ever in his heretical positions.  Unfortunately, one must say that he’s of outrageous bad will.  We might debate him again, but the question is whether we want to cover similar issues with the same person.  The facts and arguments covered in the first debate, which no defender of the validity of the Vatican II antipopes can answer, really speak for themselves.  But we might debate him on a different issue.  We’ll see what happens.  We’re also working on something more in-depth against Protestantism.  If you haven’t heard the debate, you can go here to listen to the debate.

 

New John Paul II photos

 

Here’s a new file with some very interesting new photos of John Paul II:

 

New John Paul II Photos

 

Antipope John Paul II taking active part in a pagan ritual!

 

 

This is a photo of John Paul II being "blessed" in a pagan American Indian ritual in 1987.  We had a picture of this in our book: The Truth about What Really Happened to the Catholic Church after Vatican II.   However, this particular angle shows something different: it shows that John Paul II was bowing his head in order to receive and participate in the pagan ritual!  This is an absolute act of apostasy.

 

St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, Pt. II, Q. 12, A. 1, Obj. 2: “… if anyone were to… worship at the tomb of Mahomet, he would be deemed an apostate.”

 

Who would be so blind to deny that John Paul II was a non-Catholic heretic and therefore an antipope?

 

Package

 

Greetings Good Brothers,

 

Just a note to let you know that I received the package I ordered from you and that I send you my compliments, for whatever they're worth.  You really have left no stone unturned in researching and compiling your books and video representations. Thanks be to God!   Oh, but...well...some of it is kinda hard to face.  Not hard to believe, just sad to see… I will send another order in some time this week...I hope to distribute some of the books, esp. the one on No Salvation Outside the Church... Both books tell the truth and the DVDs are great….

  

SA

 

To do?

 

Hello,

I have seen a few of your video postings. I found them interesting. So tell me, hearing all of what you posted, whats a person suppose to    do to become a valid Catholic?

I am in Louisville, KY. This is a very Catholic town. Lots of  Churches. (And it had a lot of sexual abuse problems here as well).   And its all Vatican related. What is your advise for people that need to do what you have said, but have no avenue?

Thanks,
Rob

 

MHFM: We have a section on our website explaining what people are to do who are converting to the Catholic Faith from Protestantism, etc. or who are coming out of the New Mass and the Vatican II “Church.”  We would also recommend that you call us and we can help you with more specific questions about possible options for the sacraments in your area.

 

New John XXIII photos

 

Here’s a new file with some interesting new photos of Antipope John XXIII:

 

New John XXIII Photos

 

Antipope John XXIII was the first claimant to the Papacy to welcome a Shinto High-Priest to the Vatican

 

 

B-16 not a pope - when will they get it?

 

Dear MHFM

 

I was just reading over the list of praises of Benedict XVI for pagans and now the Chinese (in China).  If this "pope" and his Vatican II predecessors lived in Stalin's time, is there any doubt that they would visit Russia and heap praise and respect upon them while people were being massacred by the millions and  sent to the Siberian Salt mines.  In China they tortured our Catholic missionaries and put people's heads upon poles as examples to others.  Their tanks ran over their own people in Tianmen Square, and, oh, yes, forced abortions.    And yet  this so-called Pope praises China.  When are we going to get it?  Satan is laughing his head off as these “popes” carry on their Communist antics for loyal  "Catholics". 

 

The cousin I emailed Benedict's quotes to has not replied yet.  Nor has the sister in law who was so sure she could find fault with your web site.  This was several months ago.  I think she ran into the brick wall of truth. 

 

PM

 

Insult

 

… I've read the excellently researched PDF you produced, in which you argue convincingly and dispassionately, and demonstrate beyond doubt, the heretical posistion of this antipope.  What an insult he is to all those Catholics in Ireland who risked death and suffered economic humiliation for 400 years rather than convert to protestantism!  Worse still, they now believe him to be a traditionalist zealot rather than an apostate.

 

Keep up the good work.

 

MHFM: Good point: it’s when one considers the sacrifices made by Catholics in so many different circumstances in history not to become heretics or schismatics or apostates that the true evil, malice, sin and heresy at the heart of the actions and teachings of the Vatican II antipopes come through.  Their actions completely mock and declare worthless all the sacrifices and hardships suffered by those Catholics because they would not compromise the faith.  That demonstrates why Antipope Benedict XVI and the Vatican II sect are so evil, and why those who obstinately defend them are so evil.

 

B-16 video

 

Hello,

I have been watching… your video entitled "the amazing heresies of B XVI. It's excellent! Congratulations for such a brillant work. I would like to show it to a friend…

 

Thank you for your time.
God speed,
Delphine


PS/ Do you know any valid priest who celebrates the Holy Mass in Ireland (I mean non in union with papa Ratzi?)

 

MHFM: Thanks for the interest and the words of support.  Unfortunately, we don’t know of priests in Ireland who are not in communion with Antipope Benedict XVI.

 

“Orthodoxy”

 

May peace be with you.

I was reading your article that argued against Eastern Orthodoxy. Your argument to their illogic: It seems a simple answer that knowing the difference between a valid or a robber council seems to be inline with determining if a council is heretical or not. However, does this not exactly parallel to the argument of finding a pope a heretic or not?

May God bless you.
Holy Mary protect you.
-Christopher

 

MHFM: No, one can consistently and logically show that the Vatican II antipopes are heretics (and therefore never assumed the papal office) because their teaching notoriously contradicts the past dogmatic teachings of the popes.

 

Now, how do the “Orthodox” distinguish between the valid and binding councils and (false) robber councils?  Ask them, and you will receive no specific answer.  You will hear: “because the Church accepted these councils.”  And when you say: “Specifically, how do you know that the Church accepted those councils,” you will again receive no answer.  This is because there is no consistent answer for them to give.  All bishops are equal, according to them; but there have been many councils at which many bishops were present and issued decrees that are heretical.  So, why did the Church not speak at those councils but did speak at the ones they accept?  They have no response.  That’s why there must be (and is) an office of supreme bishop (the Bishop of Rome).

 

HenceeHence, , as Catholics we have a consistent and logical set of criteria by which we can know and show that something is heretical and that a person is a heretic.  In the case of Eastern “Orthodoxy,” however, since they recognize no supreme bishop, they have no consistent and logical set of criteria by which they can distinguish a binding and infallible council from a false and heretical one.  At most, they could say that they accept a particular council because its teaching is in accord with their personal interpretation of Scripture and fathers of the Church.  Hence, it is nothing more than an earlier version of Protestantism.  Every man decides for himself, with no real Church having real authority which exists from Christ.  They cannot, by any means, say that they can consistently believe or prove that the first seven councils are infallible and dogmatic.  Their claim in this regard is empty, false and illogical.  (Here’s the letter to which he refers, by the way: A letter refuting Eastern Orthodoxy.)

 

Register

 

Dear editor am Fr. Dr. Deogratias Ssonko professor of Liturgical science in many theological seminaries here in Uganda and regular presenter on Radio Maria.

 

Kindly register me for your publications

 

Thanks

 

Fr. Dr. Deogratias

 

MHFM: We’re really glad to hear about your interest.  The newest information is on the website or can be ordered from us.  We hope you look into it.  We strongly recommend viewing our DVDs and obtaining our books.  We really hope you continue to look at the information on the website, especially about the dogmas, the Vatican II “Church,” the New Mass, the invalid New Rite of Ordination, etc.

 

New Paul VI photos

 

Here’s a new file with some new photos of Antipope Paul VI.  There are some very interesting shots, including some new shots of him wearing the breastplate of the ephod:

 

New Paul VI Photos

 

Over the next few days we will be adding more interesting new photos of the other Vatican II antipopes.  These will include a very important one of Antipope John Paul II.

 

NJP

 

Dear Brother Dimond

The article on NJP was excellent and long overdue. I was one of the unfortunate few who read the article by Brian and Laura K… and was sold on NJP.  But thanks to you a ray of hope is visible. One of your statements has become my guide "Salvation of souls is the supreme law of the church" and I'm sure the church will never shut that door.

I have also cleared a misconception that Abp.Lefebevre was wrong in consecrating bishops without papal mandate.But the sad part is that these bishops have all professed and adhered to severe heresies and have laid to waste a good deed.

I would be grateful if you could clarify the difference between valid and invalid and licit and ilicit sacraments.  Please send me the specific prayers to St.Joseph

God Bless you and your work.  I remember you in prayer.

Jerome D'Souza
Goa - India

 

MHFM: We’re glad you found the material helpful.  For those who haven’t seen it, the article to which he refers is this:

 

Facts which Demolish the "No independent priest today has Jurisdiction" Position - Did St. Vincent Ferrer have jurisdiction? If you hold the position that "no independent priest today has jurisdiction," then your answer must be no. [pdf]

 

Regarding your question, a sacrament is valid if it takes place.  A sacrament is licit if it takes place lawfully.  The prayers to St. Joseph can be found here, and on our mainpage by going to one of the lower sections of our site called “Prayers to Powerful Saints.”

 

Something missing

 

Hello,

 

My name is Jim Keane and I live in Southeastern, Georgia. I have viewed some of your DVD's and read your literature. I agree with most of what you are conveying, some of the information I am still absorbing. I am old enought to be pre-vatican II and miss our older ways, which I consider the right ways of the Holy Roman Catholic Church. With that said I still attend mass every Sunday and most of the Holy days of obligation, but I always feel there is something missing?... 

 

Jim

 

MHFM: Jim, what’s missing is the real presence of Jesus Christ in the Eucharist.  As our DVD and article on The New Mass  [PDF File] show, the New Mass is not valid since it lacks the words of consecration.  One must avoid it under pain of grave sin.  We hope you come to that realization.  The Vatican II “Church,” with its New Mass and new teachings, is not the Catholic Church, but the clever counterfeit created by the Devil as part of the predicted Great Apostasy.

 

Re-investigating

 

Dear Brothers Dimond:

 

I heard Br. Dimond on the Art Bell show and was very impressed with his unflinching presentation.  I haven't been a Catholic since I was a kid, but that presentation and your web site have me re-investigating Catholicism.  I have long suspected that the modern church does not believe in the message of Jesus Christ, but I had no hard evidence of this.

 

I would be astounded at the way many people dismiss the unassailable evidence presented on your site, but I'm now 42 and I've been well-schooled in the incredible ability most people have to dismiss facts they find distressing.

 

I will be ordering your book/cds package within a week…. Anyway, I think your work is excellent and look forward to your next radio show.

 

Frank

 

MHFM: We’re very glad to hear about your interest.  We hope you follow through with it and return to the true (traditional) Catholic faith.  We have been astounded as well by the bad will which is so prevalent.  But thankfully there are people out there of good will who care about the truth and are acting upon it.

 

Anti-Blessing?

 

Have you noticed that the picture of Jesus Christ on Ratzinger's Jesus of Nazareth has his left hand raised in a satanic blessing?  The original picture "Salvator Mundi" has the right hand raised in blessing, so they had to change it to have it as such on the cover.

Do you know if there is occultic connection with the palm of the hands raised (as in the back picture of the book), or the double arm, palms up, double rise that PaulVI, and JPII  are always seen doing in your films?  Is that something that Popes have always done.  Also, are you aware of the upside down cross blessing that both PaulVI, and JPII do in your films?  Do you know where this could be researched?  

 

Thank you.  Cordially, Mary

 

MHFM: We have definitely noticed that when the Vatican II antipopes “give blessings” (e.g. when present in front of large crowds) they make a very quick gesture which is supposed to be the sign of the cross but it is not.  It’s a quick movement of the hand, definitely not a complete sign of the cross.  It’s difficult to make out what it is: it could be an upside-down cross or something else sinister.

 

Difference?

 

Hi

 

I've seen some of your stuff on the Internet.  I think that you expose very well the incoherence of Vatican II.  In discussing the Novo Ordine Missae, however, I have an observation to make, of which you probably aware, but would be interested to know what you think.  I remember as a kid (late 60s) that the Creed in the English vernacular finished with "...and I LOOK FORWARD TO the resurrection of the dead", which was, in a further development, changed (and I don't know if this is just in the British Isles) to "...and I LOOK FOR the resurrection of the dead"

 

This seems a crucial difference to me.  In the Latin "ET EXPECTO RESURRECTIONEM MORTUORIS" I understand EXPECTO as "hope for/look forward to (hopefully)", but certainly not "LOOK FOR" (ie  "I am looking/searching for..")  It seems that this is an even further development to V2, which attacks the HEART of Pauline Christianity (no resurrection=no hope=no point).

 

What do you think?

 

Best regards,

Sean Nation

 

MHFM: Expecto or Exspecto means “I await” or “I long for.”  We don’t think that “I look for” is a significant difference.  But Ratzinger definitely attacks the reality of the Resurrection is his heretical book Introduction to Christianity, which we expose here: The Heresies of Benedict XVI  [PDF file]

 

Heretic

 

Dear Brothers,

 

Can you please provide a simple and concise definition for 'heretic?'  I don't believe Webster's dictionary quite grasps the meaning of such an individual, in today's modern age. I am trying to explain to a 'Born-again' couple, who have formed a missionary in Ecuador, that they are leading souls to Hell, regardless of their 'works.'  I quoted St. John 10:1 and St. Matthew 7:21-23, in a general message, on their blog. I also added a verbatim of Cantate Domino. 

 

My hope is to scare them into investigating their skewed interpretations of God's Word and their 'goofy' belief, that they are eternally saved, by merely 'inviting' Jesus into their heart.  In the mean time, I referred your website to them. 

 

Thanks!

 

L…

 

MHFM: Here’s a concise definition:

 

Canon 1325.2, 1917 Code of Canon Law: “After the reception of baptism, if anyone, retaining the name Christian, pertinaciously denies or doubts something to be believed from the truth of divine and Catholic faith, such a one is a heretic; if he completely turns away from the Christian faith, such a one is an apostate; if finally he refuses to be under the Supreme Pontiff or refuses communion with the members of the Church subject to him, he is a schismatic.”

 

Mother Teresa’s darkness

 

Dear Brothers:
 
In the September 3, 2007 issue of Time Magazine  there are a few additional quotes from Mother Teresa's letters that are interesting.  I have not seen these quotes in other articles and I think online article at Time.com is also different.  Anyway, one of the quotes in the article has her saying ...that if she ever becomes a saint--she will be one of darkness and will be continually absent from heaven--she will be a light to those in darkness on earth.  A paragraph or so later she also has a statement that says she is willing to suffer for all eternity if it will be possible.  I am not sure what that related to--I don't have the article in front of me because I gave it to my mom to read.
 
I am sure her wishes to be saint of darkness, her continual absence from heaven and her eternity of suffering are being met as we speak.
 
Thank you and God Bless you.
 
Rene

 

MHFM: That’s very interesting.  Her message, which was to help men in their fleeting earthly existence while keeping them in their false religions and thus deprived of what they need for supernatural happiness, epitomized darkness and emptiness.

 

Tradition and Protestant heresies

 

Dear one,

Which do you accept, the Bible or the tradition when they are in contradiction?  Much tradition was formed when the Bible was forbidden and not taken into consideartion.  It seems to me that now that you are studying the Bible, you find that it leaves your tradition in shambles.

Wayne Searfoss

MHFM: The Catholic Church infallibly teaches that (Apostolic) Tradition and Scripture are the two sources of revelation.  The Bible itself teaches that you must accept Tradition (2 Thess 2:15-16; 2 Thess. 3:16).  Protestantism is ridiculous and so unbiblical.  One needs only to think deeply about the self-refuting doctrine of “scripture alone” (which is taught nowhere in the Bible but contradicted by it) and the outrageously absurd “justification by faith alone” (which is condemned as a heresy in James 2:24 and refuted by loads of other passages).  The fact that millions and millions follow this massive perversion of the Bible (i.e. Protestantism) is so demonstrative of the level of bad will in the world that it makes one want to yell out in righteous indignation to the followers of this perversion: how is it that you are following a religion which you claim is biblical, and yet your two core doctrines are clearly refuted by the plain words of the Bible?!  How do you think you will escape on the Day of Judgment?!!  The Bible not only refutes your two core doctrines, but clearly teaches the Papacy to anyone who is honest and can read (Mt. 16:18-20; Jn. 21:15-17), confession (Jn. 20:23), the necessity of baptism and baptismal regeneration (Jn. 3:5; 1 Peter 3:20-21; Acts 2:37-38), etc., etc.!  The Catholic Church is the only Church that’s been around for 2000 years!  Why would God leave a false Church as the one visible Church – the Church which brought the Gospel all over the world – especially when He said He wouldn’t allow the gates of Hell to prevail against it (Mt. 16:18)?!  He obviously wouldn’t!  It’s beyond stupid!  Wake up and save yourself from your damnable blindness!

Since the Church of Christ (the Catholic Church) and the Bible itself teach that Tradition is a source of divine revelation, Tradition obviously cannot contradict the Bible.  It was also the Church which told us which books make up the Bible.

St. Joseph

 

Brothers:

 

I understand if you do not want to get the middle of this, but if you could inform Timothy to turn to St. Joseph.

 

First though, Timothy must ask for WORK, not money!  I learned this the hard way.  God understands that we need money and  He always answers very promptly if you ask for WORK.

 

Only then should Timothy go to the great St. Joseph who will help him in all things financial and home life.  Like St. Teresa of Avila, I have found St. Joseph to be a wonderful source and a prompt helper whenever I have needed work to support myself.  And being a self-employed transcriptionist, I have had to turn to St. Joseph many, many times.  He never fails.

 

Many thanks for all your Website and radio programs,

Deidre Howard

 

Judge?

 

10NewOrdination.pdf, page three of 8

 

[MHFM writes]: “…there is not one mandatory prayer in the new rite of ordination itself which makes clear that the essence of the Catholic priesthood is the conferral of the powers to offer the sacrifice of the Mass and to absolve men of their sins, and that the sacrament imparts a character which differentiates a priest not simply in degree but in…

 

By whose authority was the gift of judgment -- which Jesus repudiated in his teachings -- "Judge NOT, for with the judgment you judge, you will be judged!" -- given to ANY human being, nee "Christian" ?

 

By what sovereign right does any member of ANY church presume to have the power to judge others?  I just want to know, that's all.  WHO SAID SO?  Can you answer?

 

Thanks be to God.

Emily Elizabeth Windsor-Cragg

 

MHFM: We’re not sure exactly what your question is.  If you are saying that to adhere to, defend and proclaim the facts and truths of the Catholic Faith – and the conclusions necessarily flowing from those facts and truths – is to violate Jesus’s admonition to “judge not” (Mt. 7:1), then you are gravely mistaken.  We mentioned on our last radio program that Matthew 7:1 is about the only scripture certain liberals memorize.  They make sure to memorize it in order to justify their own evil deeds, as well as those of others.  However, contrary to what they think, Jesus is condemning unjustified judgments and hypocritical judgments.  That’s why He proceeds (as recorded in the very same chapter) to explain that a man must remove the log out of his own eye before he tries to help remove it from his brother’s (Mt. 7:4-5).  In other words, His statement is directed against hypocritical and unjustified judgments.  The Bible itself is clear that one must judge.

 

1 Corinthians 6:1-5: “Dare any of you, having a matter against another, go to be judged before the unjust, and not before the saints?  Know you not that the saints shall judge this world? And if the world shall be judged by you, are you unworthy to judge the smallest matters?  Know you not that we shall judge angels? how much more things of this world?  If therefore you have judgments of things pertaining to this world, set them to judge, who are the most despised in the church.  I speak to your shame. Is it so that there is not among you any one wise man, that is able to judge between his brethren?”

 

Men should be judged by their actions.  Heretics should be judged and denounced because of their actions.

 

St. Robert Bellarmine, De Romano Pontifice, Book II, Chap. 30, concerning judging those who are heretics, including one who claims to be pope: “… for men are not bound, or able to read hearts; but when they see that someone is a heretic by his external works, they judge him to be a heretic pure and simple, and condemn him as a heretic.”

 

Take St. Polycarp’s conduct (who certainly had the Apostolic Faith) as an example.

 

St. Ireneaus, Against Heresies: “Once he [St. Polycarp] was met by Marcion, who said to him, ‘Do you recognize me?’ and Polycarp replied, ‘I recognize you as the firstborn of Satan!’” (Jurgens, Faith of the Early Fathers, Vol. 1:212)

 

Since St. Polycarp had the true faith, he recognized that a person such as Marcion (who demonstrated an obstinate rejection of the truth) was of bad will and of Satan.  St. Polycarp (A.D. 70-156), by the way, knew the Apostle John himself. 

 

Turned around

 

Dear brothers;

 

… I was just writing to let you all know how much your web site and material has done for me. It has literally turned my life around in all aspects, especially my relationship with God. We have not attended the novus ordo in over three years, going nowhere for Mass at all for almost a year. ( I had a run in with a couple of priests over things going on in the “church” today)…. I just wanted to let you and anyone know how thankful I am that God led me to your web site ( it was purely by accident)… and thank you for all the extra stuff you send when I do order!!...                             

 

     Thank you and God bless you all and your monastery

           Stu Ingraham, Darby Montana

 

Reading

 

Dear Brothers: I have been reading your books and watching the DVDS. I have not been to mass more than half a dozen times since 1969.  It seems like I lost my faith around that time, but I was only 20 years old and the sexual drug revelution was going on and like a lot of people my age I dove right into it. But that aside being much older looking back it seems not only did I leave the church but the church left me first.Going to the NEW MASS just left me flat. I went to catholic school 1st through 6th grade and was an alter boy in the traditional church. Their was no sexual molestation in those days. It was unheard of.  Anyway I'm 57 years old and have alot of atoning to do. Whare can I find a traditional catholic church? I need confession I live in southern michigan in Niles near South Bend IN, home of Notre Dame. Can you help me.  Thank you.

 

p…

 

MHFM: We're glad that you are reading the material.  One must stop going to the New Mass, if one hasn't already.  Pray the Rosary each day, all 15 decades if possible.  There’s a section on our website dealing with steps that should be taken by those who are converting or returning to the Church or leaving the Novus Ordo.  Call us about the sacraments question.

 

Novena

 

Hello Brothers,

 

I would just like to say thank you for standing up for the truth, when so few will do so.  These are very trialing times that we live in, and without the proper thoughts in mind one could be very discouraged and confused. Its very sad to see many that are blinded by the B.O.D controversy.I tried to help a few people in regards to what the Catholic church teaches (Pope Eugene IV etc ..)  but then they get upset and walk away, or just throw accusations of being a Fenny-nite....or stay away from that..To me, the Catholic church has always taught that "there is no salvation outside of the Catholic Church",

 

I would like to know if you could help me out on a special request? Firstly,what is a good novena for financial help? I started reciting Our Mother of Perpetual novena by St. Alphonious on Sunday, after my rosary.  Of course i will except whatever is given to me by Gods holy will.  My request is for my financial situation which is very dim at the moment, if i could trouble you to keep me in your prayers as well.

 

God bless you

Thank you

Timothy

 

MHFM: On our website we have some prayers to numerous powerful saints.  That section is called “Prayers to powerful saints.”  We would recommend those; but if there is a saint or two or three that you have a special devotion to then that would be a great idea as well.

 

Canon Law

 

Subject: Request for clarification on your NJP article and my confusion with Dogma and Canon: what's the difference and how can I know it?

 

Dear Brother Peter and Brother Michael,

 

When I first read the new NJP article I was very pleased because I found it to be consistent with your very excellent work; yet, at the same time, I also sensed I might be missing something important.  Thus, I ask you to clarify something for me:  What is the real difference between Dogma and Canon—because, from the NJP article, I now sense there may be a difference.

 

From your web site in the section “Regarding the Interpretation of Dogma” you state the following, from which I concluded that Canon was a reiteration of Dogma:

 

The word “canon" (in Greek: kanon) means a reed; a straight rod or bar; a measuring stick; something serving to determine, rule, or measure.  The Council of Trent is infallibly declaring that its canons are measuring rods for “all” so that they, making use of these rules of Faith (the meaning of the word “canon”), may be able to recognize and defend the truth in the midst of darkness!  This very important statement blows away the claim of those who say that using dogmas to prove points is “private interpretation.”  This canon teaches exactly the opposite of what they assert: that all cannot make use of these rules of Faith!  This is a very important statement not only for the salvation/baptism controversy, but also for the sedevacantist issue.

 

The point of the dogmas is so that the faithful know what they must believe and reject, so that they are independent of the mere opinions of men, and are following the infallible truth of Christ.  If the faithful have to rely to someone else giving their version or understanding of the dogmatic definition, then that (fallible) person becomes the rule of faith, and not the infallible dogmatic definition.

 

From the Catholic Dictionary… I find the following definition for Canon—I bolded the segment that caused me to agree with your points indented above:

 

An established rule for guidance, a standard, or a list of such rules: 1. in biblical usage the catalogue of inspired writings known as the Old and New Testaments, identified as such by the Church; 2. in ecclesiastical usage, a short definition of some dogmatic truth, with attached anathema, made as a rule by general councils; 3. the Eucharistic Prayer, which is the essential part of the Sacrifice of the Mass. In religious life, certain orders of men with specific duties often attached to a particular church, shrine, or ecclesiastical function; 4. in music a composition that repeats the same melody by one or more voices in turn, producing harmony; 5. in printing a size type, namely 4 line pica 48 point, used in printing church books or the Canon of the Mass; 6. catalogue of canonized saints; 7. rules of certain religious orders and the books that comprise them; 8. in art and architecture the established rule, which is periodically specified in ecclesiastical matters by Church directives or legislation; 9. a member of the clergy attached to a cathedral or other large church, with specific duties such as the choral recitation of the Divine Office. (Etym. Latin canon, rule, standard of conduct; summary, record; from Greek kan_n, rod, rule.)

 

From your NJP article you state:

 

- YOU MAKE SOME GOOD POINTS ABOUT CHURCH LAWS, THEY WILL SAY, BUT DOES THIS

PRINCIPLE APPLY TO CASES OF JURISDICTION FOR CONFESSIONS?

● A pope is above canon law, further illustrating that canon laws or ecclesiastical laws can be

changed and can cease to apply in a necessity

● Two other examples of papal laws which were authoritatively promulgated and were overturned

 

What is the real difference between Dogma and Canon and how can I tell when they are not one and the same?  I humbly request clarification on this because I do genuinely respect and trust what you write—and I look forward to each and every new web site posting.  With many thanks and much respect,

 

Gregg

 

MHFM:  Thanks for the question.  When one refers to “canon law,” that refers to the governmental laws of the Church: Church disciplines, etc.  Those can be changed.  That’s why we see Pope Benedict XIV saying this:

 

Pope Benedict XIV, Magnae Nobis (#9), June 29, 1748: “The Roman Pontiff is above canon law, but any bishop is inferior to that law and consequently cannot modify it.” 

 

Archbishop Cicognani – a professor of canon law at The Pontifical Institute of Canon and Civil Law in Rome before Vatican II – explained it the same way: “Canon law may be defined as ‘the body of laws made by the lawful ecclesiastical authority for the government of the Church.’”[35]

 

But when we are talking about canons from dogmatic councils which deal with faith or morals – and the quotation you gave from our book was in reference such canons on FAITH OR MORALS – we are talking about unchangeable teachings of faith or morals.  So the important distinction involves whether a canon from a dogmatic council deals with something disciplinary in nature (i.e. something pertaining to the Church’s governance) or whether it deals with faith or morals.  If it’s the former, even if it’s from an ecumenical council (e.g. Trent, Florence, etc.), it can be changed and might cease to apply in certain situations or necessities.  If it’s the latter, it cannot be changed and has no exceptions because it’s an infallible and unchangeable truth of faith or morals which must be accepted under pain of anathema.  (We’re speaking here of canons promulgated at an ecumenical council.)

 

Pope Pius IX, Vatican Council I, 1870, Session 4, Chap. 4:

“…the Roman Pontiff, when he speaks ex cathedra [from the Chair of Peter], that is, when carrying out the duty of the pastor and teacher of all Christians in accord with his supreme apostolic authority he explains a doctrine of faith or morals to be held by the universal Church... operates with that infallibility with which the divine Redeemer wished that His Church be instructed in defining doctrine on faith and morals; and so such definitions of the Roman Pontiff from himself, but not from the consensus of the Church, are unalterable.” (Denz. 1839)

 

Heretics

 

Hi, do you have a list of statements from popes and saints showing that heretics cannot be Catholic? Also, are there any ex-cathedra pronouncements saying this? Please e-mail me what you have. Thank you. I agree with you that Benedict, John Paul and Paul the 6th are heretics. I think your arguments are air tight. They are clearly heretics. They have been established by Antichrist in order to destroy the Catholic Church. The pseudo-patriarchs of Orthodoxy have also been established by Antichrist. The devil wants to work from the top and go down from there. Catholicism and Orthodoxy are being hijacked by Satanists. Antichrist is in the process of creating a pseudo-Christianity with false bishops. Rome and the corrupt Freemasonic patriarchs of the Eastern Church will eventually unite to create a "new" and completely false Christian Church. Most, if not all, of the dogmatic and orthodox teachings of historic Christianity will be denied. This "new religion" will have more in common with the New Age movement. The "charismatic movement" is also the work of the devil. It came out of the pentecostal movement of heretical protestant evangelicals. Antichrist is creating a false hierarchy, a false spirit, a false Christ, and a false liturgy (see 2Cor.11). The recent union between the Communist Moscow Patriarchate and the Russian Church abroad, is just the beginning of the absorption process and the creation of the Whore of Babylon where Antichrist will sit as absolute leader. I appreciate your stance. I think we are approaching the time where the truth faithful will be found in traditional remnants groups.

 

Evfimy

 

MHFM:  This file covers the dogmatic teaching that heretics are outside the Church: The Catholic Teaching that a heretic cannot be a valid pope [PDF file].  If you haven’t gotten it already, we also strongly encourage you to get our 6 DVD Special (also includes 2 new books) for an amazing price of only $10.00  This special includes our newest book The Truth about What Really Happened to the Catholic Church after Vatican II, the DVDs and more.

 

China

 

Hello,

Can you advise when a MHFM commentary will be on your website about Pope BXVI's Letter to Catholics in China recently released by the Vatican? Also, I have searched for a comment from the SSPX about how it reflects on their own situation and cannot find any responses, as yet. Have you heard?

Thank you,
Marta K.

 

MHFM: In case some people missed it, it’s covered in the Heresy of the Week for this week.  We’ve been a little late on the Heresy of the Week in the past few weeks.  You don’t want to miss this one.  It’s truly outrageous.  For those with eyes to see it’s more proof that Benedict XVI is totally evil and probably a satanist or a member of the occult.

 

Liked article

 

Loved your article on the White vs. Hitchens interview.  I actually heard some of that debate live on the way home from work one night last week.  I had that feeling that I often have of wanting to jump through the radio to grab and shake Mr. White (a feeling I often have when listening to the radio or watching talk shows).  The liberals I am used to; it is the people who are supposed to be conservative that are more infuriating.

 

I agree that Hitchens is less dangerous, as he at least seems to properly understand Catholic dogma.  He rejects it outright, but does not misrepresent it.  I think it is much worse when people who can present themselves as Catholics and as experts misrepresent the faith in that they are much more likely to damage and confuse the faithful than are the rantings of one who honestly calls himself an atheist.  Using Dante as his authority!!  I had the same reaction, like, hey are you joking?  Is this some kind of a parody?  Unfortunately the guy is “serious”.

 

It is an interesting insight on your part that Hitchens seems sex obsessed.  It is I think the stumbling block of most in a popular culture that is so saturated with sex and no longer holds any behavior as wicked.  Rather it is considered wacky (actually “hateful” or “judgmental”) today to defend morality…

Bill Mulligan

 

MHFM:  We’re glad you liked the article.  It was such an awful and revealing heresy that a more detailed analysis was necessary.  To your point, there is no doubt about it that the sins of the flesh are the biggest stumbling block for most people.  Those are the sins which put most in Hell and keep most outside the Church.  Almost the whole world is presently obsessed with, and saturating itself in, this mortal sin.  It’s why comparatively few people have interest in the things of God and the true faith.  Even in Our Lady of Fatima’s time, Jacinta came to know that, according to Our Lady, most souls go to Hell for the sins of the flesh.  Can you imagine what she would say today?  That’s also a reason why Protestantism is so popular.  Protestantism allows people to remain in their sins of the flesh, whether of thought or of deed, even though wicked Protestant ministers (in the manner of evolutionists) will use every kind of distortion possible to assert that they don’t believe such.

 

Interview and New Article regarding the Heresy of David Allen White

 

MHFM: This article concerns a very interesting recent radio program on which David White was a guest.  It analyzes and refutes an outrageous utterance of heresy, and provides a link to the program:

 

David Allen White's revealing and heretical encounter with an Atheist on a radio program  

 

See how a supposed “traditional Catholic,” who has been prominently promoted by various “traditional” groups, uses false ideas on salvation and “invincible ignorance” to justify outrageous heresy and evil.

 

Where?

 

If Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI are, according to you, both heretics where does the true Catholic Church subsist?

The Rev Richard Budgen

 

MHFM: The Catholic Church exists and is visible in those Catholics who maintain all the teachings of the Church without compromise.  This is true even though such true Catholics have been reduced to a remnant in our day.  It’s similar to the Arian crisis in the 4th century, when Arian heretics got control of most of the buildings and the true Church was visible only with the remnant.

 

St. Athanasius: "Even if Catholics faithful to tradition are reduced to a handful, they are the ones who are the true Church of Jesus Christ.” (Coll. Selecta SS. Eccl. Patrum. Caillu and Guillou, Vol. 32, pp. 411-412.)

 

St. Gregory Nazianz (+380), Against the Arians: “Where are they who revile us for our poverty and pride themselves in their riches?  They who define the Church by numbers and scorn the little flock?” (William Jurgens, The Faith of the Early Fathers, Vol. 2, p. 33.)

 

Here’s a question for you.  Since the Papacy is the principle of unity in the Church, as the Church teaches – which means that those who reject the teachings of the Papacy are not in union with the Church – do you not agree that Benedict XVI is not in union with the Church because he publicly declares that leading schismatics who reject the Papacy are in the Church?

 

New video posted

 

A new video called Current Freemasonic Enemies of America and the World has been posted.  You can watch it here: WATCH OUR DVDS/VIDEOS ONLINE FOR FREE.  It’s about ¾ of the way down the page.

 

Head Coverings

 

Why did women cover their heads to enter the Church and when going to Mass?

 

Nano…

 

MHFM: The reason can be found in 1 Corinthians:

 

1 Corinthians 11:5,10- “…every woman praying or prophesying with her head not covered, disgraceth her head: for it is all one as if she were shaven… Therefore ought the woman to have a power over her head, because of the angels.”

 

Note: - “‘A power"... that is, a veil or covering… and this, the apostle adds, because of the angels, who are present in the assemblies of the faithful.”

 

New Convert

 

Subj: I have converted…and I thank you!!!

 

Dear Brothers:

My name is Joseph Myers.  I am a new convert.  I was baptised on the 7th of August, 2007. I appreciate your material so much.  I have been truly changed because of the truths of the Catholic Faith, and, because of the books and material that you have compiled.  That later simply points to The Catholic Faith, so, thanks for the books, but even more heartily, thanks for bringing out and un-eclipsing the True Faith!!!

I first became familiar with your stuff on Coast to Coast.  I heard both programs.  At the time I was in a protestant sect that believed in this current great tribulation.  I was spending a lot of time in the king james bible and in the original languages therein.  I was doing this on my own, being already convinced that the world was in a terrible time.

I called in late June of 2007.  I was immediately sent your material.  I started praying the 15 decade Rosary.  I purchased a Bible (with the other 7 books
that were suppossedly added) in July along with a catechism and another book.  I immediately got more aquainted with The Catholic Faith.

Thanks for everything!!!  From a now...not so lost
Californian,

Joseph George Myers

 

Religious Orders?

 

Dear Bros Dimond,

 

In the message of Our Lady of La Salette, one part which states, "They will blind them in such a way, that , unless they are blessed with a special gace, these people will take on the spirit of these angels of hell; several religious institutions will lose all faith and will lose many souls… Rome will lose the faith, and become the seat of the Antichrist… The church will be in eclipse….!

 

My question is in the part of "several religious institutions"…. When we see the word "several", this would indicated that, many or most, would lose the Faith but also means that some would not lose the Faith.   In todays world or the world of the Traditional movement, can you pick out, or name any particular religious group or institution that is among the few , who have not lost the true Faith ?

 

My second question which somewhat follows the above train of thought, is, if there are those few  groups or institutions out there who have not lost the Faith, where are they getting the authority to absolve sin, without Ordinary supplied Jurisdiction. ??

 

Will await you reply

 

Prayfully

f. l.

 

MHFM: We can tell you that our order has not lost the faith.  Regarding the jurisdiction issue, that’s what the article we recently posted on Jurisdiction [pdf] addresses.  Jurisdiction is supplied to independent priests for the salvation of souls.  That supplied jurisdiction is distinct from ordinary jurisdiction, and it is also distinct from the fact that many of these priests (who profess to be in union with the Papacy, unlike the “Orthodox”) do hold heretical positions.  The jurisdiction is not supplied to them for them but for the souls it can benefit.

 

To do?

 

Hello,

My question is pretty straight forward.  What is one to do?  Additionally, I would be lying if I said that current priests and Pope John Paul II have not helped me, through their words and writings, in my search for God.  Thank you for your time.

Respectfully,

Dan Grolemund

 

MHFM: That's a large question, but in brief: accept the fullness of the Catholic Faith, reject the Vatican II sect and the New Mass, and then go from there.  (One shouldn’t call John Paul II “Pope,” by the way.)  Our website has a section on what people leaving the New Mass, etc. should do regarding confession, etc.  We would recommend that you consult that section.  Pray the Rosary every day, all 15 decades if possible.  Do spiritual reading and study the faith.  Try to inform and convert others with the fullness of the Catholic Faith.  If one, however, after having seen an expose of John Paul II's heresies and false ecumenism, is not yet at the point where one can recognize that he was an evil heretic, then that person doesn't yet possess the faith. 

 

A strong conviction that Jesus Christ and the Catholic Faith are truly necessary for salvation is a foundational belief that one must have.  If one doesn’t have that foundational conviction, his faith is corrupt.  That foundational conviction necessarily entails a recognition of the evil of heresy and of the evil of those who promote heresies and false religions. 

 

Hence, one who possesses the foundational belief he needs to have will necessarily see, after having been presented with the facts, that John Paul II was an evil heretic.  If one cannot see that, then that person still lacks the foundational belief described above concerning: the necessity of Christ, the necessity of the Catholic Faith, the evil of heresy and the evil of false religions.

 

Jurisdiction Article

 

Dear Brother Dimond,

 

I want to thank you for this excellent article on jurisdiction.  This issue has bothered me for some time, though I am not a committed "home aloner".   I was just more comfortable with the so-called independent priests than these traditional societies with their own little Vaticans.  I thought it was somehow unseemly for priests to go around looking for some willing bishop to consecrate them.   They set up societies and fight each other.  It's almost like Protestant denominations.  Yet, no bishops no priests.   I suppose it's just a bad situation we will have to live with until Our Lord intevenes.  Thanks again. 

 

T   

   

MHFM: Thanks, we’re glad you liked the article.  The problem with these groups is not the fact that they’ve taken steps (e.g. independent ordinations or consecrations) to spread the traditional sacraments and priesthood, but the heresies they hold on doctrinal issues.  But obviously that wasn’t the subject of that article. 

 

Radio Program Archived

 

Our most recent radio program has been archived:

 

August 11, 2007 Radio Program [55 min. – discusses Benedict XVI giving back the Latin Mass, his statement that there’s proof for evolution, his declaration that another schismatic leader is a pastor in the Church, the hypocrisy of false traditionalists on B-16 and schism, a very quick synopsis of Benedict’s new heretical document on the Church, and “Cardinal” Bernardin.  This program also takes a careful look at the Protestant bible and the book of 1 Corinthians.  It examines all the places in this book alone which completely refute Protestant beliefs.  This program also discusses in depth the major heresies in Benedict XVI’s document on limbo, which until now have only been summarized in news reports.  It shows that this document rejects major dogmas and attempts to justify its heresies with “baptism of desire” and the same arguments that many false traditionalists use.  This program also covers other recent heresies of Benedict XVI and some other issues.] Archived Radio Programs

 

Web Stats

 

MHFM: In July we received over a million hits on our website.

 

New Video

 

MHFM: New video coming Monday night or Tuesday called Current Freemasonic Enemies of America and the World

 

Link?

 

Hello Brothers:

 

I again want to thank you for all the invaluable information on your site.

I do want to report that it seems that when I click on to the pdf files that nothing comes up.  Is there a

broken link here?????

THanks,

JMJ

Marie

 

MHFM: Thanks for the e-mail.  We suspect it’s a problem with your Adobe reader.  You can download the latest Adobe reader for free here.  Hopefully that will solve the problem for you.

 

Likes website

 

Your site, is the one I visit most often concerning matters of the faith, Once I start I just can't seem to put it down (like a good book).
 
It hasn't been long since I have known the truth about The Novus Ordo, anti-popes, Vatican 2.  The only thing I was sure in my heart that if we are to be faithful to God and for our salvation is to not follow the new fashions.  Since I was a little girl , I have always felt myself turned to Our Lady of Fatima and remembering what she said to the children :  people who serve God do not follow the new fashions.  It means everything that has to do with sticking with tradition and what the Church always taught.  Even the new fashions concerning modesty in dress in public and in church.  It makes me sick, and turns me off the most, to see people going to church in shorts, women sleeveless, people talking,(how do you expect to pray in peace).  Even in a church (novus ordo)  you can't have any peace.  It has been in the month of October 2005 (yes the month of the Rosary), that God has shown me the man whom I loved with all my heart and admired as I admired Christ was indeed a false pope. I'm speaking of Pope John Paul ll.  How shocked I was and imagine the sadness and depression I have been decieved !  I'm sad to find out I haven't known everything all about the faith all along.  Then God kept feeding my intelligence with knowledge as I searched more and more for the truth.  I know the True Catholic Faith more than anyone around me.   
In the 80's , at my Parish ,I remember one time at church on Sunday, My  father and I were wondering why everyone was receiving communion in the hand all of the sudden.  Our heads went blank and we went along with it. 
Confusion, confusion.  Thanks to God everything is clear now.  It's been 9 years, I went to church receiving communion on the tongue and going to frequent confession.  Genuflections I make MANY!   People staring at me, some people even taking my example.  Priests have refused me communion on the tongue !  Even saying that in one Parish he doesn't give communion on the tonque anymore because of reasons of hygene.  I said nothing and I went back to my seat.  After communion he said infront of all the people in the church what he just told me.  I was so angry and shocked I ran out fast out of that Parish and never came back since !  I cried like a baby. Aren't you hearing this dear Brother !  Doesn't it make your ears Squeek.  Of course all this happening in a Novus Ordo Church.  I didn't know better then.  This is not the Catholic Church thanks to all your information on your website.   Things are so much clearer now.
 I am not blessed in having a Tradional Latin mass to attend.  I have stayed home praying the mass, reading the council of trent, reading scripture, the Rosary, etc. on Sunday. I have been doing this for 2 months now.  I have to admit I feel lonely and I miss Church.  I feel more close to God now than I have ever been in my entire life.    I hope one day to see and attend the True mass of all time.  Please pray for me Brother. 
 
United in the True Faith,  Patty from  Montréal, Canada   

 

Another new article

 

Was the most powerful "Cardinal" in America after Vatican II a secret Satanist? [pdf]

 

Radio Program tomorrow

 

MHFM: We will be doing a radio program Saturday, Aug. 11, at 8:00 p.m. (Eastern Time).

 

Radio Program (to listen live click on the “Radio Program” link at the time of the program)

 

Jurisdiction Article Posted

 

Facts which Demolish the "No independent priest today has Jurisdiction" Position - Did St. Vincent Ferrer have jurisdiction? If you hold the position that "no independent priest today has jurisdiction," then your answer must be no. [pdf] *new feature article

 

MHFM: We had planned on getting to this issue in a more detailed fashion a while back, but other things continued to sidetrack us.  The article is posted now, and it covers a very important issue because the “no independent priest today has jurisdiction” position is more widespread than one might think.  We have received many questions about this issue.  We strongly recommend that those who are interested in or concerned about this topic print this article out and read it.  This article specifically addresses and completely refutes those who hold this position.  It specifically mentions the writing of Barbara Linaburg on this topic.  But what is said applies to many others who have held and promoted this false position.

 

Locked up for the Faith

 

DEAR  BROTHERS ,

 

WE RECEIVED WITH JOY AND THANKSGIVING TO THE MOST HOLY TRINITY AND THE IMMACULATE MOTHER OF GOD THE PACKAGE YOU SENT TO US. IT IS REFRESHMENT AND NOURISHMENT TO OUR SOULS WHICH HAD BEEN STIFLED FOR SO LONG DUE TO THE APOSTASY OF OUR TIMES AND THE POISON OF V—2. WE CANNOT PRAISE GOD ENOUGH IN THIS WORLD ON ACCOUNT OF HIS MUNIFICENCE IN GIVING US HIS MERCIFUL MOTHER. WE ALWAYS PRAY FOR YOU AS WE CONSTANTLY UNITE OURSELVES SPIRITUALLY WITH YOU AND THE WHOLE BODY OF CHRIST IN PRAYERS.WE HOPE THAT YOU ALWAYS REMEMBER US TOO… OUR… GROUP MEETS FOR PRAYERS ON SUNDAYS AND OTHER EVENTS ESPECIALLY HOLY DAYS OF OBLIGATIONS. MOREOVER, THE V-2 CHURCH WE WERE ATTENDING EXPELLED US AND ALL WHO ACCEPTED THIS MESSAGE LAST YEAR AND FOR DISSEMINATING IT, SOME OF US WERE LOCKED UP IN POLICE CELLS FOR DAYS ON THE INSTRUCTION OF THEIR APOSTATE ARCHBISHOP.

 

YOURS IN JESUS     &MARY

EMEM-MARIA OFFIONG(MRS)

ABUJA-NIGERIA

 

Only One Baptism

 

I've done my homework as to just what to believe about salvation.  (see attachment)  I truly believe there is no salvation outside the Roman Catholic Church.  I grew up pre-Vat, with 16 years of Catholic schooling, and I was taught from the Baltimore Catechism about the "3 baptisms," so I never worried too much about evangelizing others because "they could desire baptism, " etc.  But yet in the Mass for All Times, canonized, (the Indult, John XXIII, Mass is not the Tridentine, which Benedict seems to get confused about!), it says: "ONE BAPTISM FOR THE REMISSION OF SINS" not THREE!  And when I bought the first edition of the Baltimore Catechism while I was at the National Cathedral bookstore in Baltimore, this summer, there is NO mention of "3 baptisms,"  not until the second edition. 

 I have made the decision to stay with ex cathedra teachings of the Church. Saints aren't infallible, only Popes (valid) when speaking from the Chair of St. Peter; and three times from the Chair of Peter, the dogma, No Salvation Outside the Catholic Church, has been declared.  That should end the discussion - period!  The division among the "Traditional" Catholic groups on this issue, is playing right into Satan's hands.  I have a problem with each of the groups putting down one another, as you do, also, because outsiders do not see UNITY, and if, supposedly we are all Roman Catholics (Trad.), then we should be of  One Mind, One Faith, UNITED!  All these groups cannot be right!   The only way for Unity (if, indeed these groups want that because they ought to know that this is the only way, having a united front, not all the in-fighting which is most confusing to people (and confusion is straight from Hell),  that they can be effective in winning souls for Christ and His Church. 

All Traditional Catholics must pray for this Unity as Christ prayed for His to have Unity, to be One, a Mark of His true Church.  With unity, then these groups could concentrate on attacking the real enemy, rather than one another.  Perhaps there has been some infiltration?!

Thank you for all you do to education Catholics of the Catholic Faith, necessary for salvation!  Our Triune God continue to bless you and all you do in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost!                             

 

MJERP 

 

MHFM: We agree with most of your e-mail.  The part about how you read about the “three baptisms” and it stifled your desire to evangelize was very interesting.  However, we don’t agree with what you said about division and how there should not be “in-fighting” but a united front.  There can only be a united front when those who are presently denying the truth change their position.  In the meantime, the heretics must be put down.  They are the cause of the division – that is, their own division from true Catholics and from true Catholic teaching.  It’s not our fault that they are not satisfied with the simple defined truth that unless a man is born again of water and the Holy Ghost he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God.  It’s not our fault that they insist on teaching people that men don’t need baptism or the Catholic Faith for salvation, which accomplishes nothing good and contradicts solemnly defined teaching.  It also devastates supernatural faith in the necessity of the Church, Jesus Christ and one’s belief in the need to convert his or her neighbors.  All of this is their fault, their bad will, and they must be refuted and denounced when they attack Catholic teaching and lead people astray.

 

Mass, Baptism, Heretic

 

Dear Brother Dimond,

    I talked to a "traditionalist" priest recently. I asked him if he believes that you must be a baptized Catholic in order to be saved. More specifically, I asked him if people needed water on the head with the form "I baptize you in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost."  He first claimed that St.  Augustine believed in the possibility of salvation for the unbaptized catechumen. He then gave his own example. He asked me to consider a 17th Century, French fur trapper alone in the wilderness who desires water baptism but cannot get to another person fast enough before his death. He said, "Does the fur trapper go to hell when he dies? I don't think so."

   Then I asked him, "Would you consider a person who believes in the absolute necessity of water baptism for salvation to be a heretic?" He said, "Yes, that person would be a heretic."…Can one attend the Mass of this priest?


T.D.

 

MHFM: No, a Catholic must not attend his Mass.  He’s an imposing heretic.  We do think that you should inform him of our website and our book on the topic, so that he can see his objections in this regard answered, as well as the facts from the solemn magisterium which contradict his position brought forward.  We would also be shocked if he didn’t believe that Buddhists, etc. can be saved.  The quick response to the faithless heretic’s imaginary case of a good-willed French fur trapper who desires baptism, but cannot get it, is very simple: there’s no such person; God would get it to him.  It’s really that simple.  But since he brought up the French, and mentioned the 17th century, that reminds us of the the following stories covered in section 25 of Outside the Catholic Church There is Absolutely No Salvation [pdf file].  They concern the life of St. Isaac Jogues, who was an extraordinary French missionary to North America in the 17th century.  These stories contradict the heretic because they support the truth that God gets His absolutely necessary sacrament to all good willed souls who want it.  These are just three stories; there are many others.

 

There is another interesting story in Jogues’ life which confirms this.  After having much success in converting people in various places, he and his companions began to be shut out from all the villages in a certain section of the heathen savages.  The Devil had convinced the heathen savages in this area – and the idea was spreading – that the presence of the missionaries was the reason why there were famine and disease among them.  So, being totally exhausted and shut out from every hut in the area, and freezing from the cold and dying for a place to rest and warm themselves, we pick up the story:

 

The Life of St. Isaac Jogues, pp. 145-146: “…wandering about from place to place, and everywhere meeting with blows and threats and hatred, Jogues and Garnier came to a little cluster of cabins in the heart of the hills.  They were both exhausted by the terrible exposure to the cold and by the lack of food.  They forced themselves upon one of the cabins and were grudgingly received.  Jogues felt feverish and sick through all his body.  He could not move from his mat.  Then came a messenger from one of the villages in which they had been welcomed on their entry into the Petun land.  The runner told them that some of the people who were sick were begging them to return.

     “It was a call from God.  They could not but heed it.  In order to complete the journey of thirty-five miles by daylight, they started out about three o’clock in the morning.  All the country was pale with snow in the dawn, and the mountain air was painfully cold.  Jogues was still gripped by the fever and unsteady on his legs.  They slid their snowshoes laboriously over the crackling crust of the icy snow.  Frequently, they stopped for breath in deadly exhaustion.

     “But they had to shorten their rests, for fear lest they die of the cold.  Their only food, a lump of corn bread about the size of the fist, was hard as ice.  They arrived at the village late at night, covered with sweat and yet half-frozen, they said.  The sick persons were still alive.  They were baptized.  ‘Some souls gone astray here and there, who are placed on the road to heaven when they are just about to be swallowed up in hell,’ was their comment, ‘deserve a thousand times more than these labors, since these souls have cost the Savior of the world much more than that.’” (Francis Talbot, Saint Among Savages: The Life of St. Isaac Jogues, pp. 145-146.)

 

      As St. Isaac Jogues says, he knew that if he did not reach these people, instruct them and baptize them they would be “swallowed up in hell.”  That is why he forced himself at the very moment he had just found a bit of rest and warmth to make the thirty-five mile trip, though he was starving, freezing and exhausted – a trip which almost killed him.  There is another interesting story which illustrates the same truth.

 

“When dawn trickled through the firs, they [Jogues and Garnier] struck out along the trail, now blanketed with snow.  Some distance on, beyond a clear field, they noticed a few cabins.  The families, they found, were just abandoning their huts and were going to the nearest Petun village, for they had neither corn nor any other food… They [Jogues and Garnier] attached themselves to the band and traveled all the day… ‘We had no special plan to go to this village [which we named] St. Thomas rather than to any other,’ they remarked ‘but since we had accepted what company the savages offered, and since we followed them there, there is no doubt but that we arrived where God was leading us for the salvation of a predestined soul which awaited nothing but our arrival in order to die to its earthly miseries.’  They had finished their supper and were conversing with their hosts, when a young man entered and asked the Blackrobes to visit his mother who was sick.  ‘We go there,’ they exclaim, ‘and find the poor woman in her last extremities.  She was instructed, and happily received, with the Faith, the grace of Baptism.  Shortly after that, she [died and] beheld herself in the glory of heaven.  In that whole village there was only that one who had need of our help.”  (Ibid., p. 141.)

 

The Life of St. Isaac Jogues, p. 225: “Two of the Hurons, Jogues learned, were to be burned to death that night at Tionontoguen.  He stayed with them on the platform and concentrated his appeals on them.  Finally they consented.  About that moment, the Mohawks threw the prisoners some raw corn that had been freshly plucked.  The sheaths [of the corn] were wet from the recent rains.  Father Jogues carefully gathered the precious drops of water on a leaf and poured them over the heads of the two neophytes [new converts], baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.  The Mohawks understood that his [Jogues’] act meant to bring happiness to these hated victims.  They raged at his audacity and beat him down, threatening to slaughter him with the Hurons… That night the two Hurons [whom he had baptized] were burned over the fire.”  (Ibid., p. 225.)

 

     If the sheaths of corn had not been thrown at that very moment, Jogues wouldn’t have had the water with which to baptize the two Indians.  And, as noted in his life, St. Isaac Jogues always instructed the heathen in the essentials they had to know for baptism.

 

John 3:5,7 – “[Jesus saith] Amen, amen I say to thee, unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God… wonder not, that I said to thee, you must be born again.”

 

Eastern Schism

 

Dear Brother Dimond,

Thank you for a great website! In Praeclara Gratulationis  Pope Leo XIII in 1894 writing in regards to  the Eastern Orthodox Church, is this particular sentence that I  would appreciate your comments on: " to cast an affectionate look upon the East, from whence in the beginning came forth the salvation of the world. Yes, and the yearning desire of  Our heart bids Us conceive the hope that the day is not far distant, when the Eastern Churches, so illustrious in their ancient faith and glorious past, will return to the fold they have abandoned."  My question is: what did Pope Leo XIII mean by "so illustrious in their ancient faith and glorious past?"

Thank you for your help,

Wyatt Lee

 

MHFM: Leo XIII means that, prior to their split from the Church, these Churches (Constantinople, etc.) were illustrious representatives of the ancient Catholic faith.  They were some of the oldest and most important local Churches in the early Church.  To give just one example: St. John Chrysostom, one of Catholic Church’s great saints, was the Patriarch of Constantinople prior to its split from the Catholic Church and the Papacy.  That’s all Pope Leo XIII is saying.  He makes it quite clear that these Churches have since abandoned the Church and fallen into schism. 

 

We’re glad you brought that up.  For whenever a Catholic speaks of the glorious past of the Eastern Churches before the schism, he must make it clear that he’s talking in terms of prior to their entrance into schism.  Pope Leo XIII does that clearly by saying that he yearns that they “will return to the fold they have abandoned.”  In all the countless praises heaped upon the schismatic sects by the Vatican II antipopes – contained in literally hundreds of speeches – have you ever heard anything from them like that?  No.  Think about that.  They will never say that they have abandoned the faith or the fold.  Pope Leo XIII, on the other hand, a valid and Catholic pope, makes it quite clear that he no longer regards the schismatic Churches as illustrious, but outside the fold.  You will never hear any of the Vatican II antipopes say that because they are not Catholic and are inculcating a different religion.  

 

Confusion?

 

Dear Most Holy Family Monastery: 

 

I found your website very good except for the hate and ingratitude you show toward the SSPX, and except for your denial of baptism by desire.

 

Is it pride that keeps you from comprehending or accepting that others, who have not been handed the faith like you have, can be saved?  If you were God, how would you judge a man that joined a group of Christians to be martyred because he believed and wanted to be Catholic?  Or how about the good thief who can to be named a saint?  Or how about the man honestly looking for the true faith but can't find it because the true Church is practically invisible at this time?  Would you damn them all because they weren't yet baptized and officially part of the church?

 

I hope you come to see the light as your folly is keeping YOU out of the church.

 

Sincerely,
Michael Davis

 

MHFM: God can and does keep any good willed soul alive until baptism.  St. Augustine, in the following passage, reiterates the simple truth of Catholic Tradition on this point – a point on which he unfortunately didn’t always remain consistent. 

 

St. Augustine, 391: “When we shall have come into His [God’s] sight, we shall behold the equity of God’s justice.  Then no one will say:… ‘Why was this man led by God’s direction to be baptized, while that man, though he lived properly as a catechumen, was killed in a sudden disaster, and was not baptized?Look for rewards, and you will find nothing except punishments.” (Jurgens, The Faith of the Early Fathers, Vol. 3: 1496.)

 

Jesus made it clear that no man gets to Heaven without rebirth of “water and the Spirit” (John 3:5), and the Church understands those words as they are written.

 

A very interesting thing about your e-mail is that you readily acknowledge that you believe that people who don’t have the Catholic Faith can be saved.  You thus acknowledge that you dissent from the faith of the Holy Roman Catholic Church, and that you are therefore not Catholic.  Like so many others, you think that you are a traditional Catholic, but you are not.  You must have faith in Catholic dogmas to be a Catholic.  The scary part about this is that you might not realize, until you die and meet Jesus Christ, that you’re not even part of the Catholic Church.  But then it will be too late, and you will be condemned to Hell for not believing what the Catholic Church “firmly believes,” and not professing and preaching what the Church firmly professes and preaches. 

 

Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, “Cantate Domino,” 1441, ex cathedra: The Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that all those who are outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans but also Jews or heretics and schismatics, cannot share in eternal life and will go into the everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels, unless they are joined to the Church before the end of their lives; that the unity of this ecclesiastical body is of such importance that only for those who abide in it do the Church’s sacraments contribute to salvation and do fasts, almsgiving and other works of piety and practices of the Christian militia produce eternal rewards; and that nobody can be saved, no matter how much he has given away in alms and even if he has shed blood in the name of Christ, unless he has persevered in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church.”

 

Pope Pius IV, Council of Trent, “Iniunctum nobis,” Nov. 13, 1565, ex cathedra: “This true Catholic faith, outside of which no one can be saved… I now profess and truly hold…”

 

Contrary to what you suggest, there is no such man who is sincerely looking for the true faith who doesn’t find it.   Ask and you shall receive, seek and you shall find, knock and it shall be opened to you (Mt. 7:7).  Fr. Francisco de Vitoria, O.P., a famous 16th century Dominican theologian, summed up the traditional teaching of the Catholic Church on this point very well.  Here is how he put it:

 

When we postulate invincible ignorance on the subject of baptism or of the Christian faith, it does not follow that a person can be saved without baptism or the Christian faith.  For the aborigines to whom no preaching of the faith or Christian religion has come will be damned for mortal sins or for idolatry, but not for the sin of unbelief.  As St. Thomas says, however, if they do what in them lies [in their power], accompanied by a good life according to the law of nature, it is consistent with God’s providence that he will illuminate them regarding the name of Christ.” (De Indis et de Iure Belli Relectiones, ed. E. Nys, tr. J.P. Bates (The Classics of International Law), Washington, 1917, p. 142.)

 

Regarding the Good Thief, that’s not an example against the necessity of water baptism, as pointed out in Outside the Catholic Church There is Absolutely No Salvation [pdf file].  He was saved under the Old Law.  Regarding the SSPX, if you cannot see, after consulting this evidence, that their official positions are offensive to Catholic dogma, schismatic and heretical in key areas, then you are unfortunately of bad will on that issue, just as you are on the baptism/salvation one. 

 

Gall

 

I found your website of 'heresies' and am appalled at the gall you have to believe that only Catholics will have salvation. When I read the Holy Word of God, nowhere does it say that if I do not believe in the infallibility of the papacy (which, mind you, is heretical in itself) will I not have eternal life with Christ. The Scripture says that you are to CONFESS that JESUS IS LORD. That's it. Nothing less, nothing more.

 

There will be people in HELL because they were taught that it was enough to know about Jesus and the traditions of the church. Jesus will look at them on that day and say, 'I NEVER KNEW YOU. Away from me, you evildoers.' (Matthew 7:23)

 

God have mercy upon you.

 

rob etheridge, CHRISTIAN (Southern Baptist taught/ worshipping at an Orthodox church)

 

MHFM: The Bible says that if you don’t hear the Church, you are as the heathen (Mt. 18:17).  That “Church” was founded upon St. Peter (Mt. 16:18-20).  Thus, the Bible does clearly teach that you must hear that one Church founded upon Peter, which is the Catholic Church.  Scripture is abundantly clear that one must do more than recognize Jesus as the Lord to be saved.  That’s why it says:

 

Matthew 7:21-24:“Not every one that saith to me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven: BUT HE THAT DOTH the will of my Father who is in heaven, he shall enter into the kingdom of heaven. Many will say to me in that day: Lord, Lord, have not we prophesied in thy name, and cast out devils in thy name, and done many miracles in thy name? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, you that work iniquity.”

 

Notice, Jesus is quite clear that not all who say that He is the Lord will get to Heaven; but rather he that DOES OR PRACTICES the will of God will enter Heaven.  Did you get that?  One must DO or PRACTICE the will of God to get to Heaven.  That refutes your position.  It’s not sufficient to say that He is the Lord.  To deny that this verse refutes your position – as well as all of the others in the Bible which clearly indicate that works are necessary and that a man who believes can lose his salvation – is simply to be a liar.  “You see that a man is justified by works, and not by faith alone” (James 2:24).  Protestantism rejects the clear truth of the Bible on the Papacy (Mt. 16:18-20; John 21:15-17), on the Eucharist (John 6), on Confession (Jn. 20:23), on the necessity of Baptism (John 3:5) and much more.  It’s really that simple.  It’s a man-made religion.  You’re not a Christian.  The fact that you (and other Protestants) can claim to be Christians while rejecting the clear teaching of the Bible in so many areas – and failing to recognize the undeniable fact that the Catholic Church alone has been around since the beginning – is simply an outrage and a total lie, and it’s why you will not save your soul unless you convert.

 

Fr. Wathen

 

Greetings in Jesus Christ, dear Brothers!

 

Just a quick thank you.  I have continued to study your website every afternoon, some days more, some days less, and finally read your analysis of Father Wathen's apparent beliefs.  I had no idea it was that bad.  When I saw his statements, I said, "Is this really true?  Could he actually say those things?"  How wicked.  I didn't know about any of this.  Was he confused?

 

MHFM: Unfortunately, he was not confused.  He obstinately rejected the dogma that heretics cease to be Catholic.  He was one of the few non-sedevacantist priests who was honest enough to admit that the Vatican II antipopes are definite heretics.  Most of them realize that if they admit that they are heretics, then they must take the sedevacantist position.  Hence, in order to avoid taking the sedevacantist position, they dishonestly deny that the post-Vatican II antipopes are heretics – even though it’s so obvious and undeniable.  But Wathen was quite clear that they are heretics.  He repeatedly called John Paul II a heretic, a nonbeliever, etc.  Yet, when he was approached and contacted with the necessary consequence of considering them heretics (i.e., that these men are therefore outside the Church and thus hold no authority in it), he rejected it and ignored the magisterial references which show that heretics cease to be Catholic.  Apparently, until his death he continued to maintain the heretical view that once a Catholic, always a Catholic.

 

Jurisdiction

 

MHFM: Soon we will be posting an article which refutes the position, which is popular in certain circles, that essentially no independent priest today has jurisdiction.  Since that is a very important topic, people should keep an eye out for that article.  We will also be posting another short article on a different topic which we feel our readers will find interesting.

 

Musician at non-Catholic churches

 

Dear Brothers,

 

Thanks for all your hard work in spreading the truth, the more one reads and prays - the more the seriousness of our situation becomes apparent.  I would like to ask for your advice on a situation that I have found myself in.  I am employed in the military as a musician. It is a great job with many benefits which, for the most part, I enjoy. Several times a year however, gigs come up that involve playing hymns at "non-denominational" church services. After talking to my CO about my resignation (which I handed in a couple of weeks ago) he asked that I seek outside advice, as he felt that resigning over this was a big step/mistake.  Since the only validly ordained priests I can find are holding to one heresy or another - and my confessor actually told me it was ok to play at these services, I would very much appreciate your input on this matter.  Once again thank you for all your time and effort.

 

-Matt NZ

 

MHFM: Thanks for the e-mail.  If they require you to play at non-Catholic churches, then it’s clear that you must resign.  As we pointed out a few E-Exchanges ago, a Catholic absolutely should not be present at non-Catholic services even passively, despite what some people think when they wrongly attend non-Catholic services passively for funerals or weddings.  Playing music for such services is not only passive presence, but active participation.  It would definitely be forbidden.   

 

Brown Scapular

 

Hello. I was wondering about the Brown Scapular. I was wondering that since there are no more priest out there  (unless there an old age)  to bless brown scapulars would it be necessary to bless scapulars on our own?

Can the Brown Scapular save a soul in mortal sin?

 

Bana…

 

MHFM: To your first question, one can make the sign of the cross over things.  (Fathers blessed their children in the Old Testament.)  But it’s not the same as a priestly blessing.  You should just wear the scapular anyway, even if it has not been blessed by a priest. 

 

To your second question, the Brown Scapular cannot save someone in mortal sin.  This issue is covered in our book on salvation: Outside the Catholic Church There is Absolutely No Salvation [pdf file].

 

SSPX chapel

 

Hello Brother Michael or Brother Peter :

 

A few weeks ago a friend of mine who attends a SSPX chapel in Sanford, FL went to Mass there and after Mass he heard the priest, Father Young, conversing with someone and he (Fr. Young) told the person that sedevacantists are schismatics.  I was unsure of Father Young's position until now.  However, he has not publicly stated it.  Is it ok to attend his Mass and what should I tell my friend because he doesn't see a problem with attending that chapel?

 

Thanks.

 

Fad…

 

MHFM: Thanks for the question.  No, one should not go to the chapel.  He is an imposing heretic.

 

Prot. Funeral

 

Dear Brothers Dimond,

 

Please enlighten me:

 

My protestant cousin's protestant service & burial takes place in 2 days. 1. I do not intend to enter the protestant 'church' at any stage.

 

2. I do understand that the protestant minister will be saying some "committal prayers" at the graveside & leading the hymn-singing, & other prayers.

Because of this, i feel uneasy about even attending the burial at the cemetery.

 

Am i over-reacting?  Over scrupulous?  Please adise me at your very earliest.

 

Once again, thank you for your GOD-FILLED work.  May you continue to be blest.

 

Yours sincerely

 

PETER de NIESE

Melbourne

A U S T R A L I A

 

MHFM: It’s quite simple.  You absolutely should not go: not to the funeral service, not to the cemetery, nothing.

 

Mutter Vogel says never attack a priest

 

Dear MHFM, I copied this from a web site.  This statement has been published in a blue prayer book titled The Pieta Prayerbook which contains several other errors as well, yet it is a very popular prayerbook among NO "Catholics". 

 

WORDS OF JESUS CHRIST to Mutter Vogel, 1937
"ONE SHOULD NEVER ATTACK A PRIEST, EVEN WHEN HE'S IN ERROR, RATHER ONE SHOULD PRAY & DO PENANCE THAT I'LL GRANT HIM MY GRACE AGAIN. HE ALONE FULLY REPRESENTS ME, EVEN WHEN HE DOESN'T LIVE AFTER MY EXAMPLE! WHEN A PRIEST FALLS WE SHOULD EXTEND HIM A HELPING HAND THROUGH PRAYER & NOT THROUGH ATTACKS. I MYSELF WILL BE HIS JUDGE. NO ONE BUT I! WHOEVER VOICES JUDGEMENT OVER A PRIEST HAS VOICED IT OVER ME: CHILD, NEVER LET A PRIEST BE ATTACKED, TAKE UP HIS DEFENSE. CHILD, NEVER JUDGE YOUR CONFESSOR, RATHER PRAY MUCH FOR HIM & OFFER EVERY THURSDAY, THROUGH THE HANDS OF MY BLESSED MOTHER, HOLY COMMUNION (FOR HIM). NEVER AGAIN ACCEPT AN OUT-OF-THE-WAY WORD ABOUT A PRIEST, & SPEAK NO UNKIND WORD (ABOUT THEM) EVEN IF IT WERE TRUE! EVERY PRIEST IS MY VICAR & MY HEART WILL BE SICKENED & INSULTED BECAUSE OF IT! IF YOU HEAR A JUDGEMENT (AGAINST A PRIEST) PRAY A HAIL MARY. IF YOU SEE A PRIEST WHO CELEBRATES THE HOLY MASS UNWORTHILY, THEN SAY NOTHING ABOUT HIM, RATHER TELL IT TO ME ALONE! I STAND BESIDE HIM ON THE ALTAR! OH, PRAY MUCH FOR MY PRIESTS, THAT THEY'LL LOVE PURITY ABOVE ALL, THAT THEY'LL CELEBRATE THE HOLY SACRIFICE OF THE MASS WITH PURE HANDS & HEART. CERTAINLY THE HOLY SACRIFICE IS ONE & THE SAME EVEN WHEN IT'S CELEBRATED BY AN UNWORTHY PRIEST, BUT THE GRACES CALLED DOWN UPON THE PEOPLE IS NOT THE SAME!" (Our Lord's Revelations to Mutter Vogel, 1937.)

 

This statement from Mutter Vogel, whoever that might be, also seems to be the NO attitude.  Just imagine all the NO abominations and according to "Jesus Christ" we are to keep our mouths shut and "just pray".  Allow our fellow Catholics to go to hell but never mention the sin being committed right before our eyes.  I've even seen little children react to NO priests heresies in the NO churches.  One woman who was far from rich and lives on a pension, gave a priest $10,000 to put up a sign in front of the church showing the mass times.  That was about eight years ago and still no sign.  A new pastor came and she gave him the same amount of money for a sign.  Nothing... but we are not allowed to criticize them.  They can molest our children but it's disrespectful to mention it.  I was told by a N.O. "priest" not to put out… newsletters exposing pedophile priests before the crisis.  It wasn't a nice thing to do.

 

PM

 

MHFM: Yes, we’ve told others about that in the Pieta booklet.  It’s clearly a false revelation.  In fact, it’s exactly what the Devil wants people to believe.  This way heresies spread without opposition, and scandals abound without protest.  It contradicts all of Catholic Tradition.  It’s absurd.  According to Mutter Vogel, when the priest (and bishop) Nestorius denied that Mary is the Mother of God from his pulpit on Christmas in 428 the layman Eusebius should have remained silent rather than attack him publicly.  It was his public rebuke which eventually led to the Council of Ephesus’s condemnation of Nestorius as a heretic in 431.  Not everything in the Pieta booklet is correct, obviously, but there is much good there.

 

Turning?

 

Dear Representative of Holy Family Monastery,

 

This is an urgent email. I hope that you will responde. But Before I place my request, first I wish to thank you for your website stripping the bayside prophecies.  I am a catholic and had spend days looking over all the directives and the statements that were made by Veronica. After i read most of them i did a quick search to find your website listing some of the reasons why The prophecies were false. I noticed then that a bishop in New York came in the

80's and branded the prophecies as NOT VALID and that no catholic is to participate in the vigils...etc.

 

However the purpose of this email is because there is something that disturbs me greatly.  It is the following: Why would you consider the last pope john paul as not valid and the current mass as invalid? Are you not trying to accomplish that same thing that veronica did (without knowing) and that is that you are causing catholics to turn away from their church? that the mass is invalide and the vatican II issued by the church is false? also are you implying that the sacriments that the catholic church now is giving is invalid?? IE the holy eucarist, penance, babtism?  etc.

 

It would seem that you (without intention offcourse since I am not accusing or insulting anyone) are acheiving the same thing that the devil is trying to achieve which is to ditract catholics from their mass, faith, parishes...etc.  Please excuse my challenging you on this issue as i would not have sent this email unless I truelly wish to find the truth in all of this.  I am turning to you for an answer.

 

Thanks

Yousef

 

MHFM: We are turning people away from the counterfeit post-Vatican II Church.  We are promoting and defending the Catholic Church.  You really should look more carefully at the material on our website, especially the information which exposes the invalid New Mass and John Paul II's many heresies against Catholic dogmas.  All of our conclusions are based upon the teaching of the Catholic magisterium.  It’s predicted in Catholic prophecy and in Sacred Scripture that in the final days there will be a massive spiritual deception which features a counterfeit Church (which is heretical and devoid of the true faith) and an abomination in “the holy place.”  These will pose as Catholic when, in fact, they are not; and they will lead many astray.  That’s the post-Vatican II Church and the invalid New Mass, as the material on our website documents in detail.  If you haven’t already, we would also strongly recommend that you obtain our DVD special offer which includes 6 DVDs (with 10 different programs), as well as 3 important books, an audio disc (with 20 hours of programming) and flyers for only $10.00 (no shipping charge in U.S.).

 

Group

 

Brothers,

 

Firstly, I want to thank you very much for a string of videos I just watched… I found the videos very well produced, and incredibly well researched.

 

Shortly after, I found an article on your E Exchange page regarding the CMRI nuns that recently returned to the Vatican II church. In your response, you commented about the theological standpoint of the congregation they left.   You said: "the group which they left is also not Catholic and its heresy of salvation outside the Church paved the way for their acceptance of the manifest heretic Benedict XVI as good."

 

I am very interested in a clarification and/or elaboration on this heresy you mentioned, and your sources for saying so.

 

Thank you.

 

o…

 

MHFM: The Heresy of the CMRI is documented and explained in our book: Outside the Catholic Church There is Absolutely No Salvation [pdf file].  If you scroll down to page 309 of the PDF, that’s where the section on the CMRI begins.  Their heretical positions are also summarized here: The CMRI – a group which believes in salvation outside the Church.  They adhere to Protocol 122/49 (Suprema haec sacra), the heretical letter written in 1949 by a member of the Holy Office against Fr. Feeney.  It promotes the “invincible ignorance” version of the baptism of desire false theory, which means that members of any religion might get a “baptism of desire.”  This heresy is held by almost 100% of laypeople and priests who believe in “baptism of desire” today.  That’s why the priests and nuns of that group will readily tell people, if questioned correctly, that Jews, etc. can be saved.

 

New Article

 

Benedict XVI's new "conservative" Vatican document on the Church reaffirms only Vatican II's heresies and denies the true Church *new article

 

This article exposes the numerous heresies in the recent document published by the Vatican II sect, which is entitled: Responses to Some Questions Regarding Certain Aspects of the Doctrine of the Church.  This article examines all five responses which the Vatican II sect gives to explain its doctrine on “the Church.”  In addition to exposing the heresies in this new document, it discusses the Vatican II sect’s use of “subsists” and exposes certain false traditionalists who actually praised this heretical document.

 

Padre Pio book in Spanish

 

MHFM: We’re glad to say that the Padre Pio book is now available in Spanish.

 

Padre Pio: Un Sacerdote Católico que Hacía Milagros y Tenía las Heridas de Jesucristo en su Cuerpo (pdf)

 

This will be found permanently on the section of our mainpage called:Books in Español and Français.

 

Interest is Key

 

Greetings Dimond Brothers,

I recently sent my good friend Mark a comprehensive set of your materials who has been in the conservative Catholic movement for twenty years. He attends the Tridentine Mass every Sunday. Here is his response. Any suggestions on crafting a rebuttal. Appreciate any input on this.


-Bill Burns, Fredonia, New York.

---

Bill:

Sorry I've been out of touch. So busy. Lots of travel for work.


… Here are some thoughts:  The Church is in a very bad state lately...going back at least 40 years...but it's been thru it before (athanasian heresy in the early church..). Yes...I believe the council was an occasion for much of the present day confusion.


However, I do not agree at all with the conclusions of the Dimond brothers...the sedevacantist position. Moreover, I think it's a destructive position and that their ideas can really put a soul in jeopardy.   Of course it is difficult to be sure of much in these times of confusion, but the rule I follow is when in doubt...pray to Our Lady...and pray for the Holy Father..that is the current one, Benedict XVI...

 

I would have called by now but I just don't have the time it would take to discuss issues like this in the depth they require...one of these weekends when it's rainy & I can't do any yard work...I'll ring you up.

Hope all is well.

 

Mark

 

MHFM: Well, there is certainly bad will at work.  For someone to dismiss all the facts as “the Church has gone through this before” demonstrates no level of hatred of heresy or a deep concern for God’s truth.  But what is perhaps most exuded by his short letter is that he doesn’t care very much.  He doesn’t want to spend much time looking into the issues in depth – perhaps when he cannot do yard work he will call you.  No, wouldn’t want to put off trimming those bushes for finding out whether the man I think is the pope is actually a heretical impostor, or whether almost all the supposed “Catholic Masses” and “Catholic priests” in the world are actually invalid and heretical.  He has a lack of interest.  Interest is key.  Interest in God, the things of God, the Catholic Faith, is critical.  If a person doesn’t have a deep interest in it, he doesn’t stand a chance.  Without a deep interest one will go with the herd of heretics, pagans, etc. to Hell.  That person won’t care enough to hold what he needs to hold and do what he needs to do to be saved.  In our experience, lack of interest (which is connected with bad will, of course) is the biggest problem today; most people don’t care enough.  We’ve spoken to so many people who haven’t read the four gospels, even though they can read just fine.  You could pray 3 Hail Marys for him.  Then I think you should explain to him the significance of heresy and of the heresies held by the Vatican II antipopes.  Then I think you should tell him that his position is contrary to the Catholic faith and that it involves a rejection of Catholic teaching.  That involves the eventual loss of his soul (should he continue on that path) and eternal damnation.  Perhaps that message will increase his interest.  If he still rejects it, then you should move on, as St. Paul says (Titus 3:10).

 

Blown Away

 

Greetings:  I have been blown away by your website.  It's a fantastic resource.  After having read many of your papers I just have to ask what exactly your position is with the Holy See?  Are you what are known as sedevacanists?  Are you considered schismatics?  Do you believe that all of the priests, bishops and deacons that have been installed since Vatican II are invalid?  I'm honestly not trying to corner you I really want to know what you believe.

 

I am a convert to the faith (2005) and I attend both the N.O. Mass and the Tridentine Mass (FSSP) but after reading some of your materials it seems that I may just need to stay home since they're neither one really "valid" per se.  I'm very, very confused and troubled by all of what I have read.  I don't know what to do.  Please advise.

Pax vobiscum,

Steven M. King

 

MHFM: Glad you like the site… Our position on the Holy See, as reflected on our website, is that we accept all the true popes throughout history, the first being St. Peter and the last valid pope (although we would characterize him as a weak pope) being Pope Pius XII (who died in 1958).  Yes, we would be known as those who hold the sedevacantist position, that the Chair of St. Peter is presently vacant.  That is undoubtedly the true position which all faithful Catholics must take, since Benedict XVI is certainly a heretic.  We hold that all the priests and bishops ordained in Paul VI’s new rites of ordination and episcopal consecration are invalid, yes.  The case against the New Rite of Ordination is simply irrefutable, as covered here: Why the New Rite of Ordination is Invalid [PDF File]  Most of the people should be staying home today; there is no obligation to attend the Mass of a heretic, and one cannot attend the invalid New Mass.  But we have a section on our mainpage which addresses that issue.  Once again, we’re really glad to hear about your interest and we hope you continue to investigate the information.

 

Waited

 

DEAR BROTHER MICHAEL AND BROTHER PETER, I'M WRITING TO THANK YOU FOR TAKING THE TIME, AND PUTTING FORTH SUCH IMMENSE EFFORT, IN WRITING EXTREMELY DETAILED INFORMATION ABOUT VATICAN II AND THE SPIRITUAL DESOLATION IT HAS WROUGHT!!  I HAVE WAITED MANY YEARS FOR THE FOUNDATION OF THIS TRUTH TO BE DOCUMENTED, CONCISELY…

     YOU SEE, I HAVE SUFFERED MOST OF MY LIFE BECAUSE OF VATICAN II.  IF I WERE TO SAY I IDENTIFIED WITH A PARTICULAR CULTURE, AS IS VERY POPULAR TO SAY TODAY, I WOULD HAVE TO SAY I AM FROM A CATHOLIC CULTURE!  I WAS BORN TO CATHOLIC PARENTS IN 1959, AND CAUGHT THE TAIL END OF CATHOLICISM... NO MEAT ON FRIDAY...EVERY FRIDAY (I BELIEVE I REMEMBER)... AND LATIN MASS WAS THE MASS EVERYONE ATTENDED, EVERY SUNDAY.  I WENT TO CATHOLIC SCHOOL STARTING IN KINDERGARTEN.  IN @ 1966-1967 I WAS SEVEN YEARS OLD, AND THINGS STARTED TO CHANGE!!  I REMEMBER MY SECOND GRADE TEACHER, SISTER PERPETUA, TAKING US TO OUR CHURCH ONE DAY DURING SCHOOL HOURS,  HAVING OUR CLASS WALK PAST THE RAILING (WHICH WE HAD PREVIOUSLY BEEN TAUGHT NEVER TO DO), AND GATHER AROUND THE ALTAR IN A CIRCLE. ALTHOUGH IT HAD BEEN PART OF THE ORIGINAL ALTAR, IT HAD BEEN SEPARATED FROM THE MAIN ALTAR, BROUGHT FORWARD, AND MADE TO APPEAR AS A TABLE. SISTER PERPETUA THEN INSTRUCTED US TO TOUCH IT. I DIDN'T WANT TO, AS IT WAS FORBIDDEN. BUT, SHE TOLD US IT WAS OK NOW.  WHAT WE HAD BEEN TAUGHT BEFORE DIDN'T COUNT ANYMORE. SO...I TOUCHED IT.  I WAS EXTREEEMELY UNCOMFORTABLE TOUCHING IT, AND KNEW IT WAS NOT OK...SOMETHING WAS WRONG.  ON ANOTHER DAY, SHE TOOK US TO THE CONVENT WHERE  THERE WAS A PRIEST WHO GAVE MASS IN THE LITTLE CHAPEL.  THERE, AGAIN DURING SCHOOL HOURS, WE WERE TAUGHT HOW TO TAKE COMMUNION IN THE HAND.  THIS WAS ALL DONE BEHIND OUR PARENTS' BACKS.  MY MOTHER KNEW NOTHING OF IT, UNTIL I TOLD HER YEARS LATER, HOW WE WERE BEING DESENSITIZED TO THE OLD CATHOLIC TRADITIONS WHILE AT SCHOOL.  NONE OF IT EVER FELT RIGHT TO ME.

    … I WAS COMPELLED TO WRITE TO YOU AND TELL YOU MY STORY, BECAUSE OTHER PEOPLE DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW VATICAN II STRIPPED ME OF THE UNDERSTANDING OF MY FAITH.  IT STOLE MY FAITH FROM ME, AND REPLACED IT WITH THE COUNTERFEIT CHURCH YOU DESCRIBE.  IT'S AN ABSOLUTE HORROR!!  NOW I KNOW AND UNDERSTAND WHY IT DID NOT FEEL RIGHT ON SO MANY OCCASIONS...IT WASN'T!!! I COULD NOT REASON AND UNDERSTAND WHAT WAS HAPPENING WHEN I WAS IN SECOND GRADE...AND NO ONE ELSE EXPLAINED IT TO ME.  MY PARENTS JUST TRUSTED THE SCHOOL TO TEACH ME THE ACADEMIC PRINCIPLES OF THE FAITH!!  THEY TOOK ME TO CHURCH EVERY SUNDAY.  THAT WAS IT!  TOO I APPRECIATE THE USE OF THE WORD COUNTERFEIT CHURCH!!!  THANK YOU TOO, FOR YOUR VIDEO, DEATH AND THE JOURNEY TO HELL.  MY SON AND I TRY TO THINK ABOUT DEATH, DYING, HEAVEN AND HELL, EVERY DAY.   SOMETIMES IT'S TOO MUCH FOR ME THOUGH.  ALSO, HAVE YOU EVER READ HIDDEN TREASURE HOLY MASS, BY ST. LEONARD?  PHENOMINAL INFORMATION.  I HIGHLY RECOMMEND IT. IT TOO CHANGE MY LIFE.  THANK YOU AGAIN FOR YOUR BOOKS AND VIDEOS.  I KNOW I WROTE A LONG DISSERTATION, BUT IT'S BEEN A LONG 41 YEARS!!

                                 SINCERELY,
                               THERESA SMITH
                            ONTARIO, CALIFORNIA

 

Gates of Hell

 

Subj: Greetings from a former sedevacantist

 

Dear Brother,

It is a serious sin against Faith, when we deny the words of Our Lord, and proclaim that the gates of hell have prevailed against His Church, whom He has promised to be with to the consummation of the world. It is a dogma of our Holy Faith, that He is with us visibly, in His Pope, to this end. Embracing this initial error that hell has indeed prevailed, even for a short time, is such a great act of pride in the presence of God, it clouds your mind for everything else. You become blind, though you are quite certain, in this pride, that you are filled with a great grace, to see.  This very certainty is your downfall, because you do not think then you need to ask God "What is the Truth?" with humility, thinking so surely you possess it… 

 

AMDG+
Kathy

 

MHFM:  You hold that the gates of Hell have prevailed, for you hold that the Catholic Church can officially overturn her dogmatic teachings. See, for instance, Vatican II vs. the Catholic Church on Jews being rejected by God and on religious liberty (The Heresies in Vatican II) [PDF File].  Benedict XVI holds that the leaders of schismatic sects are IN THE CHURCH OF CHRIST!  He has agreed with the Lutherans on Justification.  If he's the pope (which he isn't), then being a Catholic and believing in any traditional dogma (such as the Papacy) is utterly meaningless.  What planet are you on?  Do heretics, such as yourself, who defend the heretic Benedict XVI have a clue about the significance of Benedict XVI’s actions with the “Orthodox”?  It’s simply astounding that supposed “Catholics” can argue for fidelity to the Papacy and defend Antipope Benedict XVI.  How many times does it need to be proven that he holds that the Papacy is meaningless?  He just signed another joint declaration in which he declares that a schismatic leader is in the Church of Christ!  Wake up, you dupe of the Devil!  There are definitely some people of good will out there, and we hear from them all the time; but there are so many people of bad will, such as yourself, so many.

 

Non-Catholic event

 

Brothers,

Has the Church ever infallibly defined that it is sinful to go to a non-Catholic wedding or funeral?  If it has not been infallibly defined, where have Popes taught about this issue?  Thanks so much and keep up the good work!

-Anne

 

MHFM: It wouldn’t be, strictly speaking, the subject of a dogmatic definition, but rather disciplinary laws or instructions which are tied up with faith.  In the years prior to Vatican II, the idea of “passive attendance” developed whereby one could attend non-Catholic services as long as one didn’t actively participate; in other words, the liberal idea was taught that one could go to Protestant churches, schismatic churches, and perhaps even Jewish synagogues, etc., for the funeral or wedding of a relative or friend, as long as one didn’t “actively participate.”  This was clearly a bad and compromisingly development.  To refute it, we will cite Pope Pius IX’s encyclical, Graves ac diuturnae.  Speaking of the “Old Catholic” heretics and schismatics, Pius IX says:

 

Pope Pius IX, Graves ac diuturnae (# 4), March 23, 1875: “They [the faithful] should totally shun their religious celebrations, their buildings, and their chairs of pestilence which they have with impunity established to transmit the sacred teachings.  They should shun their writings and all contact with them.  They should not have any dealings or meetings with usurping priests and apostates from the faith who dare to exercise the duties of an ecclesiastical minister without possessing a legitimate mission or any jurisdiction.”

 

(This is a new quote which comes from our new book, The Truth about What Really Happened to the Catholic Church after Vatican II.  We also talked about it on our radio program.) Obviously if one must “totally shun” their religious celebrations and their buildings, then one cannot attend non-Catholic services, funerals or weddings for any reason, let alone to pacify friends, relatives or co-workers and give non-Catholics the false impression that non-Catholic lives can lead to salvation or that non-Catholic weddings are pleasing to God.

 

Also, one definitely should not go to the wedding reception or the funeral events after the services.  To do so is to give the non-Catholics the same false impression: that their marriage is pleasing to God or that people can be saved as non-Catholics.   A true Catholic should completely shun all events associated with non-Catholic funerals and weddings, including the events afterward.  This has been added to the “Frequently Asked Questions” section of our website.

 

Pope Pius XI, Mortalium Animos #9, Jan. 6, 1928: “Everyone knows that John himself, the Apostle of love, who seems to reveal in his Gospel the secrets of the Sacred Heart of Jesus, and who never ceased to impress on the memories of his followers the new commandment ‘Love one another,’ altogether forbade any intercourse with those who professed a mutilated and corrupt form of Christ’s teaching: ‘If any man come to you and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into the house nor say to him: God speed you(II John 10).”

 

Refuting Eastern Orthodox

 

Dear Brother Dimond,

Recently I have been discussing the orthodox religion with one of my friends who has studied it much. She proposed a very interesting idea to me that I had never heard before.  She claims that before 1054, the Pope was not necessarily in charge. Yes, he was the head, but had no more power than any of the other patriarchs, which is why they all had to make a decision mutually.  This I can understand, even though I am not at all certain that that is true. However, I do believe that the dogma of papal infallibility  was established in the Council of Trent, malmost 500 years after the split.

However, what I found truly interesting was the that she was claiming that the reason for the split was because the current pope, in that time, was trying to force the East to add "and the Son" into the creed. Then the East got mad because they didn't believe that just the pope could inflict a rule as such without having a council about it.  Thus the split occurred. Supposedly, they both anathematized each other at the same time. Now the orthodox current claim is that the Catholic church has had no valid councils since then because we didn't have a unified church, meaning the orthodox were still not in union with the West. I think here is when Constantinople comes into play. I believe he was the one that "reunited" the East with the West, or at least thats what the West thinks. The orthodox still, however, don't consider that to be the case. So I guess us Catholics believe that the orthodox are in schism. But following this logic, there is no foundation to claim that it is the orthodox that actually are. Why did the West prevail, while the East maintained its ground? It seems as if the orthodox are in a coma; not believe anything that has been declared after the split, but at the same time, the West has grown immensely, but obviously not in the right direction. It almost seems as if this split paved the road for the crusaders, and maybe the Church hasn't developed into what it ought to be, had there never been a split.

So my questions to you are these:  Firstly, How does the "West" have the authority to declare that they were still a unified church without the East.   If it is true that the pope didn't have the sole authority, then why could he make that decision without the East involvement? And secondly, if it is true that there has to be a UNIFIED church to have a valid council, then how can we claim to have had any valid
councils since?

One last note, I was reading something that you had written about orthodox that my dad gave to me. I believe it was an e-mail answer. In it you stated that because God promised to be with his Church to the end of time, doesn't it strike you a bit odd that He would be basically absent from it since 756 ( i believe the year was), which is the last valid council the orthodox accept. Yet, at the same time, we believe that the VII was invalid and all the other ones following that. Thats at least a good fifty years. I am not questioning the validity of it whatsoever, because i firmly believe in what you publish; yet fifty years versus a thousand is that not great a spectrum in God's time. I just don't think that that reason is a concrete enough reason to disregard the orthodox position. That doesn't disprove their position.

Anyway, thanks for your time. Hope to hear back from you. Some insight would be wonderful that way I can defend the Catholic faith against
this. Thanks so much!

Diane B.

MHFM: Diane, thanks for the interest.  I must point out that what you are holding as possible, namely, that the pope did not have a greater authority than the other patriarchs in the early Church, is contrary to Catholic dogma.  Christ clearly made St. Peter the first pope, as an abundance of scriptural evidence proves (Mt. 16:18-20; Jn. 21:15-17; etc.).  The bishops of Rome, as the successors to St. Peter, also exercised this unique primacy in the earliest centuries, as Vatican I declared that all Christians must believe. 

 

Pope Pius IX, Vatican Council I, Sess. 4, Chap. 2, ex cathedra: “Surely no one has doubt, rather all ages have known that the holy and most blessed Peter, chief and head of the apostles and pillar of faith and foundation of the Catholic Church, received the keys of the kingdom from our Lord Jesus Christ, the Savior and Redeemer of the human race; and he up to this time and always lives and presides and exercises judgment in his successors, the bishops of the holy See of Rome, which was founded by him and consecrated by his blood.  Therefore, whoever succeeds Peter in this chair, he according to the institution of Christ himself, holds the primacy of Peter over the whole Church.” (Denz. 1824)

 

There are many examples of the popes exercising this primacy in the early centuries.  There is the case of the sedition at the Church of Corinth in the first century (A.D. 90-100).  The Church at Corinth asked for help from the Bishop of Rome, Pope St. Clement.  They requested him to intercede, even though the apostle John was still alive and closer in Ephesus.  This shows the Papal Primacy from the beginning.  In response Pope Clement wrote his famous epistle to the Corinthians.  In this epistle from the first century, the pope clearly uses authoritative language to command them to be subject to their local pastors.  Here are some quotes from his famous epistle:

 

"Owing, dear brethren, to the sudden and successive calamitous events which have befallen us (i.e., the persecutions of Emperor Domitian), we feel that we have been somewhat tardy in turning our attention to the points respecting which you consulted us; and especially to that shameful and detestable sedition, utterly abhorrent to the elect of God, which a few rash and self-confident persons have kindled to such a pitch of frenzy, that your venerable and illustrious name, worthy to be universally loved, has suffered grievous injury." (First Clement, Chapter 1)

 

"Ye, therefore, who laid the foundation of this sedition, submit yourselves to the presbyters, and receive correction so as to repent, bending the knees of your hearts. Learn to be subject, laying aside the proud and arrogant self-confidence of your tongue." (First Clement, Chapter 57)

 

"Your schism has subverted [the faith of] many, has discouraged many, has given rise to doubt in many, and has caused grief to us all. And still your sedition continueth." (First Clement, Chapter 46)

 

I will also mention the case of Pope Victor, around the year 190, ordering local synods to be held all over to settle the date of Easter.  There are other examples, but they are covered in many books on the primacy of St. Peter, so I will not repeat them here.  I will say that one of the reasons that the primacy of jurisdiction of the popes wasn't emphasized quite as much in the early Church as it was later on - even though it certainly existed -  is because it was obviously more difficult at that time for popes to step into controversies in far off places.  Due to the difficulties of travel and communication with far off places which existed prior to the invention of modern means of travel and communication, it was obviously not as easy for the Bishop of Rome to settle controversies in distant lands or dioceses.  That’s why examples of this type of intervention were less frequent, even though they existed.  For the same reason, the role of the local bishops and patriarchs in the early Church was especially important at that period in putting down heresies and handling controversies that arose in their localities.  However, here’s a quote from St. Irenaeus (around the year 200) which expresses the authentic and original truth on this issue: that the Church of Rome had a primacy of jurisdiction (e.g., all must agree with it) from the beginning.

 

St. Irenaeus, Against the Heresies, A.D. 203: “But since it would be too long to enumerate in such a volume as this the successions of all the Churches, we shall confound those who, in whatever manner, whether through self-satisfaction or vainglory, or through blindness and wicked opinion, assemble other than where it is proper, by pointing out here the successions of the bishops of the greatest and most ancient Church known to all, founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious Apostles, Peter and Paul, that Church which has the tradition and the faith which comes down to us after having been announced to men by the Apostles. For with this Church, because of its superior origin, all Churches must agree, that is, all the faithful in the whole world; and it is in her that the faithful everywhere have maintained the Apostolic tradition.” (Jurgens, The Faith of the Early Fathers, Liturgical Press, Vol. 1: 210.)

 

Regarding your statement that papal infallibility wasn’t established until the Council of Trent, that’s not correct.  It was defined as a dogma at Vatican I in 1870, but the truth of it was believed since the beginning.  We find the promise of the unfailing faith for St. Peter and his successors referred to by Christ in Luke 22.

 

Luke 22:31-32- “And the Lord said: Simon, Simon, behold Satan hath desired to have all of you, that he may sift you as wheat: But I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not: and thou, being once converted, confirm thy brethren.”

 

Satan desired to sift all the Apostles (plural) like wheat, but Jesus prayed for Simon Peter (singular), that his faith fail not.  Jesus is saying that St. Peter and his successors (the popes of the Catholic Church) have an unfailing faith when authoritatively teaching a point of faith or morals to be held by the entire Church of Christ. 

 

Pope Pius IX, Vatican Council I, 1870, ex cathedra:
SO, THIS GIFT OF TRUTH AND A NEVER FAILING FAITH WAS DIVINELY CONFERRED UPON PETER AND HIS SUCCESSORS IN THIS CHAIR[36]

 Pope Pius IX, Vatican Council I, 1870, ex cathedra:
“… the See of St. Peter always remains unimpaired by any error, according to the divine promise of our Lord the Savior made to the chief of His disciples: ‘I have prayed for thee [Peter], that thy faith fail not ...’”[37]

 

And this truth has been held since the earliest times in the Catholic Church.   

 

Pope St. Gelasius I, epistle 42, or Decretal de recipiendis et non recipiendis libris, 495: “Accordingly, the see of Peter the Apostle of the Church of Rome is first, having neither spot, nor wrinkle, nor anything of this kind (Eph. 5:27).”

 

The word “infallible” actually means “cannot fail” or “unfailing.”  Therefore, the very term Papal Infallibility comes directly from Christ’s promise to St. Peter (and his successors) in Luke 22, that Peter has an unfailing Faith.  And it was also believed in the early Church, as we see here.  Though this truth was believed since the beginning of the Church, it was specifically defined as a dogma at the First Vatican Council in 1870.

 

The primary way to refute the Eastern "Orthodox" position is covered in this short letter: Refuting Eastern Orthodox.  It’s just an introduction, but it covers the fatal flaw of illogic at the heart of Eastern “Orthodoxy.”  We’ve added it to the section of our website called “Refuting Protestantism and Eastern Orthodoxy.”  It’s new, but we will expand it over time.

St. Philomena

We recently added a prayer to St. Philomena to our website.  She’s a powerful saint:

 

Prayer to St. Philomena

 

“Cardinal” Keeler’s heresies

Please I need some help. Is there any way you can find info on Keeler for me, like his heresies in writings or so on?  I dont know how to find out what type of heresy he is in. thanks.

 

PP

 

MHFM: Yes, on August 12, 2002, the American “bishops” in union with John Paul II issued a document on the Jews.  It was called “Reflections on Covenant and Mission.”  Spearheaded by “Cardinal” William Keeler, who was the “Archbishop” of Baltimore, and without a peep of objection from John Paul II, the document publicly declared: “… campaigns that target Jews for conversion to Christianity are no longer theologically acceptable in the Catholic Church.”  Thus, “Cardinal” Keeler holds that the Old Covenant is still valid and that Jews don’t need to – and shouldn’t – be converted to Christianity.  He is thus a notorious apostate.  That should provide you with the information you’re looking for, but Keeler also accepts all of the heresies of Vatican II, false ecumenism, etc., of course.  His view on the Jews, by the way, is common among the Novus Ordo “bishops,” as we show in: The Apostasy of the Hierarchy and prominent members of the Vatican II sect - is this your hierarchy? [PDF File]  That’s because it comes from the teaching of the post-Vatican II antipopes on the Jews, which itself comes from Vatican II’s heretical teaching that Jews are not rejected by God (Nostra Aetate #4).

 

Nicea and Bible

 

Hi Brothers

I am a member of a forum and we are currently debating which is the most accurate bible (though the forum itself is not a religious forum).  My understanding is the most accurate bible and the one I should purchase is the one I can purchase through your online store.  However, when I said that this was the best bible to purchase someone wrote that the Council of Nicea in 325 under the order of Emperor Constantine edited the bible.  I have actually heard this before.  Could you please tell me if this is true and if it is not why do people think this?

Thank you for taking the time to read my email.

VJ

 

MHFM: Thanks for the question.  The Council of Nicea in 325 did not edit the Bible or formally compile a list of the inspired books.  The Council of Carthage in 397 was the first council at which we find a complete list of the books of the New Testament as we have now.  They might think that it was at Nicea by order of Constantine because it’s a popular myth among non-Catholics that the Catholic Church started with Constantine.  So some of them seem to refer practically everything to Constantine.

 

Apparition

 

hi i just went to your website,and found some info on fatima. well i tell you she is acurate there are images of men burning in the hells. i am told the souls are round,and i feel that to be true intuitivly but alsp have seen dead people roaming the earth,and in the lower subway stations of nyc i have seen invisible bodys blackened by negativity... basically i just laugh god will send thenm all to hell-im staying with jesus the trinity and the virgin mary,and all the angels and saints of god. good luck 

 

barry paul finlay

 

MHFM: What you have said is interesting, but one has to be careful with things such as what you’re describing.  One of the primary means of deception today is false apparitions.  We’ve spoken with a shockingly high number of people who claim to have seen and received supernatural and preternatural things such as you describe.  In many cases, they are obviously deceptions of the evil one since the person is embracing some heresy or living a bad life; but the person cannot see it.  I’m not saying that’s necessarily the case with what you’re describing, but one has to be careful not to look too deeply into them or for them. 

 

When you think about it, such a revelation can be a very effective tool of deception for Satan.  For once he grants a person such a revelation or apparition, quite often (not in every case) that person begins to think he or she is special and has an inside track to God.  It can subtly appeal to that person’s pride.  That person might become complacent or, in so many cases, falsely confident that he or she is on the right path when, in so many cases, he or she is not on the correct path and is actually embracing a heresy or not doing what God wants.  So we would say, in general, that one should not put too much stock into those things; but I’m sure our readers have found what you have said interesting. 

 

Nuns

 

Brothers,

Here is an article about the former CMRI nuns being accepted into the Vatican II church:

http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/0703883.htm

Just as you pointed out, people see a few traditional things coming out of Rome, and it totally wipes away all the heresies the Vatican II church holds!  It'svall about appearances! God has allowed these nuns to become more blinded because of their own heretical belief concerning the salvation dogma.

Bridget

 

MHFM: Yes, here’s another one: http://www.catholic.org/national/national_story.php?id=24641. I find it interesting how externals often play such a key part in the Devil’s efforts to deceive people.  He made sure that there was some traditional Latin chanting at the funeral ceremony for the beastly Antipope John Paul II, and that’s all these faithless “nuns” needed to see.  They don’t love the truth, and their supposed dedication to God is a fraud.  The really sad part is that while their move back to the Devil’s Counter Church was, in essence, a full-fledged choice for the Devil, the group which they left is also not Catholic and its heresy of salvation outside the Church paved the way for their acceptance of the manifest heretic Benedict XVI as good.  This “realization” that he is “good” was, as they admitted, the key for them in changing their position.

 

Abjuration

 

Dear MHFM:

 

I was wondering why you have not discussed on your website the issue of "Abjuration" It's my understanding that a catholic that has fallen away from the catholic church would need to make an abjuration to enter back into the catholic church.  And since there is no remission of sins outside of the catholic church or salvation outside of the catholic church.  There must be a clear understanding of this issue, if we are to have a chance to save our souls.        

 

Thanks!

 

JAG 

 

MHFM: For a long time we’ve had on our website the Council of Trent’s profession of faith for converts, which is an abjuration.  In professing it, one condemns everything the Church condemns. “I condemn, reject, and anathematize everything that is contrary to those propositions, and all heresies without exception that have been condemned, rejected, and anathematized by the Church.”  We also recommend that people add that they reject specific sects to which they formerly belonged. 

 

The Council of Trent’s Profession of Faith for Converts

 

We have received some e-mails stating that we reject the need for abjuration.  Such a statement is a lie.  It’s typical of the kind of calumny and distortion that schismatics engage in.

 

EWTN

 

Dear Brothers,

 

I just saw on EWTN's The World Over, a segment commenting on Moto Propio.  Raymond Arroyo was interviewing a "Fr." Robert Sirico.  A caller called in and asked whether the priests ordained in the new rite of ordination would have to undergo ordination in the old rite in order to celebrate the traditional Mass.  The dishonest "priest" replied, "No there is only one ordination.  I, myself, was ordained in the new rite and I can celebrate the old rite........"  He didn't even have the honesty to address the issue of whether the new rite is valid or not. 

 

AP

 

MHFM: That doesn’t really surprise me, considering that almost all of the “priests” in the Novus Ordo are oblivious to the major problems with the new rite.

 

Geocentrism Article

 

Hi,
I read through the entire artcle tittled, "Examining the Theological Status of Geocentrism
and Heliocentrism and the Devastating Problems this creates for Baptism of Desire Arguments" I thought it was one of the greatest works for arguing against the false heretical idea of baptism of desire. Everyone who is Catholic or claims to be Catholic (traditional or not) should read this artcle of yours. It also brought my attention to the fact that the Blessed Mother should not be called Co-Redemptrix. I have always believed that that title is fine and so has many traditional Catholics that I know. I think I simply misunderstood the definition of co-redemptrix because I always knew that Christ is the only redeemer but throuh Mary she would help you find Christ and avoid sin, thus being redeemed by christ with the help of the Blessed Mother. I thought that is what co-redemptrix meant, I guess I was wrong. I think maybe many people misuderstand the real meaning. Well anyway I thank you for your great work on the truth of true Infallibility . All should read it.

God Bless

 

a

 

MHFM: Thanks, we’re glad that you liked it and that you read it.  The silence of the leading baptism of desire advocates in regard to the points raised in that article is deafening.   Those who follow these issues closely know that the facts and arguments in that article literally crush what these people have been arrogantly telling and teaching masses of “traditionalists” for years.  If they continue with their silence, soon we will be forced to specifically call them out again, to further expose their hypocrisy and to draw even more attention to the fact that they do not have the truth on their side and that they have been totally refuted.  They have been totally refuted on what they have said about the authority of the actions against Fr. Feeney, about the authority of the teaching of theologians and doctors of the Church, among other things. 

 

Consider the fact that these groups have published tracts and articles stating that it’s a mortal sin to reject baptism of desire because of the 1949 letter of two members of the Holy Office (Suprema haec sacra, a very heretical document).  But not one of those same groups, to my knowledge, holds that it’s a mortal sin to deny that the Earth is the center of the universe, even though geocentrism was considered de fide by St. Robert Bellarmine and to deny it was declared heretical by a decree of many members of the Holy Office in 1633!  Think about this profoundly outrageous hypocrisy, which is demonstrated by these prominent “traditionalist” priests and bishops and is now right in front of us all.  It’s like the elephant in the room.  Yet these bad willed, necessity-of-baptism-denying, salvation-for-non-Catholics-believing heretics ignore it and go on their “merry” way.  They think they are safe ignoring these facts.  However, when they meet Jesus Christ they will find out just how wrong they were and just how much they sinned against His truth.  They won’t get away with it; nor will the heretical laypeople who ignored these and other facts, and continued to accept the heresies of these priests or continued to support them.

 

Regarding the “Co-Redemptrix” issue, soon we will be posting some thoughts which we feel further demonstrate why that title is not a proper title to express Our Lady’s profound role in our salvation, and why it is excluded by the language used in the dogmatic definitions of Trent and Florence.

 

Bitter?

 

After perusing your site for even a short time, I was able to conclude that you most certainly weren't holy, you are actually bitter; you're not part of the family, you've cut yourselves off and then blamed everyone else for being wrong. I'll pray for you.


Patrick

 

MHFM: You do not name even one issue about which you think we're wrong, since you are a coward and you would be refuted. You are a blind and arrogant heretic.  You're a fraud who is headed for damnation.  You present an exterior of charity, when in reality you have none.  Are we angry at obstinate heretics who reject or mislead or attack Catholic teaching?  Of course we are.  Since you are devoid of the true faith and, as a result, devoid of any sincere concern for God’s truth, you call solicitude for the truths of Catholicism and a hatred of heresy unholy bitterness.  You are gravely mistaken. 

 

Psalm 96:10- “You that love the Lord, hate evil: the Lord preserveth the souls of his saints, he will deliver them out of the hand of the sinner.”

 

You are those of whom the Scripture speaks:

 

Isaias 5:20- “Woe to you that call evil good, and good evil: that put darkness for light, and light for darkness: that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter.”

 

Woe to you, heretic.

 

Rosary

 

We’re glad to say that we now have a “How to Pray the Rosary” page on our website.  We send out many sheets on how to pray the Rosary with orders to various individuals who do not know how to pray it (since they are from a non-Catholic background) or who have forgotten how to pray it when they stopped praying it years ago.  But now one is available on our website:

 

How to Pray the Rosary

 

More on new Motu Proprio and the Sunday limit

 

I suspect that the Motu Propio document on the "freeing of the mass" has a Satanic purpose.

 

The American Bishop's conference are interpreting the request to allow only one 1962 version mass per Sunday (in article 5 of the Motu) as on a Diocese level instead of one per parish (in article 4 of the Motu). I looked at some sites online that list indults and in my rough calculation, this will actually lead to about a 50% reduction in the current number of indults. So, it does not seem like the goal of the document was to increase the availability of the indult to lay people - at least not the goal of the Bishops, and probably not the goal of Benedict XVI, based on all his other words and actions.

 

I think the document on China and the document on the freeing of the mass have something in common. Both are encouraging priests and lay people to come out of hiding and identify who they are that want anything that even looks more like the genuine faith. This will make it much easier to round them up.

 

This would be similar to how the Russian Communist's persecution played out. Per Solzhenitsyn's Gulag Archipelago, they had special intense tortures for Catholics, so much more intense that the nonCatholic Christians being tortured considered themselves very fortunate in comparison; But still, the Communists were not satisfied with just torturing Catholics. So, it looks like the Novus Ordo, who knows us already, is using the Motu to find sympathisers.

 

It certainly does not seem like an effort to lure people away from SSPX or other trad chapels, because so many of the indult chapels are to be closed through this Motu anyway.

 

It looks like this document is simply part of some final preparations for a much greater persecution. Since it is not for the purpose of freeing the mass nor for luring trads back into the Novus Ordo structure, what then, do you think, is it's purpose?

 

MHFM: We have mentioned in numerous places on our website – most recently the News and Commentary section – what the purpose of this new motu proprio is.  It is extremely significant to also note that part of the restrictions that Benedict XVI has placed is to only allow one Latin Mass per Sunday.  Think about that.  Most people only attend church on Sundays, especially people in the Novus Ordo.  So if there were one day on which there would be a need to have more than one Mass it would be on Sunday, of course.  But that is precisely the day on which he disallows more than one Latin Mass.  That should tell you something about his true intentions and evil agenda.

 

----

 

Brothers,

Thanks for your response.  I stand corrected.  I should not have said the "Motu Proprio" did nothing.  I think in effect it will do very little.

It is true that priests ordained in the New Rite of the Vatican II church are not true priest, and therefore even if they perform the ceremony of the Tridentine Mass, it still won't be a valid mass.  Besides this most significant point, there is also in Art. 4 of the "Motu Proprio" the very vague and disturbing words "observing all the norms of law".  What this means, nobody knows.  I believe the "pastor" and the "bishop" will interpret
these words in a manner that best suit their whims.  The devil doesn't want the laity attending any valid masses, so for the older priests who were
validly ordained in the pre-Vatican II rite, I am afraid the "pastor" and the "bishop" will use this clause to suppress any attendance of the laity
from these private, valid masses as "authorized" in Art. 2 of the "Motu Proprio".  As you say, the Vatican is simply using the conservatively-billed and
advertised documents like the "Motu Proprio" to get the conservative Novus Ordo "catholics" to continue hang on and the confused traditionalists to
come back to the counter church, the false bride of Christ.

Another example is the document entitled "Responses to Some Questions Regarding Certain Aspects of the Doctrine on the Church", which was released today July 11, 2007 under the approval of Benedict XVI.  Regarding this "conservative-sounding document about the Roman Catholic Church being the one Church of Christ" as you put it, the document was full of ambiguous and contradicting statements, and in effect, it did very little in clarifying anything, except proving once again that the church in Rome is not the Catholic Church.

For instance, the document correctly states in the Response to the Second Question that "Christ 'established here on earth' only one Church" and "This one Church of Christ, which we confess in the Creed as one, holy, catholic and apostolic".  These are both true statements, and a conservative Novus Ordo "catholic" might read it and say "See look, Benedict is not a heretic." But indeed Benedict XVI is a heretic.  Case in point, the document goes on to completely contradict itself later in the same Response to the Second Question with "It is possible, according to Catholic doctrine, to affirm correctly that the Church of Christ is present and operative in the churches and ecclesial Communities not yet fully in
communion with the Catholic Church ..."  This is nonsense.  It contradicts the de fide teaching that the Church is Christ is one as was just declared
three sentences prior in the same document.

"For since the Mystical Body of Christ, like His physical Body, is one (I Cor. 12:12), … it were foolish to say that the Mystical Body is composed of
disjointed and scattered members.  Whosoever therefore is not united with the Body is no member thereof; neither is he in communion with Christ its Head." -Pope Pius XI, Mortalium Animos, Paragraphs 15-16.

What is also laughable is how the counter church tries to convince everyone that it is trying to clarify the dogmas that the true Church has already
decreed.  For instance, in the Response to the First Question the document states "What the Church has taught down through the centuries, we also teach ... that which was uncertain, is now clarified ..."  Come on, what could be more simple than the dogma that the true Church of Christ IS the Catholic Church, one and undivided.  What this new Vatican document tries to explain is purposely obtuse and incomprehensible.

So I concur with you.  The Vatican is purposely using these conservatively-billed and advertised documents that in effect will do very little in bringing about any changes in the counter church.  I should not have said that the "Motu Proprio" did nothing.  In effect, it will just do very little, considering how few real priests there are and the vague clause contained in Art. 4. Thanks again for all that you do.

Francis Pagnanelli

 

MHFM: Yes, also having read this new supposedly “conservative” and traditional document on the Church, I can only say that anyone who has read it and thinks that it represents traditional Catholic teaching is totally of bad will.  It’s completely heretical.  We will discuss it soon on our website and on our next radio program.

 

Dr. Tom Droleskey

 

MHFM: A recent e-mail exchange for those it may concern:

 

Dr. Tom Droleskey believes that members of false religions can be saved

 

This will be found permanently in the “Beware” Section of our website.

 

On New Motu Proprio

 

Brothers,

I have read Benedict XVI's "Motu Proprio", and I have to say that for anyone who is still a conservative Vatican II "catholic" waiting for the reform of the reform, it really did nothing for them with regard to increasing the usage of the Tridentine Mass.

In his "Motu Proprio", Benedict XVI simply stated that "It is, therefore, permissible to celebrate the Sacrifice of the Mass following the typical edition of the Roman Missal promulgated by Bl. John XXIII in 1962."  This is nothing new.  Pope St. Pius V told us that 437 years ago in his Papal Bull "Quo Primum".  Benedict XVI even admitted that the Tridentine Mass was "never abrogated", as if the counter church had the power to do so anyway.

Let's look at the "Motu Proprio".  In Art. 5, it states that in diocesian parishes where there exists a desire of the faithful to attend the Tridentine Mass, then "the pastor should willingly accept their requests".  Note that the "Motu Proprio" does not state that the pastor is obligated to accept their requests, and that even if the decision is made by the pastor to celebrate the Tridentine Mass, then that decision still needs to be made "under the guidance of the bishop", meaning that the "bishop" still has the supposed authority to stop its celebration.

So what exactly did the "Motu Proprio" do?  Nothing.  You brothers are right.  This long awaited "Motu Proprio" is just a ploy keep conservative "catholics" hanging on in hope that the reform of the refom will someday
come.

Francis Pagnanelli

 

MHFM: I have read it as well.  While there are definitely some restrictions, I definitely disagree that it is nothing new.   It definitely expands permission for the use of the 1962 Missal, contrary to what some are saying.  It’s very different from the situation prior to the promulgation of this moto proprio; for, as we showed on our website, Paul VI clearly affirmed that the New Mass was binding and that the traditional mass was only allowed for very few conditions; and later documents only allowed the Latin Mass with the specific permission of the “bishop.”  Now any “priest” in the Counter Church could cite Art. 2 below to justify his use of the 1962 Missal, without any permission, if confronted by his Novus Ordo “authorities.”  These are words coming from his very own Antipope Benedict XVI, a post-Vatican II “pope.”  The “priest” wouldn’t need to argue that St. Pius V’s decree is still binding.

 

“Art. 2. In Masses celebrated without the people, each Catholic priest of the Latin rite, whether secular or regular, may use the Roman Missal published by Blessed Pope John XXIII in 1962, or the Roman Missal promulgated by Pope Paul VI in 1970, and may do so on any day with the exception of the Easter Triduum. For such celebrations, with either one Missal or the other, the priest has no need for permission from the Apostolic See or from his ordinary.”

 

People at his church could then use Art. 4 to attend such celebrations:
 

“Art. 4. Celebrations of Mass as mentioned above in art. 2 may -- observing all the norms of law -- also be attended by faithful who, of their own free will, ask to be admitted.” [Link to new “Motu Proprio”  ]

 

So it is definitely different, contrary to the claims of one false traditiionalist website.  [The false traditionalist website I’m describing constantly attacks the Counter Church as a non-Catholic sect, but outrageously, obstinately and schismatically continues to regard its leadership as the authorities in the Catholic Church.  It thus has an axe to grind in lessening the significance of this new motu proprio; for if all “priests” in the Counter Church can now say the Latin Mass, there is less of a distinction between his own false position and theirs (which he hates so much) and it undercuts his reasons for remaining independent of the Vatican II hierarchy.  So that’s why that particular website is dishonestly asserting that this new document grants essentially nothing.]  After this motu proprio, however, things are no different in terms of most of the Masses still being invalid, since almost all the priests are invalid anyway, which is why Benedict XVI was willing to do it.  We are not denying that apostate “bishops” in the Counter Church might do their utmost to circumvent these permissions, and therefore its effect will not be as widespread as some in the Counter Church think.  Nevertheless, the point is that Antipope Benedict XVI has definitely stepped out and made a concession to “traditionalists” as part of his diabolical plan. 

 

The Devil probably waited as long as he could to make this concession, picking just the right time.  As we hear more and more every day about the acceptance of homosexuality becoming essentially a world-wide dogma which people of the world must accept or face ostracization or even criminal charges, we know the time is very short.  Now there is talk about a conservative-sounding document about the Roman Catholic Church being the one Church of Christ which will supposedly anger Protestants.  This comes after scores of joint declarations of Antipope Benedict XVI and Antipope John Paul II with schismatic and Protestant leaders in which they denounce trying to convert schismatics and accept Protestant heresies.  Again, this is all part of the plan.  After many “traditionalists” fall for it, they will probably move quickly with the “canonization” of the beast Antipope John Paul II, making them worship Antichrist. This concession of the 1962 Missal was one the Devil had to make as part of his final surge.  It’s obvious, at least to us, that part of Benedict XVI’s mission from Satan is to try as hard as he can to deceive the “traditionalists” while not violating his program of ecumenical apostasy and the promotion of Vatican II.  It’s quite something, but we are truly living in those times of which Our Lord spoke, when he spoke of the spiritual deception being so profound that even the elect would be deceived “if it were possible” (Mt. 24:24).  The question is who loves the truth (the full truth), who hates heresy, who condemns heretics (e.g., the apostate Antipope Benedict XVI) without becoming a schismatic who falsely condemns people who are not heretics, and who holds the other dogmas of the faith (such as Outside the Church…) without any compromise?  If one doesn’t denounce this apostate after becoming aware of his apostasy, it doesn’t matter how many Latin Masses one attends, whether they are valid or not, for that one is a Christ-denier.  

 

Cum ex

 

Dear Bros Dimond,

 

I have read and reread this Apostolic Constitution of Pope Paul IV, and having a difficult time of determining what the complete message is.

I am hoping that you would have some time to decipher it for me, and explain it to me in simple laymans language.. 

 

As I see it , it’s a warning with teeth , against "Usurpers", who are in the the Church or intend to be in the Church , in any position of Authority , that being from Pope even down to layman, that if they are convicted of any Serious Heresy, are removed , all power and authority taken away, never to be able to hold a position of authority again ,FOREVER,to be put away in some monestary or Order , to live the rest of their lives , on bread and water..  The document repeatly talks of , "In perpetuity", etc…

 

I need to know the weight of the document , if its in the area of Divine  law, which must be obeyed to the letter, by all , as in the case of something that is "Ex Cathara", or Infallable.. or does it fall in the category of , "Disiplinary" , of some sort. 

 

Thank you, Await your reply

Sincerely

Fred landolfi

 

MHFM: Cum ex Apostolatus Officio of Pope Paul IV definitely has some disciplinary aspects to it.  However, the central point that heretics cannot hold offices and rule in the Church is dogmatic.  It’s tied in with the dogma, defined by Eugene IV and others, that heretics cannot be inside the Church.

 

Pope Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum (#15), June 29, 1896: “No one, therefore, unless in communion with Peter can share in his authority, since it is absurd to imagine that he who is outside can command in the Church.”

 

Sunday rest

 

MHFM: Here’s a story to remind us of the obligation to refrain from doing forbidden work on Sunday.  Padre Jose de Anchieta was a famous 16th century Jesuit missionary to Brazil.  He exerted great efforts in bringing the Catholic Faith to the natives of that land.

 

“Edifying signs of some conception of right and wrong appeared in unexpected places.  One Sunday as [Padre] Jose went visiting he found a little boy diligently weaving a basket that he had begun that morning, apparently having forgotten about the Sabbath.  We do not know what Jose said to him, but the following morning the penitent brought his precious basket to school and before all the children threw it into the fire.  Gradually the natives learned to observe the days of fast and abstinence although, as in most things, they depended upon the ‘padres’ to remind them not only about the Lenten season but also about Fridays.” (Helen G. Dominian, Apostle of Brazil, p. 115)

 

Approved?

 

I have just finished reading your booklet on Padre Pio and enjoyed it immensely. However in lokking over your various items for sale, I am wondering seriously if your monastery is a truly Catholic one and in good standing with the Church, if it has the approval of the  Bishop of the Diocese you are located in. I am familiar now with your website but the section of "Our Manastery" is very limited in information of the detaiuls which I would like to know… I thank you for any information I would like before I proceed in ordering any more of your tapes and dvds.

 

Yours, in Christ.

 

Gir…

 

MHFM: You really need to look more carefully at the material on our website.  It shows that the post-Vatican II Church and its “authorities” are manifestly heretical and therefore not Catholic.  They reject many dogmas of the Catholic faith and, according to Catholic teaching, cannot hold authority in the Catholic Church.  They are today’s equivalent of the Arians.  In the 4th century, the Arians (heretics who denied the Divinity of Christ) were successful in occupying many of the Catholic buildings and making true Catholics look as if they were the outsiders.

 

The “bishops” of the post-Vatican II Church obviously don’t regard as “approved” groups such as ours, since we adhere uncompromisingly to the traditional Catholic faith and reject the heretical Second Vatican Council and the Counter Church to which it gave birth.  Since you asked about the local Vatican II “bishop” in Buffalo, you should read the file below.  He’s the first one covered:

 

The Apostasy of the Hierarchy and prominent members of the Vatican II sect - is this your hierarchy? [PDF File]

(This article covers the astounding heresies and apostasy of the “bishops” and other prominent members of the Vatican II sect – the Counter Church – as well as the Catholic teaching that heretics immediately lose authority in the Catholic Church)

 

Major EWTN Heresy

 

FYI - While flipping through the channel lineup on TV this morning, I came across Mother Angelica Live on EWTN.  If anyone ever needs evidence that proves she believes in Universal Salvation, you can find her speaking about it from the May 16, 2000 episode, which came on as a rerun.  She firmly and deceivingly claims that it is the teaching of the Church and supports this heresy whole-heartedly.

 

Lidash…

 

Relative to your most recent radio broadcast (Dolan’s discussion of Father Feeney and the dogma of No Salvation):

 

I view EWTN periodically with the intent of having specific cases to use in discussion with various people trying to hold tight to a belief because EWTN said it was so and they can’t be wrong (I also use your material which is far more insightful than anything I am capable of doing).

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

 

Friday 7/6/07; re-broadcast of “Mother Angelica Live” from the year 2000

 

The last caller of the program asked, ‘Will people of other religions lose their souls if they do not eat the Body of Christ?’

 

“Mother” Angelica answered:

“God judges by your light.”

 

She quotes Luke 12:47,48: She says, ‘There is a passage in Luke 12 where it speaks of the servant who knows what his master wants, he will receive many stripes but the one who does not know but deserves to be beaten will receive less.’ ‘You see, if you don’t know, how can you be held …’

 

And then she wraps everything around her next statement, ‘There was a heresy a few years back that you had to be Catholic to go to Heaven. The Church does not teach that.  All people are saved by the merits of Jesus through the Church.’

 

She continues, ‘Nobody has told them, back to your question (the caller asking about the Eucharist). We will be judged only by what they have been told and the graces we have.’

 

Some additional paraphrases: The degree (of grace?) given to priests, religious, and bishops means that more is expected of them.

There are other people we must save - Jesus and the Church want all people to go to heaven My judgment will be different than others because I am religious and more is expected. You have light and knowledge by what you have been told - to whom is given a great deal much is expected, but, if you haven’t been given a great deal …

 

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

This was a carbon-copy of the many examples of heresy you have provided to Catholics pertaining to the deceit or ill-will or ignorance that people in leadership positions (as with Dolan) pass-off as authentically Catholic. Makes me recall a number of years ago how I yearned for my cable company to provide EWTN so that I would have access to true Catholic teaching – THANK YOU – for opening my eyes to the many angles the counter-church uses to subvert Catholic Teaching and Tradition.

 

Regarding the scripture passage from Luke - the Haydock commentary provides: “Shall be beaten with few stripes. Ignorance, when it proceeds from a person's own fault, doth not excuse, but only diminsheth the fault"  That is quite different from the interpretation "Mother" offered.

 

Gary

 

MHFM:  That’s quite a heresy.  The fact that Mother Angelica called the seven-times defined dogma of the faith (i.e. Outside the Church There is No Salvation) a heresy and said that the Church “does not teach that” is so heretical that it’s difficult to find the words to describe how bad it is.  It further proves that she is outside the Church, that she is a false prophet, that her network is not remotely Catholic and is a vehicle of the Devil to lead conservative-minded individuals into the Counter Church he has constructed. 

 

It’s also interesting to note that her programs are typically so lacking in substance, so worthless, so boring, so focused on trivial matters or making her audience laugh at unimportant things, that they are, in our view, pathetic.  This is not to suggest that laughing at unimportant things is wrong, but if it provides the bulk or a large portion of one’s message to the people then there is a big problem.  Her programs are usually worthless because they are the products of a dead soul.  What’s amazing is that so many people have remained glued to them (and thus frozen in the Conciliar Church) rather than losing interest in her lifeless message and searching instead for things which provide more substance, more material relevant to the hard-hitting truths of God and the Catholic Faith.  It speaks to the sad truth of how few savor the truth and are attracted to it and to what’s important.

                                                          

RCIA

 

Dear Brother Diamond,

I've been reading your website… First, please let me extended a deeply heart-felt expression of gratitude towards you and those of your monastery. It has been instrumental in kindling the small, but sufficient, flame of hope and faith in my soul throughout that time. I hope this email finds you all well.

For years now, I've been growing in my traditional Catholic faith. I'm 28 years old, have never been baptized, and was raised in a vaguely Protestant family.  Without getting too much into my story, over 7 years of study, contemplation, and prayer in mostly Carmelite traditions, along with Eucharistic adoration, has sown a burning desire to fully live the Catholic faith.  From the beginning, I've known the heretical nature of Vatican II, and have had a natural aversion to it. Many times early in my study, I could sense the spirit of Vatican II in things that I'd pick up to read well before learning that it had, in fact, been written by someone closely associated with that heretical movement.

For four years now, I've gone from RCIA program to RCIA program, "Traditionalist" church to "Traditionalist" church, trying to find a home where I can be baptized and fully incorporated in The Body of Christ.  Each time, my resolve to continue the programs broken by manifest heresy being taught, the overall flippant attitude towards Christ, or, in the case of the "Traditionalists", a scared, timidity and spirit of compromise, even if their word be not compromised….

 

Most cordially,
Shaunna Burk

 

MHFM: We contacted this individual.  It’s great to hear about the interest in the faith.  It’s also very interesting to hear yet another testimony about the manifest heresy in the Vatican II sect’s “RCIA” programs.  We’ve heard many such stories.  At this point in the apostasy these programs must be truly outrageous.  No one should have anything to do with the RCIA programs of the dioceses, of course.  (We mention this for those who are new to this website.)

 

Christians

 

MHFM, Which papal encyclical was it that stated that no one but catholics may be called Christians?  Wasnt it Vatican II council of apostasy?  But which pope said it, and what was the encyclical?

Also, if you are all sedevacantists, why does it not necessarily follow that you must immediately move to solve the solution of the problem of the papacy?

From,
E

MHFM: It was in this encyclical:

 

Pope Pius IX, Etsi multa (#25), November 21, 1873: “Therefore the holy martyr Cyprian, writing about schism, denied to the pseudo-bishop Novatian even the title of Christian, on the grounds that he was cut off and separated from the Church of Christ. ‘Whoever he is,’ he says, ‘and whatever sort he is, he is not a Christian who is not in the Church of Christ.’”

 

I’m not sure what you mean by your last statement, for we are not advocating the election of a pope.  It is the Vatican II antipopes who have tried to solve the “problem” of the Papacy by removing this dogma from the list of things which a person must accept to be a true Christian.

 

Archived radio program

 

We did a radio program last night, Tuesday, July 3.  We didn’t decide to have a program on Tuesday night until a few hours before the program, so that’s why not much advanced warning was posted on our site.  But here’s the link to the program:

 

July 3, 2007 Radio Program [1 hr. and 4 min. – discusses at length and quotes from an extremely revealing sermon by Bishop Dolan on baptism, salvation, Fr. Feeney and “Feeneyites.”  Hear his own heretical words.  Hear a true heretic in action.  This is a must-listen if you are familiar with this bishop.  This program also discusses other things.] All the Archived Radio Programs

 

Web stats

 

How many hits do you get on your website?

 

MHFM: Over the last 65-day period we received more than 2 million hits on our website. 

 

Job question

 

Dear bro micheal,

 

I was playing football befor i joined the novus ordo seminary but after i discover the evil of vatican 2 i left and i went back to my football game but i still feel the desire to serve God as a religius but we dont have a traditional seminary in my country( nigeria) what do i do concerning the football i am playing do i continue with it or look for another job to do? in my country Nigeria almost every Job is against the Catholic faith. plz advice me on what to do i am confuse.

 

Terry Markmary

 

MHFM: If that's the best job you can find, and if there's nothing which involves the compromise of your faith, we see no reason at all that you cannot continue to play football (or soccer, as it is called here) to make a living.

 

Some readers’ comments

 

I just read your last e-exchange on true christianity.   This poor soul may not even know that the first bible wasn't published until some centuries after the birth of the Church.  Yet before that the earliest christians had the faith which was handed down to them by word and tradition from the Apostles who received the Holy Ghost on Pentecost.

 

AP

---

Dear MHFM

 

Your logic in the latest e-exchange with the Protestant is irrefutable, but it probably will not convert very many; nor did Jesus convert very many while he walked the earth when most walked away and only a few were left who believed him.

 

The infant is born with a need to know and he or she is constantly testing, tasting, touching, exploring....

    When does the human being stop this searching for truth which we are all born with an obligation to come to know? 

    It stops when we begin to be influenced by our peers--by man--and into pleasing man and leaving God by the wayside. This pleasing of man has gone so far that mothers now routinely murder their own infants in the womb or prevent their existence with contraception, and now families are suddenly murdering each other; even children are murdering children. and everyone is taken by surprise that this should happen.

    Where are our priests? "Priests"? They are having ego trips and telling jokes in Novus Ordo churches, assuring us all is well in order to receive human approval. 

    They call it peer pressure and as they fall into hell they blame others for failing to continue their search for the truth. that would have saved them had they not stopped and catered to their fellow MAN.  

 

PM 

 

MHFM: Amidst all the darkness, the good news is that some people are converting.  In the past few months we’ve been contacted by many people from a non-Catholic background (e.g. Protestantism or nothing) who are taking actual steps to conversion after having received or heard some of our information.  We’ve been contacted by many, many more (and continue to be contacted all the time) by people in the Novus Ordo who are interested in the truth and are coming to a full recognition and practice of the traditional Catholic faith.

 

Brothers Michael and Peter,

 

Regarding the email sent by Robert Dombrowski I would like to add this point.  Robert if Benedict XVI is your pope and you have the same faith as he does, which by the way, you must admit, then you must also believe that Jesus and Allah are one and the same.  Just in case you don't know, Robert Jesus is God. However, Benedict XVI, as did JPII, say and believe that the god of the Muslims is the same God of the Christians.  Therefore you must also hold that that Jesus and Allah are one and the same.  This is Blasphemy.  The Church has always held that the god of the Muslims is a devil.  Benedict claims that devil for his god.  In turn, the god of the church BXVI resides over is a devil and those who are in that church do not follow The One True God, but the devil.  So Robert before you begin to tell others they are wrong you ought to know who you serve.  Again, your pope says that the god you and he serve is one whom the Church has always taught is the devil.

 

Paul

Texas

 

Jesus

 

Bros. Dimond,

 

I your recent appearance on Coast to Coast you said that Jesus said, "I am God."  I have come across articles that claim Jesus did not know he was God.  If Jesus knew he was God, how did he suffer as a man? Certainly He could have controlled his crucifixion and its torments at his whim.  Or, alternatively, where do the claims that He was unaware of his real being derive?  I'm sure you can settle this apparent dilemma.

 

Thanks,

 

Howard Prass

 

MHFM: The New Testament repeatedly teaches that Jesus is God, as shown here: Where does the Bible teach that Jesus is God?  Jesus is God, yet suffered as a man because He is both God and man.  He is one divine person with two natures.  He did not suffer in His divine nature, but He suffered in His human nature.  Thus, God (the Second Person of the Holy Trinity) suffered in His humanity, which He assumed in the Incarnation.  As God, Jesus could have stopped His torments, but He submitted to them and suffered for the redemption of the world.  One must know and believe the teaching on the Incarnation; one cannot be saved without faith in it.

 

Marriage

 

Dear MHFM Brothers,

I have two friends that are husband and wife. They are on their way to the true Catholic Church and are in the process of examining you material. They presented me with a question of whether or not their marriage is valid or not, since they were married before a Novus Ordo "priest". I informed them that they are the ministers of that particular sacrament so it is valid. They understood but then wanted to know if their marriage was blessed, and if not what they could do to get it blessed. If anything.

                                                                        
Thanks for all your help,
Nate from Detroit

 

MHFM:  As you correctly state in your e-mail (assuming they hadn’t been married before they married each other and assuming they were both professing Catholics), they are validly married.  There’s no need to get it blessed, especially since there are so few fully Catholic priests around today.  Simply, if they come out of the Novus Ordo Church, accept the fullness of the traditional faith, make the profession of faith from the Council of Trent (available here), and make a good confession, then their marriage would be in good standing before God.  A good confession includes mentioning any involvement with heresies or having partaken in non-Catholic services, etc., as well as any mortal sins (such as Natural Family Planning or artificial contraception) which may not have been confessed to a priest ordained in the traditional rite of ordination.

 

Absurd?

 

Brother Diamond or whoever :

After thouroughly reviewing your website I must say that the real heretic is you.  It appears that you are
outside the Church.  I notice also that you attack just about every traditional "Catholic" group there is, implicitly suggesting that you are the only true Catholic.  Your belief that the popes after Vatican II are antipopes is utterly absurd.  There certainly exists many problems in the Church today but schismatics such as you only serve to create division and more confusion.  You need to renounce your false positions and return to the Church under the leadership of Pope Benedict.  That's right! POPE Benedict!

Robert Dombrowski

 

MHFM: The Heresies of Benedict XVI  [PDF file].

 

Heretics, heretics, what can one do?  The truth, the truth, it’s all schism to you.  Ever heard of Vatican I?  You are no more a Catholic than Attila the Hun.  The councils, the dogmas, the Office of Peter, to not see that Benedict denies them is to be a heresy eater. 

What part of “Protestantism is different from heresy” (Benedict XVI) don’t you understand?  When you defend all of his heresies, where do you think your soul will land?

 

The Joint Declaration on Justification, the Balamand Agreement, have you ever even read the Council of Trent?  By what demonic spirit have you been sent?  Like a Muslim, in a mosque, toward Mecca, he prays; no matter, you accept every egg of heresy which he lays.  He tells the Protestants and the schismatics there’s no need to be Catholic – how sick!  You must possess the understanding of a tick.  He denied Jesus by worshipping in the synagogue; you can’t see the crime because you’re in a spiritual fog. 

 

Religious liberty, ecumenism, so many heresies in V-2; you claim to be Catholic, but you are closer to a Jew.

 

Benedict XVI tells world’s leading schismatic that he’s in the Church of Christ, yet you defend him anyway because you’re part of his spiritual heist.  No matter how many heresies you see, you still won’t believe; your bad will is so profound it makes me want to heave.

 

With blind bats like you, Catholic truth is perverted.  Perhaps when you consider the heresy below, you will be converted. 

 

I really don’t feel like proceeding with this amateur rhyme; heretics like you aren’t worth the time.

 

Benedict XVI, Principles of Catholic Theology, 1982, pp. 197-198: “Against this background we can now weigh the possibilities that are open to Christian ecumenism.  The maximum demands on which the search for unity must certainly founder are immediately clear.  On the part of the West, the maximum demand would be that the East recognize the primacy of the bishop of Rome in the full scope of the definition of 1870 and in so doing submit in practice, to a primacy such as has been accepted by the Uniate churches.  On the part of the East, the maximum demand would be that the West declare the 1870 doctrine of primacy erroneous and in so doing submit, in practice, to a primacy such as has been accepted with the removal of the Filioque from the Creed and including the Marian dogmas of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries.  As regards Protestantism, the maximum demand of the Catholic Church would be that the Protestant ecclesiological ministers be regarded as totally invalid and that Protestants be converted to Catholicism; the maximum demand of Protestants, on the other hand, would be that the Catholic Church accept, along with the unconditional acknowledgement of all Protestant ministries, the Protestant concept of ministry and their understanding of the Church and thus, in practice, renounce the apostolic and sacramental structure of the Church, which would mean, in practice, the conversion of Catholics to Protestantism and their acceptance of a multiplicity of distinct community structures as the historical form of the Church.  While the first three maximum demands are today rather unanimously rejected by Christian consciousness, the fourth exercises a kind of fascination for it – as it were, a certain conclusiveness that makes it appear to be the real solution to the problem.  This is all the more true since there is joined to it the expectation that a Parliament of Churches, a ‘truly ecumenical council’, could then harmonize this pluralism and promote a Christian unity of action.  That no real union would result from this, but that its very impossibility would become a single common dogma, should convince anyone who examines the suggestion closely that such a way would not bring Church unity but only a final renunciation of it.  As a result, none of the maximum solutions offers any real hope of unity.”

Notice that Benedict XVI specifically mentions, and then bluntly rejects, the traditional teaching of the Catholic Church that the Protestants and Eastern Schismatics must be converted to the Catholic Faith.  He says that their conversion and acceptance of Vatican I and the Papacy is NOT the way for unity.  This is a total rejection of the Catholic Faith.

 

[For you to actually look at the information on our website (as you claim you did), and specifically the heresies of the manifest heretic Antipope Benedict XVI (who doesn’t even believe that Protestantism is heresy), and then to call our position absurd is so absurd that it prompted me to respond in a rather unusual way to your e-mail.]

 

True Christianity

 

Saw some of your videos. I am amazed of your awareness of what Catholicism is and has always been. Nevertheless you hang on to this religion, that is totally anti biblical an tries to steal the Church of Christ for themselves. The Bible and ONLY the bible is the word of God, but you keep citing Catholic Dogmas that are out  and contrary to the word of God. "I am the way, the truth and the life no one comes to the father but through me", says the Lord Jesus. Please, if you beleive in Christ , be a Christian and nothing more, everything else is from the devil.     

 

frem

 

MHFM: While I’m glad that you have some interest, you are not a Christian at this time.  None of the Catholic dogmas contradict the Bible; they only contradict your own imagination of what is Biblical teaching and your misunderstanding of scripture, which scripture itself warns us about.

 

2 Peter 3:16- “As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are certain things hard to be understood, which the unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, to their own destruction.”

 

The primary claim of your e-mail directly contradicts scripture; for, as we see below, scripture teaches that there is a word of God besides the written word of scripture.  That is called the oral tradition.  We see that clearly in this verse:

2 Thessalonians 2:15- “Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.”

2 Thessalonians 3:6- “Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, and not after the tradition which he received of us.”

That’s why the Bible teaches that the Church, not the Bible, is the pillar of the truth.  For while the Bible is the infallible word of God along with true apostolic tradition, the Church is the primary rule of faith which Christ has entrusted with infallibly teaching people the true meaning of the Bible and oral tradition.

 

1 Timothy 3:15- “But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the Church of the living God, the pillar and ground of Truth.”

 

As we saw above, your entire position of sola scriptura (scripture alone) is found nowhere in scripture and is directly contradicted by it.  That’s not to mention all of the other doctrines which you, as a non-Catholic false “Christian,” almost certainly reject.  As a Protestant or as some other false “Christian,” you probably reject the clear truth of the Bible on the Papacy (Mt. 16:18-20; John 21-15-17), on the Eucharist (John 6), on Confession (Jn. 20:23), on the necessity of Baptism (John 3:5) and much more.  In order to make room for their man-made religion, the Protestants also kicked seven books they didn't like out of Christian Bible – books which had been accepted by the Christian Church for over a millennium.  Jesus Christ only founded one Church, and that was the Catholic Church.  It’s necessary to hear that Church for salvation (Mt. 18:17).  To claim to believe in the Bible and to reject the foundation of the Papacy upon St. Peter is to be a liar.

 

This is not even to get into the teaching of the earliest Christians, the fathers of the Church (i.e. the prominent Christian writers of the first millennium), who from the very beginning attested to the Catholic teachings on the Papacy, the Eucharist, etc.  You remain unaware of, or completely dismiss, all of that, for you are, at this time, oblivious to authentic and historical Christianity.  I would encourage you to study some Christian history; you will see that it is Catholic.  There was only one Christian Church from the beginning, against which the gates of Hell cannot prevail, and that was and is the Catholic Church.  That’s why one person correctly stated: “To be deep into history is to cease to be Protestant.”

 

Finally, in your e-mail you state that Jesus Christ alone is the way to the Father, as if the Catholic Church doesn’t teach this.  The Catholic Church has taught this truth more vigorously, repeatedly and effectively than any of the false “Christian” sects.  It was the Catholic Church and her missionaries, not the man-made false sects, which, preaching this truth from the beginning – with a consistency and a power only to be found in the one true Christian Church – brought the Gospel to the farthest of the nations.  Start to accept the truth and consider the abundance of facts from scripture (such as those above) and Church history which prove your position wrong.  The false “Christianity” to which you adhere is a phony religion which was invented in the 16th century; it is refuted both by scripture and Christian history.  You cannot have salvation in it; pray sincerely to God and ask Him to enlighten you about His true Church.

 

Pope Leo XII, Ubi Primum (# 14), May 5, 1824:

“It is impossible for the most true God, who is Truth itself, the best, the wisest Provider, and the Rewarder of good men, to approve all sects who profess false teachings which are often inconsistent with one another and contradictory, and to confer eternal rewards on their members… by divine faith we hold one Lord, one faith, one baptism, and that no other name under Heaven is given to men except the name of Jesus Christ in which we must be saved.  This is why we profess that there is no salvation outside the Church.”

 

Debating

 

I need your help clearing something up. I am currently debating “x” and “x” on whether or not Benedict XVI is a valid pope. They claim that he is a bad pope, but still the pope. They have claimed that a pope is the only one who can remove himself from the Papacy and the rules of excommunication don't apply to them (stupid I know but that is what they claim). They will however admit that a heretic cannot become Pope…I decided to use the 1983 code of canon law(since they view JPII as a valid pope they must adhere to it) to prove that Ratzinger was in violation of canon law . One of the things I claimed was that Ratzinger was in violation of Can. 1389 §1 A person who abuses ecclesiastical power or an office, is to be punished according to the gravity of the act or the omission, not excluding by deprivation of the office, unless a penalty for that abuse is already established by law or precept. §2 A person who, through culpable negligence, unlawfully and with harm to another, performs or omits an act of ecclesiastical power or ministry or office, is to be punished with a just penalty.

 

I said he was in violation of this because when he was head of the Vatican's Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith he was responsible for dealing with the sexual abuse that were occurring and the only thing he did about it was cover it up and shuffle the priests from one parish to another, and once the cat was out of the bag he asked President Bush for immunity from charges, which he was granted. This to me is a total abuse of power because he used his position to get out of punishment even though concealing the abuse was in violation of several laws including: Obstruction of justice in concealing the felony of statutory rape and child endangerment. They claim that I am interpreting this wrong. It is very possibly that I might be. Any help you could give me I would appreciate.

 

God Bless You,

 

Misty

 

MHFM: The point we would focus in on is that they seem to be admitting that Benedict XVI is a heretic, but they deny that a “pope” who is a heretic receives ipso facto excommunication (and thus severs his membership in the Church) like the rest of the heretics. In holding this position they are contradicting the infallible dogma of the Church below (defined by the Council of Florence), which declares that all heretics are outside the Church.  If a heretic “pope” could remain in the Church and not receive excommunication which severs his membership, as they claim, this dogma is not true.  But we know it is true, and thus we know that what they are saying is false.  What they are also denying is the related dogma that all in the Church have the same faith (as in one, holy, catholic and apostolic), and that a Catholic cannot therefore profess communion with a person who doesn’t hold the Catholic Faith (e.g. a heretic such as Benedict XVI).

 

Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, “Cantate Domino,” 1441, ex cathedra: “The Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that all those who are outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans but also Jews or heretics and schismatics, cannot share in eternal life and will go into the everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels, unless they are joined to the Church before the end of their lives…”

 

Pope Innocent III, Eius exemplo, Dec. 18, 1208: “By the heart we believe and by the mouth we confess the one Church, not of heretics, but the Holy Roman, Catholic, and Apostolic Church outside of which we believe that no one is saved.”

 

Pope Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum (# 9), June 29, 1896:“The practice of the Church has always been the same, as is shown by the unanimous teaching of the Fathers, who were wont to hold as outside Catholic communion, and alien to the Church, whoever would recede in the least degree from any point of doctrine proposed by her authoritative Magisterium.”

 

Pope Pius XII, Mystici Corporis Christi (# 22):

“As therefore in the true Christian community there is only one Body, one Spirit, one Lord, and one Baptism, so there can be only one faith.  And therefore if a man refuse to hear the Church let him be considered – so the Lord commands – as a heathen and a publican.  It follows that those who are divided in faith or government cannot be living in the unity of such a Body, nor can they be living the life of its one Divine Spirit.”

 

It’s easy to see, therefore, why those who admit that Benedict XVI is a heretic, but maintain that he is the pope, don’t have a leg to stand on in this debate.  Their position is demolished by the facts.  Oh yeah, and those who deny that Benedict XVI is a heretic also don’t have a leg to stand on and their position is just as easily demolished by the facts.  See: The Heresies of Benedict XVI  [PDF file].

 

Discovered

 

Dear Fathers and Brothers,

Grace and peace to you from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ!  It's been less than a day since I discovered your website and have begun reading through your PDF files.  I have much more to read and to learn.  Unmistakably, however, you are right about the Novus Ordo church. Many others have tried, with varied results, but no one else yet, in my experience, has laid bare the falsity of today's "Catholic church" as you do.  Indeed, you get right to the heart of the matter by identifying the deliberate mistranslation of "pro multis" as "for all" in the Novus Ordo mass.  The form has been altered, and with form (as I learned many years ago as a student of Russian literature--of all things!) goes content.  The Body of Christ is not there…

I could easily write many pages more here (as it happens, I was a Benedictine monk in the Novus church for some time in the 1990s, and DID write a book about my experiences there, intended for self-publication later this year), was baptized Catholic as an infant in 1968 (in what probably WAS in fact a valid ritual, given the date), saw my parents turn Protestant in my early childhood and become really ugly, morally obtuse people, my immediate family destroyed by Calvinist doctrine--not an exaggeration--though I see the Novus Ordo church working in equally perfidious ways.  (Again, I could write pages, having been there, as a Novus Ordo Benedictine [not ordained].)…

Yours most respectfully and prayerfully, in the name of Jesus Christ, the King of Glory,

Donald Webber
Seoul, Korea

 

Excommunicated Cardinal being elected?

 

SUBJ: Can an excommunicated Cardinal be a valid pope [re: Constitution of Pius XII].  If I am not mistaken you have written an article on this same question. If not would you be able to answer this question for the Faithful who visit your website ?

Joe

 

MHFM:  That objection is responded to in the “Objections” section of our new book.  It’s also covered here, Responses to 19 of the Most Common Objections Against Sedevacantism [PDF file], in Objection #10.

 

New Radio Program Archive

 

MHFM: Our June 22, 2007 radio program has been archived and is available in the Archived Radio Programs.

 

Shame on you

 

Shame on you, trying to tear apart our Catholic Church,  God will punish you for trying to destroy the one true church of God.  I feel sorry for you.

 

vicki dorsey

 

MHFM: Well, I don’t feel sorry for you.  I can’t feel sorry for people who have a chance to look at the truth and, because of their bad will, completely reject it and attack it.  I can’t feel sorry for people who think they are Catholic, and claim to be such, but so clearly take a position opposed to the traditional teachings of the Catholic Church and in favor of the post-Vatican II anti-Catholic Counter Church.  You are too blinded by your pride and bad will to come out of your darkness.  You probably completely reject the Catholic dogma Outside the Church There is No Salvation, if you even know what a dogma is.

 

Compelling

 

Holy Family Monastery,

 

I have three words to describe the deposit of truth on your website: COMPELLING, CONVINCING, CONVICTING.  Now, I can finally put the pieces together. Now I know why I struggled and agonized for years with confusion while striving for truth.  Now, I understand the source of my intellectual and spiritual battle where I always knew in my heart and mind that I was falling short of the inviolable intrinsic truths of the  Catholic Faith that God was calling me to know.

 

Simply, if you are predicating your search for truth, as I did, on the assumption that vatican II was a council inspired by the Holy Spirit and its proclamations and doctrines are were inspired by the True Catholic Church you will like myself, find yourself in a constant state of spiritual perplexity.  What a masterful satanic plan vatican II was. The father of all lies deceives you into thinking that you are engaged in a legitimate spiritual battle with him, but keeps you in a perpetual state of confusion, because he himself is behind the counterfeit church that you were deceived into perceiving as true.

 

Not to sound charismatic, but never before has the Scripture "the truth shall set you free” been realized to its fullest. I always intellectually understood this scripture but I could never realize it until now.

 

Bill Burns
Fredonia, NY

 

“Baptism of Blood” sophistry

 

Dear Dimond Brothers

 

[This person] quotes Pope Benedict XIV and tries to explain something on the example of St.Simon of Trent but fails miserably…

 

Thank you

Greetings from Croatia, V.

 

"Martyrs only, or infants, whether baptized or *no [*NOT BAPTIZED], which were slain out of hatred
to the name of Christ, are to be accepted
[eligible to be canonized as official Saints in Heaven]..."

 

(a) Pope Benedict XIV. 1. i. de Canon. c.14. p.103 shews that children who die after baptism before the use of reason, though saints ought not to be canonized, because they never practised any heroic degree of virtue ; and because this was never authorized by tradition in the church. Martyrs only, or infants, whether baptized or no, which were slain out of hatred to the name of Christ, are to be accepted ; as is clear from the example of the Holy Innocents, who are stiled martyrs by St. Irenaeas, Origen, and other fathers ; and the most ancient missals and homilies of fathers on their festival, prove them to have been honored as such from the primitive ages. Hence infants, murdered by Jews out of hatred to Christ, have been ranked among the martyrs ; as St. Simon of Trent, by the authority of the bishop of that city, afterward confirmed by the decrees of the popes Sixtus V. and Gregory XIII. also St. William of Norwich in England, (though this child, having attained to the use of reason, is rather to be called an adult martyr.) And St. Richard of Pontoise, also about twelve years old, murdered in 1182, by certain Jews in the reign of Philip Augustus, who for this and other crimes banished the Jews out of France in April, that same year. The body of St. Richard was translated to Paris, and enshrined in the parish church of the Holy Innocents, where his feast is kept on the 30th of March, but at Pontoise on the 25th. (Extracted from: Life of St. William of Norwich Martyr, The Lives of the Primitive Fathers, Martyrs, and other Principal Saints by Rev. Alan Butler Vol. III Edinburgh, 1799 A.D., p. 176 (a) Imprimatur)

 

MHFM: Thanks for the e-mail.  This is an excellent example of the dishonest argumentation that “baptism of desire” advocates in our day make a habit of employing.  It’s a classic example of sophistry.  First, there is no quote from Pope Benedict XIV.  What we’re looking at is a quote from Fr. Alan Butler.  Butler begins by paraphrasing Benedict XIV; and, since no citation is given, we don’t know if he is paraphrasing him accurately.  But even in the paraphrase we see that Benedict XIV is only speaking of baptized individuals.  That’s a key point.  Alan Butler then proceeds to give his own views on baptism of blood.  Thus, this quote proves nothing except that Butler believes in baptism of blood.  But since the quote has been very dishonestly presented by the heretic who cited it, the casual reader might be led to believe that all of what is said comes from Pope Benedict XIV.  It’s a very misleading and dishonest way of presenting the quote.  This is typical of heretics on the salvation issue who are used by the Devil to corrupt the truth, especially this truth.  They don’t have the truth on their side, so they must resort to deception, half-truths, exaggeration, lies, misleading presentations, etc.  These all come from their father, the Devil, who is the father of lies.

 

In fact, “baptism of desire” heretics such as this are very similar to evolutionists.  Just as evolutionists will brainwash and deceive people by a half-truth here, a subtle distortion of evidence there, a subtle exaggeration here, a falsehood there, baptism of desire advocates do the same by presenting half-truths, exaggerations, mistranslations, non-infallible statements as infallible, etc.  When all of these lies, distortions, half-truths, etc. are piled up, they can seem somewhat imposing and overwhelming to a person who doesn’t know how to filter through it all – just like a complete skeleton of an “ape man” constructed merely from the evidence of a pig’s tooth (e.g. Nebraska man) can seem to a person being taught evolution.  But when these things are examined one by one, as is done in our book on the topic, the lies fall apart and the arguments are shown to prove nothing.  It’s interesting to note in this regard that a few years back one of us engaged in a somewhat lengthy e-mail discussion/debate with a salvation-for-non-catholics defender.  A friend of ours had asked us to step into the discussion.  This individual with whom one of us was debating threw together a pile of quotations from the Summa Theologica which seemed, to the person unfamiliar with them, to support that one could saved without believing in Jesus Christ.  No direct citation to the part of the Summa he was citing was given, of course, nor were complete citations given, just partial ones.  When I saw these, I recognized that he was taking them completely out of context.  (In the Summa Theologica, St. Thomas Aquinas makes it clear that in the Old Testament period one could be saved without explicit faith in the coming of the Messiah, but after the coming of Christ all had to have explicit faith in the Trinity and the Incarnation.)  I insisted that the individual had grossly taken these quotes out of context.  He denied the charge, and declared with confidence that they were all used in proper context.  Well, when I had the time to track down every one of his butchered quotations (since he didn’t cite the part of the Summa from which they came) I copied in the complete context, which made it abundantly clear that St. Thomas was not teaching what he affirmed.  In fact, St. Thomas directly contradicted what he had said.  The dishonest heretic, who until then had acted very arrogantly, was not heard from again.  But it’s a typical example of how these heretics argue, especially against this truth that one must be a baptized Catholic for salvation.  This is because the denial of this truth was the key to the Great Apostasy: this truth has a central place in the preservation of supernatural faith in the necessity of Our Lord and His truth.  That’s why the Devil hates it so much and why he has his unwitting servants (i.e., useful heretics) use every distortion they can to argue against it.

 

The heretic who put together the above on “baptism of blood” is aware of and rejects the dogmas cited below.  He rejects these undeniably infallible dogmatic definitions which declare that no infant can be saved without the Sacrament of Baptism.  Since he rejects this dogma with demonic obstinacy, he is outside the Church of Jesus Christ and on the road to damnation.

 

Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, Session 11, Feb. 4, 1442, ex cathedra: “Regarding children, indeed, because of danger of death, which can often take place, when no help can be brought to them by another remedy than through the sacrament of baptism, through which they are snatched from the domination of the Devil [original sin] and adopted among the sons of God, it advises that holy baptism ought not be deferred for forty or eighty days, or any time according to the observance of certain people…” (Denz. 712)

 

Pope Paul III, The Council of Trent, On Original Sin, Session V, ex cathedra:  If anyone says that recently born babies should not be baptized even if they have been born to baptized parents; or says that they are indeed baptized for the remission of sins, but incur no trace of the original sin of Adam needing to be cleansed by the laver of rebirth for them to obtain eternal life, with the necessary consequence that in their case there is being understood a form of baptism for the remission of sins which is not true, but false: let him be anathema.” (Denz. 791)

 

Torn

 

Brother Michael - First, let me say that I love the Roman Catholic Church founded by Jesus Christ, Himself. I am 69 years old, and have 
felt a tremendous loss in my life ever since Vatican II. I felt something went terribly wrong. I never left the Church; in fact, I am very active in my Parish. But, I must say, that every time I attend Mass, I feel this sorrow within me. What bothers me is that I know that I should be feeling a tremendous joy instead. I have discussed this many times with my Pastor(s) and other priests I have known. There were a couple of times, that I just got up and left for a time.  In fact, about 2 years ago, I walked out of Mass when a woman came up to proclaim the gospel and give the sermon. After a lengthy discussion with the Pastor, I came back because of his apology and his admittance that what I had experienced was completely wrong. I  have been on the Parish Council for some time and have been constantly at odds with other members on certain aspects of our Church and the Liturgy… I am so torn, Brother Michael. Even writing this to you is tearing me apart… Thank you and may God bless you in what you do. Any advice you can give me would be so helpful. I live in the Diocese of St Paul/Minneapolis.


Richard

 

MHFM: Richard, it's quite obvious: you need to get out of the New Mass since it's not valid and it's not Catholic.  You need to come to a complete rejection of the post-Vatican II Counter Church.  All of the documentation for this is available on our website.  If you call us here and manifest agreement on the core issues, we could help you with more specific info about possible Mass locations in your area.  If you haven’t already, we would also strongly recommend that you obtain our DVD special offer which includes 3 DVDs (with 10 programs), as well as 3 important books, an audio disc (with 20 hours of programming) and flyers for only $10.00 (no shipping charge in U.S.).

 

Demonic Possession

 

MHFM: It’s interesting to note that a study of past cases of demonic possession reveals that many people have become possessed because another person has cursed them.  Obviously there are many other ways that people can and have become possessed, but this seems to be a common one.  Such a demonic curse, of course, could only have effect over one whose soul is already in the possession of the Devil by means of mortal sin.  For instance, the famous case of the girl possessed by many demons in Earling, Iowa in 1928, was allegedly a result of a demonic curse by the girl’s father: “… developments disclosed the fact that that he [the girl’s father] had… cursed her and wished inhumanly that the devils would enter into her and entice her to commit every possible sin against chastity, thereby ruining her, body and soul” (Fr. Carl Vogl, Begone Satan, Tan Books, p. 19).  Eventually the exorcism revealed that the girl was possessed by Beelzebub, Judas, her damned father (Jacob) and his damned mistress (Ibid., p. 33.).

 

In pondering why such a demonic curse could be effective in possessing people in so many different cases, one thought that comes to mind is that it indirectly sheds light on the truth inculcated by Our Lord in Matthew 7.  In Matthew 7:7, Our Lord says: “Ask, and it shall be given you: seek, and you shall find: knock, and it shall be opened to you.”  When we pray with sincerity – when we ask God, Our Lady and his saints for specific things in prayer – God, Our Lady and the saints hear our prayers.  People would be amazed at the spiritual effects of simple prayers, even things such as three Hail Marys for specific intentions, or asking a saint for a certain temporal favor.  Likewise, for those who give themselves to the Devil by mortal sin and thus reside in his spiritual kingdom, God can allow the Devil to grant favors to those of his servants who ask him for them.  The result is that he will sometimes be allowed to possess a person in mortal sin if he has been specifically asked by one of his servants to curse that person.

 

Fatima

 

There is much truth in your book, however were you aware of this and that Sister Lucy said that it [the consecration of Russia] must be with all of the Bishops?

 

stella cooper

 

MHFM: Yes, when Sr. Lucy was questioned about Our Lady’s original request, she would, of course, repeat that Our Lady requested that it should be done with all the bishops.  But that’s precisely what we emphasize in the article: Our Lady requested that Russia be consecrated in union with all the bishops of the world, but on July 13 she only promised that “In the end my Immaculate Heart will triumph.  The Holy Father will consecrate Russia to me, and it will be converted and a certain period of peace will be granted to the world.”  Notice that Our Lady didn’t promise: “The Holy Father and all the bishops will consecrate Russia to me…”  Further, Heaven revealed that the actual fulfillment of the consecration of Russia would not be fully in accord with Heaven’s original wishes.  This is a key point which we emphasize and expand upon in the article.  Our Lord Himself said that the consecration would be “late”; and Our Lady, in describing the “period of peace” which will actually come as a result of the consecration, only says it will be a “certain period of peace” (that word is added by Our Lady), instead of the unqualified “period of peace” which was promised originally if her requests were heeded precisely. 

 

Thus, there is nothing from Our Lady or Our Lord which indicates that when the consecration is done it will be done with all the bishops; on the contrary, Our Lady’s words imply that it will be done by the pope alone.  All of this (and much more) is covered in this article: The Whole Truth about the Consecration and Conversion of Russia and the Impostor Sr. Lucia.  Moreover, it’s very important to note that in 1947, when asked by William Thomas Walsh about Pope Pius XII’s 1942 consecration of the world, Sr. Lucy didn’t even know if it was sufficient.  Again, all of this is discussed in the article.

 

William Thomas Walsh, Our Lady of Fatima, p. 222: “After my return from Portugal I wrote several questions which His Excellency the Bishop of Leiria was good enough to send to Sister Dores [Sr. Lucy].  Her answers, written February 17, 1947, reached me just too late for the first edition of this book… Q.  Is it your opinion that the Pope and the Bishops will consecrate Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary only after the laity have done their duty, in Rosaries, sacrifices, first Saturday Communions, etc.?  A. [Sr. Lucy] The Holy Father has already consecrated Russia, including it in the consecration of the world, but it has not been done in the form indicated by Our Lady: I do not know whether Our Lady accepts it, done in this way, as complying with her promises.  Prayer and sacrifice are always the means necessary to draw down the graces and blessings of God.”

 

Denzinger

 

Dear brother Dimonds,

I am very much appreciating your excellent work (I think, Jesus and Immaculate also), I will very soon purchase all of books, which you are offering for sale, but I am seeking also for Denzinger (summary of all popes and church official documents), and I haven't find it yet. Could you, please, advice, where can I obtain this Denzinger, from which most of your documents have citations? Thank you very much for your answer…

God bless you.  I am very happy with your work, and I am also continuing with translations of your excelent web-sites to czech language (even if I know, that almost nobody takes care in this country about truth... and I am not sure, if even there is somebody else except me, who is or want be true catholic with true catholic faith...)


Josef [Czech Republic]

 

MHFM: Thanks, we are selling Denzinger at our online store.

 

Found

 

Hi

 

I found your site while surfing.  I have a life-long interest in the work that you do, and I am impressed.  Good work. Sister Lucy imposter, of course.  very good.  Satan has entered the Vatican for sure.  So, you have a fan here.  Keep up the good work…

 

M. Kavanagh

Victoria, BC Canada

 

Dentist

 

It's always good to see new people discovering the truth from your web site.  It seems that the questioning Protestant is guilty of reading only enough to continue her confusion.  I told my angry brothers to read ALL of your web site before they pass judgment.  So far they haven't. 

 

I gave a copy of the Vatican II book to my dentist with the DVD on Hell and a Padre Pio book.  He mentioned once that his wife and grandchildren go to church but he doesn't any more.  He has been my family dentist for maybe 30 years and I took my family to several bad dentists till I found him.  He is very fair and honest and has worked for hours  get a tooth just right without charging extra.  You don't see too many people like that these days.  He also seems to be a thinker, OR I may be in big trouble.  Nevertheless, I keep in mind that we should never be ashamed of Jesus and of the truth, but, oh, it's not easy to take those blows when they come. All my life I've avoided them. 

 

I think your book is God's gift of a last chance to see the truth before the final days. You've put the pieces of this puzzle together and it is a picture of a very small Church surrounded by a mass of confusion on the outside and peace on the inside. 

 

God Bless

 

MHFM: That’s great; hopefully he will take a careful look at the information. 

 

JP2 and B16

 

Dear Bros.,

 

I have a dear NO Catholic friend, in her late 70's & whose husband is in his 80's.  Having chosen to remain in the NO following V2, they have been infected with ecumenism & were taught, in the Fr. Feeney case, in Boston, that he was incorrect & that the Church declared that non-Catholics can be saved.  So, documents asserting the above cannot be used in winning them over. What I need is links to JP2 & B16 open proclamation that everyone can get to heaven... universalism.  It must be very clear & it must be well documented, esp in the Press.   I've been pressing Therese to read the Catechism of the Council of Trent & to compare it to the CCC.  & she is delighted to hear that B16 is "going to" reinstate the Baltimore Catechism & restore the Liturgy - to what I'm not sure, altho we may be VERY sure that it won't be to the truth. She looks upon all documentation of the infiltration of the Church by marranos, as being uncharitable. So, you see what I'm up against. IF, I can get the BIG one across to her... that the anti-popes held the heresy of Universalism, I have a chance.  Please help me to find the right pages & documentation. 

 

Jennifer Hill

 

MHFM: John Paul II definitely taught universal salvation; that’s covered in the article below.  Benedict XVI has taught that Jews, Protestants and pagans can be saved and that men are saved in all religions.  He has also repeatedly taught that Protestants don’t need to be converted.  All of their worst heresies – most of which pertain to the salvation issue – are covered in the articles below and in our DVDs.

 

The Heresies of John Paul II - a comprehensive presentation [PDF file]

 

The Heresies of Benedict XVI  [PDF file]

 

False convert

 

I read this and thought of you immediately. What you could say to this soul to show he is not fully Catholic.

http://www.catholic.org/national/national_story.php?id=24243&page=3

 

Thank you for your quote this morning on St. Thomas and family, I needed this and all the others you post.

 

Keeping you and  your monastery in prayer,


MLouise, VA

 

MHFM: Yes, it’s another example of a false convert to the Vatican II sect, one of the same mold as those featured on EWTN’s The Journey Home.  He makes reference to the Joint Declaration with the Lutherans on Justification, and essentially puts Catholicism and Protestantism on the same level by speaking about how both should learn from the other.  It’s very pathetic; it’s truly a new religion.  If we had a chance to speak with him, we would (among other things) charitably inform him of the Church’s teaching Outside the Church There is No Salvation and its no exceptions meaning, as well as the fact that the Joint Declaration to which he makes reference completely trashes the dogmatic Council of Trent.  We would further point out that, according to the teaching of the Church, Protestants are heretics who need to be converted for salvation and that his present position seems to definitely contradict that.  There is almost no doubt that he holds that his Protestant family members and former fellow churchgoers are also on the road to Heaven, but that they are simply wrong about a few things which the Catholic Church explains better.  These false converts reject the essential truth, that the Catholic Faith is necessary for salvation, and thus lack the first rule of salvation to get to Heaven: an uncompromising belief in the faith.  It’s very sad.

 

Liar defends Benedict XVI

 

I'd suggest you knock it off and have a little more trust in Christ and his promise not to let the gates of hell prevail over the Church.  Just because you happen to not like how certain truths are expressed now as opposed to a few decades ago, doesn't give you the right to tell outright lies, such as Benedict allegedy saying that Jesus might not really be the Messiah. Rubbish. Absolute rubbish straight from the Evil One.

I'm calling you out to knock it off, and conform your life to those truths you thought were changed, but in reality are just expressed differently.  Don't worry we all have to conform our lives to the will of God.

Read the Catechism and Benedict's works AGAIN, buddy. I think you're seeing what you want to see - NOT what's actually there.

MLECW

 

MHFM: You say that it’s a lie to assert that Benedict XVI holds that Jesus doesn’t have to be seen as the Messiah.  We will now demonstrate the type of execrable liar that you are.  Benedict XVI wrote the preface for the notorious book, The Jewish People and their Sacred Scriptures in the Christian Bible.  This is a fact.  It states:

 

Section II, A, 5: “Jewish messianic expectation is not in vain...”

 

In section II, A, 7, The Jewish People and their Sacred Scriptures in the Christian Bible further states:

 

“…to read the Bible as Judaism does necessarily involves an implicit acceptance of all its presuppositions, that is, the full acceptance of what Judaism is, in particular, the authority of its writings and rabbinic traditions, which exclude faith in Jesus as Messiah and Son of God… Christians can and ought to admit that the Jewish reading of the Bible is a possible one…”

 

Let me spell this out for you: the passage first explains what it means to read the Bible as Jews do.  It then explains that such a reading necessarily “exclude[s] faith in Jesus as Messiah and Son of God.”  It then explains that the Jewish reading is possible.  Thus, according to this Vatican book and Benedict XVI, Christians can and ought to admit that the Jewish position that Jesus is not the Son of God and the prophesied Messiah is a possible one.  Benedict XVI teaches the same denial of Jesus Christ in a number of his books:

 

Benedict XVI, God and the World, 2000, p. 209: “It is of course possible to read the Old Testament so that it is not directed toward Christ; it does not point quite unequivocally to Christ.  And if Jews cannot see the promises as being fulfilled in him, this is not just ill will on their part, but genuinely because of the obscurity of the texts…  There are perfectly good reasons, then, for denying that the Old Testament refers to Christ and for saying, No, that is not what he said.  And there are also good reasons for referring it to him – that is what the dispute between Jews and Christians is about.

 

Benedict XVI says that there are perfectly good reasons for not believing that the Old Testament refers to Christ as the prophesied Messiah.  He says that the Old Testament doesn’t point unequivocally to Our Lord as the Messiah.  This is another total denial of the Christian Faith.

 

Benedict XVI, Milestones, 1998, pages 53-54: “I have ever more come to the realization that Judaismand the Christian faith described in the New Testament are two ways of appropriating Israel’s Scriptures, two ways that, in the end, are both determined by the position one assumes with regard to the figure of Jesus of Nazareth.  The Scripture we today call Old Testament is in itself open to both ways…”

 

Benedict XVI again declares that Scripture is open to holding the Jewish view of Jesus, that Jesus is not the Son of God.  This is precisely why Benedict XVI repeatedly teaches the heresy that Jews don’t need to believe in Christ for salvation.  Liar, these facts completely refute you, although you would deny it again and again because you are a liar, like your father: the Devil.  You are headed straight for damnation.  You aren’t even remotely Catholic.  You would also probably try to tell us that Benedict XVI didn’t go into the mosque last year and pray toward Mecca like the Muslims, or that he didn’t go into the Jewish synagogue and take active part in a Jewish worship service, or that he doesn’t teach that Vatican I doesn’t have to be accepted by schismatics, or that he doesn’t teach that the Lutheran view of Justification is not condemned by Trent.  Yes, you would deny it all because you hate the truth.  So long as you persist in this position and attitude, you are a prime example of why people are sent to Hell forever; your bad will is incorrigible; your dishonesty is insuperable. 

 

Sunday Catholics

Good afternoon again… I refer to the following [ BELOW ] from your website, and ask with all sincerity just where one can find the remnants of the Church? I am a Catholic who has no alternative here in Australia but to worship according to the Vatican 11 Rites, as far as I know. I am not trying to trap you into revealing anything. I am sincerely asking the question above.

I came across your website quite by accident.

Sincerely.

Keith. [Australia]

MHFM: The Church is not defined by buildings.  If you only have Vatican II churches which offer the New Mass around you, then you must stay home on Sundays.  (One could go to confession, however, to a priest ordained before 1968, as long as he says “I absolve you from your sins in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost.”) The Church law that one must attend Mass only obliges if the Church provides you with a true Mass within a reasonable distance (and if the priest is not a heretic).  The Church is visible in all those places in the world where true Catholics are found.  For so many, even those who claim to be "traditional," the Catholic Faith is basically whether or not they show up at a Mass on Sunday. If they don't have anywhere to go, it's as if the Church isn't visible or as if the faith cannot be practiced.  That’s a very wrong understanding of the Catholic Faith.  Many Catholics in history had nowhere to go on Sundays.  The Catholic Faith is much bigger than whether or not one shows up at a church on Sundays or what one does on Sundays; it's a set of beliefs which must be adhered to, something that is lived everyday, regardless of whether one has a church to attend.  One of the reasons we are in the Great Apostasy is because, prior to Vatican II, many people simply became “Sunday Catholics.”  They acted as if as long as they showed up at Mass on Sunday, looked and acted piously for a few hours at Mass and listened to their priest, then they were on the right path.  But during the rest of the week they didn’t study the faith or try to deepen their faith or increase their relationship with God or do spiritual reading or work for souls or live everyday with a true spiritual outlook with the Catholic Faith informing all of their actions and priorities. .

 

In this vein, one can talk about people who get very excited and spiritually motivated around major holidays, such as Christmas, but during the rest of the year have a very lackluster interest in the things of God.  These people are spiritually phony and not pleasing to God.  While Christmas certainly and obviously marks a special feast, people should essentially live each day the same, living each day with a profound dedication to the faith and the things of God and the desire to please God, gain supernatural merit and help souls.

 

Newly convinced

 

Hi Brothers!

 

My name is Jerry Anderson. I'm 57… I only found your website last week, by God's grace, obviously. Thanks be to God! I barely remember "Feeneyism" being mentioned in some of the many (almost everything they've written) articles by Bishops Dolan, Sanborn, Pivarunas, Fr. Cekada, etc. and had not noticed (since I'm no longer married) much about Natural Family Planning though I HAD read about "invincible ignorance" and baptism of blood and desire and was questioning it a lot very recently.

 

I'm pretty sure I remember being taught by the Holy Cross nuns about Baptism of Desire and Baptism of Blood about 45 years back - maybe even in the Baltimore Catechism, it seems. I have always used those original "pre-Vatican II" teachings as my theological ruler in comparison to the Novus Ordo stuff I picked up beginning at Brebeuf Prep from the Jesuits, starting with the Council documents (my most boring high school class - taught by Father Carl Meirose). Reading more today about Baptism of desire, I realize the Holy Cross nuns must have already been laboring under false, heretical beliefs, during the reign of the weak Pius XII, when modernism was already creeping in.

 

Long story short, your presentation of the infallible teachings of the popes makes me realize the arguments by Fr. Cekada about theologians positions (which seemed very valid) are not correct. I feel like I've now completed my return to the true faith and am very grateful for having found your website.

 

I intend to support your apostolate as fully as I'm able in the future. I'm an insurance agent and have been very successful until the past couple years and am now trying to rebuild financially. If God grants me success in the efforts I'm now applying I will share it with your monastery exclusively henceforth.

 

I've read most of your site and look forward to obtaining your book very shortly. Thank you for maintaining this website, brothers!  May God bless you always!

 

Jerry Anderson

 

CMRI nuns leaving – not a surprise

 

MHFM: Some of our readers may have heard that a significant number of nuns of the CMRI – some say over 20 – are leaving the group because they no can longer remain with a society which rejects Benedict XVI.  (For those who don’t know, the CMRI is a “traditionalist” group of priests and religious which takes the sedevacantist position, but holds that souls can be saved in false religions and that birth control is acceptable.  It is a heretical group, as we have exposed on our website: The CMRI – a group which believes in salvation outside the Church.)

 

Even the woman who was acting as “Mother Superior” of the CMRI nuns has now come out with her change of position and resigned.  Well, some may ask, can one really blame the leader and priests of the CMRI for the fact that these heretical nuns are not convinced?  Yes, in part.  1) The CMRI, a supposed sedevacantist group, had not only allowed non-sedevacantists to belong to their group at this late stage of the great apostasy – and thus promoted an atmosphere of acceptance of the Counter Church at a time when acceptance of the Counter Church by those who have seen the facts is simply an act of astounding bad will, faithlessness and dishonesty considering all of the irrefutable evidence – but 2) the CMRI had even (until this recent development) allowed these non-sedevacantist nuns to teach at their schools!  In other words, the CMRI allowed people who remained faithful to the Counter Church in mind and heart to receive the sacraments on a daily basis, be part of their “traditional” community, and even teach children. 

 

Based on these facts, one can say that the CMRI is sedevacantist in name only.  They don’t believe that a full rejection of the Counter Church is a position which one must come to in order to maintain essential faith.  That’s why, even after this recent development in which nuns shook up their heretical group by leaving, the only step they have taken to remedy the situation is to say that no nuns can teach or manifest disagreement with their sedevacantist position.  They still allow non-sedevacantists to belong to their group, as is shown by this letter written by the heretical leader of the CMRI, Bishop Mark Pivarunas: http://www.cmri.org/02-sisters-letter.html.  (By the way, Bishop Pivarunas’s arguments in favor of baptism of desire and Natural Family Planning were further demolished by the facts in our recent article on geocentrism.)  We’ve also been in contact with numerous people who have attended the CMRI for long periods of time; they have reported that the CMRI is so unaggressive and silent at these chapels about the situation of the Church, and what one should think of it, that a new person could have gone there for more than a year or much longer and not even have recognized that he was attending a chapel run by a group which claimed to reject the entire Vatican II Church. 

This revelation of faithlessness and spiritual rot inside the CMRI is not surprising at all.  It certainly should not be a surprise to staunch Catholics.  It’s directly tied up with the fact that the CMRI members do not possess any real supernatural faith – that’s right, zero real faith in Jesus Christ.  This is because they reject the necessity of Jesus Christ and the Catholic Faith.  The members of the CMRI believe that it’s possible for Jews, Buddhists, etc. to be saved by “baptism of desire,” as their priests have indicated numerous times, as well as a nun who was questioned by one of us about the issue over the telephone.  This is simply a fact.  It’s also clear from their publications on salvation, which include numerous heretical articles from people such as Bishop Robert McKenna, who believes that Jews who reject Our Lord Jesus Christ can be saved.  Someone who has seen the dogmatic definitions on Outside the Church There is No Salvation and continues to believe that it’s possible for certain Buddhists, Jews, etc. to be saved, as the CMRI’s members do, has no real faith in Our Lord at all.  As Pope Leo XIII says, in rejecting the teaching of just one dogma that person rejects all faith because he thereby rejects the guarantor of the dogmas of faith (Our Lord Jesus Christ).

 

Since the members of the CMRI have no real faith in Jesus Christ or His revelation, it makes perfect sense that it would be a continuous and monumental struggle for them to believe that the sometimes conservative arch-apostate Antipope Benedict XVI has actually excommunicated himself from the Church.  Since they do not believe that the Church is truly supernatural and guided by a power and principles not always seen, it’s extremely difficult for them to continue to believe that the Counter Church could persist this long in Rome or that the sly Benedict XVI could really be this evil or a heretic, when he does conservative and nice things on occasion and is regarded externally by so many as the pope.  In short, this recent news item from the CMRI reveals the true lack of faith hidden within the depths of CMRI and other groups like them, which purport to be traditional and sedevacantist, but are spiritually fraudalently and heretical primarily because of their heretical rejection of the true teaching on Outside the Church There is No Salvation.  What is said here could also be applied to the SSPV and other sedevacantist groups.  The SSPV, by the way, allows non-sedevacantists to enter its religious order, doesn’t even make it publicly clear that it regards Benedict XVI as a non-pope, and has never (at least to our knowledge) publicly denounced him as a heretic who is outside the Church.

 

What to do?

 

I am inthe military and stationed in Japan.  Prior to arriving here we (my wife and I) had decided that the Traditional Church is the one for us.  We were attending an FSSP parish and receiving the sacraments. Once we began reading we stopped receiving them as our parish priest was ordained in the new rites.  My question is what are we to do now?  We have three children and are in Asia with no Church.  I understand that we will face a time when the sacraments will not be available to us, however we are humans and therefore sin.  We have turned to the Holy Rosary so as to procure the promises made to us by Our Most Holy Mother, is there anything else left for us?

A.S.

 

MHFM: It’s important to keep in mind that many Catholics in history (including centuries ago in Japan) were left in situations where they couldn’t go anywhere.  But you can go to confession if you find a priest ordained before 1968 who says "I absolve you from your sins in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost." 

 

St. Thomas and more

 

Dear Members of the Most Holy Family Monastery

I have been reading portions of your commentaries on your website with regards to the state of the Cathoilc Church in our world today. There are some questions left unanswered which I hope you will address in your next articles, in particular St Thomas Aquinas' position on the Immaculate Conception of Mary (Is this canonized saint a heretic because of his differing views from Duns Scotus?, Why has his
canonization not been reversed if he did not subscribe fully to this doctrine?), also how do we relate to non-catholics in our workplace and
communities - do we shun or despise them simply because they do not believe in God and in Jesus Christ in the same way as we do? how should pro-vatican I catholics relate to pro-vatican II catholics and vice versa? should we place more emphasis on being judgemental than in sharing the Gospel so as to get people to know Jesus and help them to be effective in their chritian faith and discipleship?...
I look forward to hearing from you

From a brother in Christ

Andrew

 

MHFM: The dogma of the Immaculate Conception was not solemnly defined until 1854, by Pope Pius IX in Ineffabilis Deus.  Thus, there is no argument whatsoever that St. Thomas was a heretic for not believing in it.  As far as non-Catholic co-workers go, no, you shouldn’t shun them.  You should share the faith with them, at least those you’ve gotten to know somewhat.   To your third question, the Gospel is the Gospel.  It’s not like we either share the Gospel, focus on people getting to know and love Jesus and downplay its judgments or share its judgments and downplay other parts.  Sharing the Gospel (the Catholic Faith) is true charity, and that message of charity necessarily entails informing people of the consequences and the judgments that fall upon those who reject its teaching or fail to live up to it.  Also, in answering this question it’s worth pointing out the truth which is repeated over and over again in Scripture: “the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom” (Ps. 110:10; Prov. 1:7; 9:10; Ecclesiasticus 1:16; etc.).  Scripture teaches that people first convert by fearing God, and then learn to love Him later on as they advance.  It makes sense, therefore, that informing people of God’s judgments upon those who sin mortally or reject His teaching is very often a key component in bringing people to conversion.  That’s why St. Benedict says the following about the first degree of humility.

“The first degree of humility, then, is that a man always have the fear of God before his eyes (cf Ps 35[36]:2), shunning all forgetfulness and that he be ever mindful of all that God hath commanded, that he always considereth in his mind how those who despise God will burn in Hell for their sins, and that life everlasting is prepared for those who fear God. And whilst he guardeth himself evermore against sin and vices of thought, word, deed, and self-will, let him also hasten to cut off the desires of the flesh.” (St. Benedict, on first degree of humility)

The reason why so many people commit mortal sins is that they are too proud to even fear that God will cast them into Hell for their sins.  They lack the very first degree of humilty, the beginning of wisdom, and thus they cannot advance even one bit toward eternal life because they are too proud to see point #1.  Thus, when one considers the unfortunate masses living in mortal sin and thus headed for Hell – so numerous that Jacinta of Fatima said that almost all who would die in World War II would go to Hell – one can say that the primary reason is because they lack the very thing described above in St. Benedict’s first degree of humility.

 

Joint Declaration article

 

Vatican-Lutheran Agreement on Justification

 

Brothers,

You referenced in your book that there is a more indepth study of this agreement on your website, but the only article I can find is the PDF that is in thebook. Can you send me the link to your indepth article? Thanks!

Bridget

 

MHFM: There’s an older, more in-depth article here: http://www.mostholyfamilymonastery.com/Issue-4_Joint_Declaration_with_the_Lutherans.html...  Most people, however, should read the following one since it covers the main points in just a few pages: The Vatican II sect's Protestant Revolution: the 1999 Joint Declaration with the Lutherans on Justification [PDF File]

 

Left

 

I came across you Web site by accident. I was looking for Christian Web sites. How can there be two different Catholics?  Vatican and after Vatican 2? As I was reading the site and clicking on most of the links, I became confused. The I realized there is NO difference between the two. Which became very confusing to me. Then I realized that God is "NOT" confusion. Why is the Catholic Church all  mixed up with Vatican 1 and Vatican 2?  And, why has Vatican 2 be able to get this far. None of this makes any sense.

I am glad I left! Thank you,

 

Sue

 

MHFM: Sue, you didn't read carefully enough; in fact, you didn't look at the website carefully at all.  One of the first sections on our website explains that, at the end of the world, an apostasy from the one true Christian faith (the Catholic faith) is predicted to occur in Rome during the Great Apostasy, a massive spiritual deception orchestrated by the Devil as his final assault on the true faith and true faithful.  The post-Vatican II "Church" is exactly that counterfeit Church.  There's only one Catholic faith, and that's what the Church has taught for 2000 years, not the post-Vatican II new inventions, which are all predicted and which contradict traditional Catholic teaching.  You shouldn't be glad you left because the Catholic Church is quite obviously the only Church which Christ established; it is the only one that is scripturally, logically and historically based. The gates of Hell cannot prevail against it (Mt. 16).  That does not mean that it cannot be reduced to a remnant in the final days, which is what is predicted (Lk. 18:8; Apoc. 12:6.).  In leaving the Catholic Church, the only Church established by Christ upon St. Peter, you put yourself outside the true Church, the only truly biblical Church, and on the road to damnation.  It’s critical for you to reconsider your position and the Catholic Faith.

 

B-16’s new book

 

Hello, Brothers.

 

I was flipping the channels on TV last night and stopped for a couple of minutes at EWTN.

 

There was an elderly priest with long gray robe on, bald, with eye glasses and a long white beard.  He had two lay ministers with him, and they were taking phone calls.  In answer to one caller, the priest suggested that every Catholic obtain a book written by Benedict XVI, called Jesus of Nazareth.  He praised the book and said it is full of insight and he could not put the book down. 

 

I was wondering if you were familiar with this book, however, I'm sure that if B-16 wrote it, it has heresy in it.

 

carol…

 

MHFM: Thanks for the question.  Yes, one of us read Benedict XVI’s new book.  Yes, there is heresy in it, as usual.  We will probably discuss it on our next radio program. 

 

Cleveland Desolation

 

Dear Brothers: This link will take you to the Plain Dealer article following the one in May 31 PD.  I saw that you linked it to your news.  This is an update saying the schools are subject to closing This was a "train wreck" waiting to happen.  “Bishop" Lennon came from Boston where he closed countless church and schools.  Everyone saw the handwriting on the wall when he came. Of course, this is the counterchurch anyway. So they are reaping what they have sown.

 

http://www.cleveland.com/plaindealer/stories/index.ssf?/base/isedu/118069751549240.xml&coll=2

 

… I finished the book last night!  I used 2 highlighters to mark important things-of course the whole book is important-that is why it took 2 highlighters!!  The way you write is wonderful… One of the last chapters-about the Apocalypse and your explanation is fantastic!  After reading the book, and all the things that have gone wrong with Vatican II and its heresies and apostasies, The explanation of the Apocalypse makes sense!  When you read it, it seems like St. John is writing in riddles, but with  the explanation of the seven hills and the whore of Babylon , it all comes together! I hope everyone reads this book.  God bless you.

 

God bless you.

Sincerely,

Kathryn Rubio

Solon, OH

 

MHFM:  Thanks, it’s very interesting to hear about the desolation of the Counter Church from those who are following its gradual evaporation at the local level.  There’s nothing left there.

 

Convert

 

Dear Sir,

 

A few moments earlier, I had the opportunity to speak with you on the telephone about the tremendous impact of the materials sent to me by the Most Holy Family Monastery -- as well as, more importantly, my resulting desire to be baptized into the true, traditional Catholic Church. Thank you very much for taking the time to explain to me what steps I need now take, as well as for offering to assist in finding a traditional Catholic who could perform a conditional baptism. I truly appreciate your guidance and assistance…Again, thank you for all of your help, and please do not hesitate to let me know if there is anything else that I need to do to facilitate or expedite the process of my full conversion.

 

Sincerely,

Lance Lambdin

Lincoln, NE 

 

Scandal

 

Hello Brothers,

 

Do you believe John Paul II knew about the scandelous pedophilia problems all over the place and turned a blind eye to it?  I read that he actually promoted Cardinal Law to a post at the vatican after his resignation from the Boston Diocese.  If that is true, on what grounds does he feel justified in appointing such a despicable man to a position at the Vatican?   What jurisdiction does the Pope have over such matters and why in your opinion didn't John Paul II swiftly and authoritatively ex-communicate all involved with the sexual abuses throughout the US?  This happened on his watch!  The abuses and ruined lives are countless and that only includes those who came forward.  And what do you know about an alleged cover up with Fr. Macial? Do you have references for John Paul II knowing and turning a blind eye toward the sexual abuses?  Thanks,

 

JP

 

MHFM: Yes, Antipope John Paul II definitely knew about the homosexuality/pedophilia scandals among the Vatican II clergy.  Besides the fact that he kept himself very much up on what was going on, he had people briefing him not just on that situation but on many others in the Vatican II sect.  Why then, you ask, did he promote “Cardinal” Law to a prominent position at the Vatican after Law’s part in the scandal was exposed?  This answer is obvious, but will only be accepted by those who have a true understanding of how evil Antipope John Paul II was and also believe that demons exist and are at work.  The answer is that John Paul II promoted “Cardinal” Law with the deliberate intention to mock the Church, to mock Jesus Christ, and to mock all the members of the Vatican II sect.  (That’s why, by the way, in one of his speeches John Paul II actually praised the “social justice” of Communist China.)  He knew that “Cardinal” Law epitomized disgrace and scandal, and that he deserved nothing but punishment for the evil that he facilitated and the immeasurable scandal that he caused to what people deem to be the Catholic Church.  So John Paul II promoted him, to thank him for what he did.  That will be hard for some to accept, but that’s the truth.  He promoted him for the very same reason that he knowingly and deliberately preached that man is God – as we proved in our video and in our article, John Paul II preached the Doctrine of the Antichrist – with a combination of subtlety and audacity which reveals true premeditation and an intent to perpetrate astounding evil on people who don’t recognize it.  He didn’t remove the pedophiles and the homosexuals because he was totally evil.  That’s why he didn’t excommunicate any pro-abortion politicians.  But when Bishop Lefebvre consecrated bishops in 1988 in order to perpetuate the traditional Latin Mass he had them excommunicated within 72 hours. 

 

Comment

 

Dear Brother Michael and Brother Peter,

 

     The interview with Father Webster was very interesting.  It shows how lies can be spread (about the Thuc line), but also it appears as though the Communist government is completely tied in with Vatican II.

 

Nancy Battle

---

Great interview about Bishop Thuc…

 

Thanks,

Mark

 

Interview Posted

Bro. Michael Dimond interviews Fr. Neil Webster about Archbishop Thuc, his final days and his line [1 hour audio]

For those who don’t know, the “Thuc line” refers to the “traditionalist” priests and bishops who derive their orders from Archbishop Ngo-Dinh-Thuc (1897-1984), the Archbishop of Hue, Vietnam prior to Vatican II.  After Vatican II, Archbishop Thuc took the sedevacantist position and ordained priests and consecrated bishops in the traditional rites for the preservation of the traditional Latin Mass and in resistance to the post-Vatican II sect.  Most of the priests in the world who offer the traditional Latin Mass derive their orders from Archbishop Thuc or from Archbishop Lefebvre.  We regard both the Thuc and Lefebvre lines as valid.  This obviously does not mean that we endorse all the positions held by priests who were ordained through those lines.  We present this interview not because we endorse everything Thuc said or did, and not because we endorse everything that Thuc line priests say or hold, but so that our readers can become more familiar with the extremely interesting story of his final days.  This interview is also important because some have called into question the validity of the Thuc line based on the accusation that Archbishop Thuc was not in possession of his mental faculties when he performed some of his Episcopal Consecrations.  We reject this false position.  The Society of St. Pius V, a heretical group headed by Bishop Kelly, which also believes in salvation for non-Catholics (like so many other groups), is so adamant that the Thuc line cannot be considered valid that its priests ridiculously refuse the sacraments to anyone who goes to Thuc line priests.  In this interview, Fr. Webster, a priest who was with Thuc in his final days, addresses the objection of his mental capacity. 

 

This interview is centered around the very interesting story of Archbishop Thuc’s final days and what happened to him.  It’s important to remember that Bishop Thuc’s brother was the anti-communist president of S. Vietnam who was assassinated in 1963.  This reveals that powerful individuals were very well aware of the activities of Bishop Thuc’s family.  Did Novus Ordo Church “authorities” conspire with powerful people to kidnap Bishop Thuc, in order to prevent him from consecrating more traditional-minded bishops who would spread the traditional Latin Mass, ordain priests in the traditional rite, and oppose Communism and the Vatican II sect?  Hear the fascinating story. This interview also discusses Bishop Louis Vezelis, who played a prominent role in Thuc’s final days.  It exposes Vezelis (who also believes in salvation for non-Catholics) for the spiritual fraud that he is.  [This interview will be found permanently in the “Archived Radio Programs” section of our website.]

 

New interview

 

Brothers,

 

When are you planning on having the next radio show?

 

Ethan

 

MHFM: Possibly soon, but in the next day or two we will be posting an interesting interview, which none of our listeners have heard, concerning Archbishop Thuc, his final days and his line.

 

B-16

 

Dear Brothers, If  B16 could eradicate Limbo, that would make abortion almost an act of charity. The unbaptized baby would go straight to Heaven. What more completely anti-catholic teaching can we get.  Also, for those who have B-16 as their pope, the Vicar of Christ on earth,  what then is their opinion of Jesus Himself? Their teachings are the exact opposite. One has to be truth and the other error. Doesn't it seem obvious to adhear to what Jesus taught us?  May God have Mercy on us,

 

J.C.

 

MHFM: That’s right; these false traditionalists are truly abominable for not denouncing him as an antipope after that one, and all the rest.

 

Faith apart from works of the law

 

Brother Diamond,

I believe that it is through Faith ( by grace alone) that I am saved. Yet on Coast to Coast you stated that in James 24:2 ( Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only. ) that because of this we are not  saved by grace alone. Yet out of the same Bible, I read these verses.....

Gal. 2:16  Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but  by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law:  for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.

Romans 3:24  Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that  is in Christ Jesus

Eph. 2:8-9  For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of  yourselves: [it is] the gift of  God Not of works, lest any man should boast.

Philippians 3:-9   And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith

Is the Bible contridicting itself here or are you wrong?

thanks,

Garry Myers

 

MHFM: The Bible is not contradicting itself nor are we wrong.  It is the non-Catholics who have totally misunderstood and perverted the meaning of those passages.  On the May 10 radio program, which has just been archived and is mentioned below, we address precisely those issues you bring up.

 

May 10th radio show archived

 

MHFM: Our May 10th radio program is now available in Archived Radio Programs

 

Description: [1 hour– discusses: questions from callers; the true meaning of the Bible in those passages which mention that man is justified by faith apart from works of the law; the Protestants’ rejection of the clear teaching of the Bible; specific Bible verses proving Catholic teaching on many subjects; an interesting point about Galatians 2:11; the ABC debate on whether God exists; how ridiculous evolution is and how it is destroyed by scientific arguments; quick proofs against evolution; specific evolution hoaxes; and more.]

 

St. Francis Solanus contra BOD

 

MHFM: St. Francis Solanus is called the “apostle to America” because of his labors for the conversion of pagans in South America.  In his life, there is a very interesting story which bears relevance to the absolute necessity of water baptism.  The ship on which he was traveling ran into a deadly hurricane which threatened to destroy the ship and kill everyone on board.  This was shortly after he had begun to instruct some unbaptized in the faith:

 

“As they floundered crazily under this fantastic pounding [of the hurricane], it became apparent that the galleon was doomed.  The hysteria and then the despair of the passengers were indescribable; while Fray Francisco’s [St. Francis Solanus’s] poor Negroes, senseless from terror, crowded as closely as possible about their new friend, who had been telling them so many strangely beautiful, heretofore completely unsuspected things about the God Who was as much theirs as the white man’s.  Now he was telling that same God about them and their dreadful plight…

     Water was now passing freely through the hold.  In the midst of the tempest’s fury, the ship was falling to pieces beneath them; and as there was but a single lifeboat aboard, the disaster could only mean death for the majority of the company.  Moreover, the hope was very slight that in such a sea and wind even those few who could be transferred to the small craft could be saved.  Nevertheless, the Captain made all haste to get the Franciscans and some of the more prominent passengers over the side, that they might be given this one last slim chance of survival. 

     “Seeing that Fray Francisco [St. Francis Solanus] made no move to join his brothers in the boat, Juan de Morgana implored him to hurry.  There was space for but one more.  But the missionary had already decided that he could not leave his stricken negritos to die abandoned in their agony.  Who could say that he might not be granted the time to administer Baptism to some of them?... So his reply to the Captain’s importuning left no place for argument.  ‘God will not allow me to save myself by leaving my poor brothers to lose not only the life of the body, but also that of the soul, which is eternal.’” (Francis Royer, St. Francis Solanus- Apostle to America, pp. 69-70)

 

Once again we see the belief that these pagans, whom he began to instruct in the mysteries of the faith, would be lost if they did not receive water baptism.  This completely contradicts the false ideas of “invincible ignorance” and baptism of desire.

 

Pro-abortion and part of the Vatican II sect

 

MHFM: This is a new section we’ve added to our website:

 

One can be pro-abortion and part of the Vatican II sect at the same time [PDF File]

 

On Geocentrism Article

 

Dear Brother Peter,

 

Great essay connecting the heliocentrist v. gecentrist view of the universe to the baptism of water v. baptism of desire.  Well thought and goes right at the wrong reasoning of the BOD position.  These BODers just do not give much thought to their position other than trusting the "authority".  I attempt to keep the argument simple i.e. "a person cannot desire what one isn't aware of" and that ignorance cannot save because Christ commanded the apostles to teach all nations; to teach and eliminate ignorance of the gospel.  It would be silly for God to give that command if being kept in ignorance could lead men to salvation.

 

Great job.  I hope this article corrects many wrong thinkers.

 

Tar..

 

Dear Brothers Michael and Peter Dimond,

First of all, a great article on Geocentrism and Baptism of Desire. Very informative reading. Keep up the great work.

 

Stephen and David Shone
New Zealand

 

New Article on Geocentrism Posted

 

MHFM: We’re happy to inform our readers that a new article on geocentrism has been posted.  The link is here:

 

Examining the Theological Status of Geocentrism and Heliocentrism and the Devastating Problems this creates for Baptism of Desire Arguments [PDF]*blockbuster new article which demolishes popular baptism of desire arguments, contains a new quote from a pope on geocentrism and much more

 

This article is a must read, especially for anyone who studies the “baptism of desire” controversy.  In addition to specifically examining the theological status of geocentrism, this article contains irrefutable arguments and facts, never before examined in this context, which take on and demolish the most popular arguments in favor of baptism of desire which have been made by its most “learned” defenders.  After reading this article, the most prominent defenders of baptism of desire in our day will literally have to change their arguments and drastically revise their positions.  If you’ve spent any significant time defending the salvation dogma against its attackers today, you’ve heard from them about St. Alphonsus, the condemnation of Fr. Feeney, etc.  They tell us again and again that this proves baptism of desire.  Weaving together the two controversial subjects of geocentrism and baptism of desire, this article specifically addresses their points in these areas and shows that the defenders of baptism of desire have been proven completely wrong by the facts, once again.  Once these facts get circulated, they will send shockwaves through the baptism of desire and “anti-Feeneyite” community, which holds many members in the “traditional” movement and in the Novus Ordo Church.  The prominent defenders of baptism of desire will truly have to trash their favorite arguments after reading this article.  Since this article deals with the subject of infallibility, it also has major implications for arguments made in favor of Natural Family Planning, that Mary is “Co-Redemptrix,” etc.  It’s a must read for anyone who closely studies the faith in these days. 

 

Right Path

 

Reading that book on Vatican II [the Truth about What Really Happened to the Catholic Church after Vatican II] is amazing. It’s like the red sea parted for me, and I saw that my church is a Vatican II church, and not the true Catholic Church. I don’t think that anything was mentioned about the Rosary in my church, but after reading the Padre Pio book I learned about the importance of the Rosary. I really feel like God has touched me since I started to read this.  I feel like I’m going down the right path for the first time in my life.  Thank you so much.

 

Michael Cotton

Laguna Woods, CA 

 

Curious

 

To whom it may concern:

 

I am not exactly sure how I came across your site but I am very curious.  It is so overwhelming.  Can someone kindly tell me in a nutshell what you are all about and what danger you feel I am in by being a practicing Catholic?  ANy shortened answers is greatly appreciated. 

 

MHFM: We are saying that everyone should be Catholic, for the Catholic Church is the one true Church.  What we are saying is that the post-Vatican II sect, with its New Mass and new teachings, is not the Catholic Church.  Please look at our website carefully, especially the first two sections which introduce terms and the facts about the predicted apostasy from the Catholic Faith in the last days.

 

Church, where?

 

 …I have been trying to figure out the TRUTH, and no one will tell me, and no one will let me know WHERE this church is?  Who are the Benedictines you are affiliated with and wondered if any in my area?? I know you are Benedictine but you are not thesame as many, I do not think? I also have joined ( on line)  as a  Lay Cistercian,  connected with Conversi community of New Melleray, and Our Lady Of The Mississippi Abbeys' of Iowa.  The are Trappist Monks and Nuns, but am on line and Lay person who is taking part as best I can while living a distance, from the community. They  too, believe in the Benedictine Rules. I do take part in the chat talks each month and do readings etc and write on topics in forum etc. Now what do you say about this group, are they in keeping with correct beliefs?

 

I just wonder exactly which Benedictine following you are with, and perhpas many are left not understanding WHERE they should be led?  I am being earnest, in my questions, and hope you could answer this for me, if possible. I know you are very busy and it is not easy, but I do search for the truth and want to follow correctly but how can  we do that when no one helps us find the WAY?

 

Thank you for your suggesstions on readings and praying, I do appreciate this.

 

 

In Christ,

 

Katherine

 

MHFM: The religious communities you are referring to are obviously part of the post-Vatican II sect, which accepts the New Mass, false ecumenism, etc.  They are not true religious of the Catholic Church, even though they claim to be.  One must have nothing to do with those orders or the New Mass or the false sect to which they unfortunately belong.  Regarding where the true Church is, the Church exists with the remnant of traditional Catholics who adhere uncompromisingly to the faith.  One point that we want to emphasize – a point which some people who are new to this information seem to struggle with – is that the Catholic Church is not defined strictly in terms of buildings.  You don’t have to go to a particular building to be part of the true Church.  That is why, by the way, an infant who is baptized by heretics in a building belonging to a sect becomes part of the visible Catholic Church.  The Catholic Church is defined by faithful and members, not buildings.  It is a true saying that where Peter is there is the true Church.  When there is no pope, however, as is the case today and at many times in the past, the best answer to your question is that the true Church is found and visible where the true faithful are found:

 

St. Athanasius: "Even if Catholics faithful to tradition are reduced to a handful, they are the ones who are the true Church of Jesus Christ."

 

Recent Article

I cannot find the article on your website that covered Benedict's recent heresy on baptism and original sin.  Would you please direct me to it?

Carol Walker

MHFM: It's found here:

 

The staggering implications of Benedict XVI's new blatant heresy on Limbo

 

It can also be found in the "Recent Articles" section of our website.  Articles which were used for “Heresies of the Week” or posted prominently on our website are frequently moved to the “Recent Articles” section of our website or put in some other appropriate section if the subject matter applies specifically to it, such as the Benedict XVI section.

 

Inquisition

 

Subject: Great book and some comments

 

Dear Brother Michael & Brother Peter,

Your new book, The Truth About The Church Since VII" was solid, as are your other works. I will periodically replenish my supply, and I will distribute them whenever it is possible.

Regarding some E-exchanges I've read recently, the use of torture reminded me of William Thomas Walsh' book, "Characters of The Inquistion." In it the "torture" used was hardly considered torture at all, compared to the secular and heretical government punishments of the time, and even by todays standards, these "tortures" were more of an extreme annoyance that anything. And as Mr. Walsh asks, what punishment should be handed down to a heretic who causes another to lose their eternal soul to hell for eternity? Death, because without sincere repentance, countless souls would continue to be at risk, even if that person were imprisoned for life. Can any of the naysayers who scoff and ridicule MHFM say that their own eternal, immortal souls are not priceless? Heretics were only punished when they tried to undermine the religion of a country and/or when they caused another to fall into heresy. And they were given numerous opportunities to recant and repent. And now that the heretics are no longer punished, look at the result; all Catholic countries are virtually non-existent, the anti-christ and his beast are knocking at the door, and the remnant has fled to the mountains. The price paid by not extinguishing heresy has indeed been very high.

Oh, by the way, skinning and salting of wounds was used by the pagan Romans and, perhaps, even the pagan Japanese against Catholic martyrs, according to Saint Alphonsus de Liguori in his "Victories Of The Martyrs."

Howard Shaffer
Hot Springs Village, AR.

 

More on Hatred

 

Dear Brothers

 

I wonder, does your correspndant feel a hatred towards Communism like "the fire of a thousand suns", since it was responsible for millions more deaths last century than the Inquisition was for the entire six centuries of it's existance? I somehow doubt it!

 

No, I suspect it's much more personal than that. He/she is probably living a life-style at odds with the Church's moral teaching and, in order to justify his/her sin, must needs paint the Church as evil then there is no need for repentance and conversion.

 

God bless you,

Mary.

 

Mass in CA

 

Dear Sir:

 

… I would be interested in attending one of your traditional Catholic churches if there is one in my area of Chico, Calif.  I looked under Catholic churches in the Yellow Pages and found a church called Saint Therese Roman Catholic Chapel, which advertises itself as having the Latin traditional mass, but it doesn't say anything more about the actual belief it teaches.  I would call them, but I am afraid that they might make false claims.  There phone number is (530) 894-4040.  Maybe you can tell me if they are genuine, or if not, whether Chico has any genuine Catholic traditional church at all. Do you have a list of churches?

 

I would appreciatiate any information you can provide.

 

Thank you,

Wanda Alexander

Chico, CA.

 

MHFM: There isn’t one in that area that is totally genuine, no.  But below is the address for a valid traditional Latin Mass in Martinez, Ca.  It is our understanding that the priest, Fr. Zapp, holds the correct sedevacantist position.  Unfortunately, it is also our understanding that he believes in baptism of desire.  (Almost 100% of those who believe in “baptism of desire” also believe in salvation for those who are “invincibly ignorant,” members of false religions, etc.)  Because he holds a position on salvation that is not in line with Catholic dogma, one should not financially support him, though one might be able to receive the sacraments from him,.  Like all other priests, we would sincerely hope that he would come around and change his position on that crucial issue of faith.

 

Blessed Sacrament Roman Catholic Church

1150 Mellus St.

Martinez, CA  94553

925-228-9852

 

Hatred

 

My hate for you and your God is a fever that burns with the fire of a thousand suns. Was the Catholic Church infallible when it executed all of those "heretics?" When it skinned them, poured salt on the wounds, and set them on fire at the stake?  Or how about when they invaded Paris and massacred all of the Huguenots?…

 

MHFM: The fire of a thousand suns?  That’s pretty hot.  It’s probably something like what you will feel for all of eternity in Hell.  In Hell, that is, unless you convert to the Catholic Faith.  But that will never happen until you humble yourself and recognize that God is God and you are not.  Perhaps that tiny exercise of humility will get you the grace to be open to the truth, and see that Jesus Christ’s life of miracles and resurrection proved who He was.  Then you might be able to see that you are not only laboring under outrageously false ideas of what happened in Catholic history (e.g., that the Church “skinned people” and “poured salt” on their wounds, which is complete nonsense), but that you are also unable to see the reason why some of the things which you consider outrageous could have been justified.  But until then it’s pointless to attempt to argue truth with a person like you or explain something such as what constitutes an infallible teaching of the Church.

 

Abandon?

 

Dear Brothers Dimond

 

    Thank you very much for responding to my email.  Its all abit overwhelming for me...  and I must pray and fast very much.  I was raised in the Post Vatican II church, its pretty much all I've ever known, so this is very painful...  I was blessed in that my parish was shepherded by a good priest after the "change" who changed things very little at all, and continued to teach and espouse traditional Catholic devotions and teachings.  However, he has long since retired.

I must ask you, as I sit here in my dark night of the soul, do you believe its possible to change and heal the damage that has been wrought by Vatican II?   In my vocational journey, God lead me to some of the most blatent examples of how bad the "New Catholicism" is...  for over two years now I have through obediance to what I believe is His church, been obediant to the authorities appointed over me, I have told God that I know something is very wrong, but I do not know what it is, or what to do about it, except remain obediant and have faith, even though the "fruit" appears to be rotting on the vine... Tuesday, I pretty much had it out with God...  I told Him I cannot do it anymore, nothing makes sense and I'm so lost I do not know what to believe anymore...  and Wednesday morning, your DVD and booklet on Padre Pio was in my mailbox...  ( God tends to have a keen sense of humor, I think) So... I see alot more now, and I am wondering...  What would have happened IF Luther had faith, remained obediant to the Church, and trusted God to prevail?  What IF The King of England had faith, remained obediant, and trusted in God...  The entire Vatican Council...  for whatever reason gave us this apparent mess...  everyone pretty much agreees "this" is not what Vatican II was supposed to be... So is it a greater evil to abbandon this mess, and profess that we have so little faith in God to prevail? Or is it the greater evil, as you point out to remain in this mess, and be a part of it? Please understand I am not criticizing, my world has just taken a serious wound and I'm doing triage here...  and my first impression is not to abandon "this" but to fight "it".

   In any event I thank you for your website, I have ordered more DVD's and your book, and have

much I need to contemplate, and I thank you for being a catalyst for me!

                                     Deus Gratius,

                                              

Andy schnelly

 

MHFM: There is no evil in abandoning a false Church, which has a false Mass, false teachings and non-Catholics (who believe in all sorts of heresies) as its leaders.  There is evil in remaining with it.  That is to abandon the Catholic Church.

 

More on the salvation heretic

 

Dear Brothers,

 

Just had to comment on Sonya's "gotcha" e-mail.  Wow.  I actually sat back and laughed.  What a mess of illogical, convoluted "thinking".  If that isn't devilspeak, I don't know what is.  Poor Sonya.  Keep bringing us the unadulterated, CLEAR truth of Catholic teaching.  Bless you, bless you!

 

Sincerely in Christ,

Margaret Moore

Grand Rapids, MI

 

Another salvation heretic

 

MHFM: The following very interesting e-mail comes from a woman who wrote to us asserting that it’s wrong to say that members of other religions don’t go to Heaven.  We responded by pointing out that Outside the Church There is No Salvation is a dogma, and that those who don’t believe in this infallible teaching of the Catholic Church are not Catholics.  Her response to our e-mail is below; it is very interesting.  She makes reference to an article on the topic and says:

 

I guess you didn't look at this article that I sent you. It does say that this [outside the Church There is No Salvation] is correct, but whoever taught you that it meant that other religions are not going to heaven is off. Tell me what you think of this article. It never disagrees with the dogma, but what the dogma means is different from who taught it to you. So I do believe it, but I don't believe it means what the person who taught it to you believes, because it isn't what it means. So now who isn't Catholic?

Sonya

 

We responded to Sonya by pointing out that the dogma means what it says, and what has been solemnly declared.  It has no other meaning.  She obviously totally rejects this meaning.

 

Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, “Cantate Domino,” 1441, ex cathedra:

“The Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that all those who are outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans but also Jews or heretics and schismatics, cannot share in eternal life and will go into the everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels, unless they are joined to the Church before the end of their lives; that the unity of this ecclesiastical body is of such importance that only for those who abide in it do the Church’s sacraments contribute to salvation and do fasts, almsgiving and other works of piety and practices of the Christian militia produce eternal rewards; and that nobody can be saved, no matter how much he has given away in alms and even if he has shed blood in the name of Christ, unless he has persevered in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church.”

 

Moreover, let’s focus a little more closely on her incredible response.  One could probably search in vain for a better example of a heretic who denies the salvation dogma while simultaneously claiming to believe in it.  Now remember: this is a woman who wrote to us asserting that we were wrong to say that the members of other religions don’t go to Heaven.  While still asserting the same totally heretical position – she hasn’t changed it one iota – she is now saying that holds the dogma we referred to.  To justify her lying position, which reduces the salvation dogma to a meaningless formula, she makes reference to an article by another person who was advancing invincible ignorance and baptism of desire.  Do people see how it works?  Do people see the fruits of the false theories of “baptism of desire” and “invincible ignorance”?  Do they see that to support these ideas is to deny the true meaning, the only meaning, any meaning, of the salvation dogma?

 

While Sonya’s evil denial of the dogma is quite obvious to the true Catholic, the fact is that there are tons of people who believe in exactly the same thing she is expressing.  This includes almost 100% of alleged “Catholic” priests, including those celebrating the traditional Mass. The difference is that these others are simply more crafty in utilizing euphemistic phrases to express their denial of the dogma.  For instance: they won’t come right out and admit that “other religions [sic]” are going to Heaven, but they will say things like “a person unbaptized,” who “follows the will of God,” who “seeks the truth,” and has the “implicit desire” can be brought into a union with the Church.  When pressed specifically about their positions and the meaning of their phrases, however, these people are forced to acknowledge that they hold that certain Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, etc. can be saved.  After acknowledging that, they frequently then try to deny that they ever said such a thing when the true Catholic starts to attack them for it.  That’s because they are liars.  Like all heretics, Sonya is a liar, an obstinate one, who had a chance to see the dogma and continues to deny it and even abominably claims to agree with it while denying it!  She says that the idea that “other religions are not going to Heaven is off” – so, there is salvation outside the Church – yet she claims that her position “never disagrees with the dogma”!

 

In answer to her question, we say to Sonya: you are not Catholic.  We say to you and to all the others who deny this dogma, you are liars.  If you continue as you are, you will definitely find your portion in the pit of Hell where all liars go.

 

Apocalypse 21:8- “But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, they shall have their portion in the pool burning with fire and brimstone, which is the second death.”

 

Wants to convert

 

Dear Brother Dimond,

 

My name is Thomas Richardson and I live in Ocala, Florida. I was hoping that you could possibly give me some guidance. To make a long story very short, I have been searching, in a spiritual sense I guess you could say, for several years now. I was raised in Protestant churches and have attended them all my life.  I began to have doubts and to question some of the major Protestant doctrines. This was a gradual process that occurred over a period of several years. One thing led to another and I began reading books on Catholic apologetics and watching EWTN, especially the “Journey Home” program. It became evident to me that if the Catholic Church was  established by Jesus Christ himself, then all other religions which were not established by Jesus Christ must be false.

 

I began attending a Catholic parish locally on an irregular basis. The first thing I noticed is that the service did not seem so different from other Protestant services I have seen.  The Church has women Eucharistic ministers and almost everyone receives Communion in the hand while standing. To me, if the Eucharist is truly the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Jesus Christ, this seemed terribly irreverent.

 

I noticed that everyone comes forward to receive Communion in this parish. I must be the only person in the building that does not come forward to receive Communion, and this is a very large Church. I sometimes wonder if I am the only non-Catholic visitor in the congregation or if every one of those going to receive the Eucharist are all Catholics in a state of grace.

 

I have read about the many problems of liturgical abuse and novelty being introduced into the new Novus Ordo Mass since Vatican II. It seems the Church has been in a state of crisis since its “opening up” to the world and its embracing of Modernism. Of course everyone has heard about the terrible sexual abuse scandals of the Church. I have even read of “Pink” seminaries and a “Lavender Mafia” within the Church that protects and defends the homosexual Priests and seminarians. For one considering entering the Catholic Church all of this is a little confusing and disconcerting, to say the least… My dilemma is that I believe the Catholic Church is the one true Church and the Church teaches that there is no salvation outside of the Catholic Church. But how can I become Catholic?

 

To be honest, I am confused. I am starting to lean in favor of the position of the Sedevacantists. The position of the Traditionalists who support the post Vatican II “Popes” seems very inconsistent. They reject Vatican II; they reject the Novus Ordo “Mass”; they recognize the Church is in a great state of apostasy; and yet they still accept as Shepherds of the Church the men who allowed this great crisis and apostasy to overcome the Church. These “Popes” not only allowed this apostasy to enter into the Church, in fact it seems that they facilitated and promulgated these heresies. If the Church is truly indefectible and infallible, how can this be? It seems that the gates of Hell have prevailed against ourChrist’s Church…I have just sent away for your 3 DVD Special pack of materials. I am looking forward to receiving your materials. I love our Blessed Lady and I pray the Rosary nearly every day. I am trying to pray the Rosary at least once daily. Thank you for any answers you can provide me in my search for the truth.

 

God bless you.

 

Thomas Richardson

Ocala, Florida

 

Loss after V-2

 

I was raised a Catholic and found great comfort in the church until the changes made by the church in the mid-sixties.  Even though I was young, it made me question all the facts I was taught until that time.  Eating meat on Friday no longer a sin, the statues covered as if in shame, the guitar masses etc. made me embarrassed to be a Catholic.  I didn't leave the church it left me in an effort to gain popularity and increase its ratings.  I still hold on to the true teachings however, I did not have my daughtetr baptized.  And according to your interview on Art Bell's show, the church is not the true church anyways.  Is this decision of mine going to sentence her to hell for eternity?  Am I not as qualified to baptize her as is the father of the local church which does not represent true Catholicism?  I could not get through the lines on Sunday's show.

Sincerely,

 

Valeire Jeanne

 

MHFM: The Catholic Church is always the true Church.  The indefectibility of the Church is a dogma.  What we are saying is that the Catholic Church still exists, but the post-Vatican II sect, with its new Mass, new teachings and antipopes, is not the Catholic Church.  The Catholic Church has been reduced to a remnant in these final days, as predicted in Scripture and Catholic prophecy – a remnant composed of uncompromising Catholics who maintain the true faith.  As pointed out on our website, anyone can validly baptize.  Regarding your question: if your daughter dies without baptism or without the Catholic faith or without practicing the traditional Catholic faith or without the state of grace she will not be saved.  We must also point out that a Catholic parent has an obligation under pain of grave sin to see to it that his or her infant children are baptized.  We would strongly encourage you to look carefully at the things on our website and obtain our $10.00 special, for they specifically cover the things and issues you have mentioned.

 

Found

 

By the grace of God I found your site yesterday. It is amazing, as well as you two Brothers Dimond. My question is: I am in Mobile, Alabama. I, too, believe that you commit a sin going to the new Mess (Mass). There are no Traditionalist churches within several hundred miles from here. I know that Mass and Sacraments are a must, but as you can see are impossible. I was born Catholic (1951) and was raised in the Traditionalist Church, until Vatican II. I read on your site that you recommend praying the complete Rosary (all 3 Mysteries) every day. Is there anything else that I need to do?

Also, from your site, I gleened that I am to stay away from SSPX, and Society of St. Peter. Which Traditionalists are recommended and are there any others to dodge? Since you are "in the know", who can I write to or call to possibly get a Trad priest here to set up a parish? Our Archbishop has already announced that he is going to retire soon, and he is N.O. bigtime.

Thanks, have enjoyed your tapes and videos that I have listened to (you won, bigtime, in the debate!!!). I never knew that there was so much I didn't know about my own faith. Keep up the good work and a lot of those hits you are getting on your site is probably me.

I will be ordering something soon, so you will see my name come across your store.

T. Ray Aspinwall

 

MHFM: It's great to hear about your interest.  If you called us here someone might be able to help you with more detailed questions you have.  A confession to a validly ordained priest of any mortal sins that were confessed to "priests" ordained in the New Rite of Paul VI would also be necessary.  We would mention that people coming out of the Novus Ordo should mention in confession that they had been attending a non-Catholic service and for however long.  The profession of faith from the Council of Trent (which is found on our website and in the back of our two large books) is something everyone should make, especially those coming out of the Novus Ordo.

 

Seminaries

 

Dear Brothers,

 

Thank you for your website. It is a great light against the fog produced by the enemies of Christ.

 

It appears to me that due to the great apostasy, there are now no "valid" seminaries for the Priesthood? The SSPX and CMRI seminaries appear sadly to inculcate various false positions: particularly "The baptism of desire" and denial or doublespeak surrounding "outside the Church there is no salvation."

 

Based on Catholic teaching, would it be a sin for a Catholic understanding these heresies to commence priestly training in these seminaries? (Despite ordination ultimately being done by valid Bishops?)

 

Thank you once again and may God bless you,

 

Robert McMorrow Jnr,

Strathclyde,

Scotland

 

MHFM: Robert, thanks for the interest.  Yes, it would be wrong to join those seminaries because one would be training to enter a group which holds mortally sinful heresies against a solemnly defined dogma of the faith.  The dearth - or rather, apparent non-existence – of fully Catholic seminaries in these days is another sign of where we are in terms of the Great Apostasy.

 

Pagan grandparents

 

Dear Bro. Dimond,

 

I have a question regarding our association with pagans.  My husband’s parents are idolaters.  Like all Chinese they have an altar in their homes.  We don’t live with them.  But we do bring the kids to the grandparents place.  After reading your website, I get the idea that we should even refrain from letting the kids go to the house and have meals at their homes.  They know we are Catholics, in fact we were thrown out of the house few years back.  They have apologized so we have become a family again but we don’t live together.  But they still are pagans.  We do not partake in any of their rituals but I am wondering would it be wrong just to be there.    Please advice.

 

God Bless,

Angelia

 

MHFM: Thanks for the question.  The answer is that you should not allow them to go to their house.  Since their grandparents are idolaters and outside the true faith, it would be wrong to continue to send your kids there.  The answer in this case is especially clear because by having one’s children around grandparents who are outside the faith, one is encouraging the children to have a devotion and a respect for people who are on the path to perdition and can seriously mislead them.  One is further encouraging the children to look to their grandparents for guidance – something which they obviously should not do – as well as encouraging the children to develop a special relationship and bond with people who are God’s enemies. 

 

Pope Pius XI, Mortalium Animos #9, Jan. 6, 1928: “Everyone knows that John himself, the Apostle of love, who seems to reveal in his Gospel the secrets of the Sacred Heart of Jesus, and who never ceased to impress on the memories of his followers the new commandment ‘Love one another,’ altogether forbade any intercourse with those who professed a mutilated and corrupt form of Christ’s teaching: ‘If any man come to you and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into the house nor say to him: God speed you’ (II John 10).”

 

Matthew 10:14-15 “And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear your words: going forth out of that house or city shake off the dust from your feet.  Amen I say to you, it shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city.”

 

Donating-buying

 

MHFM: Some time back we posted an E-Exchange which emphasized that one cannot donate to heretics.  Someone wrote in ridiculously asserting that our position was “inconsistent” because we said you could buy books from a group that is heretical, but couldn’t donate to such a group.  In response to this absurd accusation of inconsistency on this point, we emphasized the obvious fact that there is a major difference between giving a flat donation to a group –which clearly shows that you endorse their positions – and buying something from someone.  The latter means that you paid money for a certain service or item; it does not mean that you necessarily endorse the other things they support.  The distinction is so obvious that it is baffling that anyone could not see it, unless that person is blinded by bad will.  Bad will is a major problem today, as more and more examples continue to demonstrate.  So here was another response on this issue from someone who obstinately maintained the aforementioned ridiculous position in order (obviously) to justify donating to heretics:

 

It is not obvious at all (as you allege) that purchasing books from TAN is okay as long as you do not donate money to them.  Purchasing books from TAN is providing them with a profit.  Or do you believe that they sell their books at cost?  Therefore, if you believe some of their books are heretical, you are supporting an enterprise that spreads heresy because it is only by being profitable that they continue to exist.  Your position is inconsistent at best.  Perhaps you do not see this fact because you are too busy hurling anathemas at everyone.

 

John C. Gorka 

 

MHFM: Your position is ridiculous.  In that case you couldn't buy anything at all since about 100% of the companies which produce about 100% of the products in the world support and/or promote things that are contrary to the faith.  Therefore, one couldn’t buy anything at the grocery store.  Thus, I assume you never go to the grocery store.  If so, you are a hypocrite.  By the way, you do not name one person at whom we've “hurled an anathema” who, in your view, doesn't deserve it.  

 

Refuting an “Orthodox”

 

MHFM: Recently we responded to an antagonistic Eastern “Orthodox” who wrote to us.  Our response provided some biblical proofs for the Papacy, as well as other points which prove the illogic at the heart of Eastern “Orthodoxy.”  He responded by quoting a portion of our response and making the following staggering statement:

 

MHFM STATED: Jesus Christ gave the keys to the Kingdom to St. Peter (Mt. 16),
and gave him jurisdiction over his flock (John 21:15-17).  St. Peter was the
Bishop of Rome, and his followers (i.e., the members of the Church in Rome)
elected his successor, or he appointed his own successor as the Bishop of
Rome and head of the universal Church.

HIS RESPONSE: The RCC is nonsensical. Here is an example. Your conclusion
does not logically follow from the premise of your argument. John 21:15-17
simply says that Christ told Peter (not his successors) to feed HIS (Peter's
sheep).
Not the entire episcopate, and this mandate is given to Peter, not
his successors. Western heretics have always engaged in circular reasoning
by reading into these texts their already assumed belief. You are reading
into this passage something that simply is not there. This is known as "the
Peter syndrom" common among RCC apologists.

 

MHFM: We respond as follows: You actually wrote that John says that Christ told Peter to feed Peter's sheep!  This is staggering.  Read the verse, in case you've never read it.  You are truly a blind heretic.  Christ says feed my lambs, that is, Christ's!  This clearly shows that Christ entrusted all of his sheep and lambs to St. Peter.

 

John 21:15-17-“Jesus saith to Simon Peter: Simon, son of John, lovest thou me?  He saith to him: Yea, Lord, thou knowest that I love thee.  He saith to him: Feed my lambs.  He saith to him again: Simon, son of John, lovest thou me? He saith to him: Yea, Lord, thou knowest that I love thee.  He saith to him: Feed my lambs.  He saith to him a third time: Simon, son of John, lovest thou me?  Peter was grieved, because he had said to him the third time: Lovest thou me? And he said to him: Lord, thou knowest all things: thou knowest that I love thee.  He said to him: Feed my sheep.”

 

Here’s another “gem” from the Eastern “Orthodox”:

 

MHFM STATED: Eastern Orthodoxy is perhaps the most illogical of all the phony
sects.  Here is a quick proof that Eastern "Orthodox" cannot logically
believe in any dogma because all bishops are considered equal: [and we gave specific examples to demonstrate the point]

HIS RESPONSE: Orthodoxy is logical, because it is the Bride of Christ. The
very Church that He founded.

 

MHFM Comment: Wow, that’s quite a response; that’s really some argument. 

 

The blindness and the obstinacy of this heretic – who even had a chance to consult the verse and see its teaching before responding the way he did – reveals the serious level of bad will at work in schismatics.

 

May 13, Fatima

 

MHFM: Since Sunday was the anniversary of Our Lady’s first appearance at Fatima on May 13, 1917, here is the account of what happened on May 13:

 

“For just before them, on top of a small evergreen called the azinheira – it was about three feet high, and its glossy leaves had prickles on them, like cactus – they saw a ball of light.  And in the center of it stood a Lady.

     As Lucia describes her, she was “a Lady all of white, more brilliant than the sun dispensing light, clearer and more intense than a crystal cup full of crystalline water penetrated by the rays of the most glaring sun.”  Her face was indescribably beautiful, “not sad, not happy, but serious” – perhaps somewhat reproachful, though benign; her hands together in prayer at her breast, pointing up, with Rosary beads hanging down between the fingers of the right hand.  Even her garments seemed made solely of the same white light; a simple tunic falling to her feet, and over it a mantle from her head to the same length, its edge made of a fiercer light that seemed to glitter like gold.  Neither the hair nor the ears could be seen.  The features?  It was almost impossible to look steadily in the face; it dazzled, and hurt the eyes, and made one blink or look away.

     The children stood, fascinated, within the radiance that surrounded her for a distance of perhaps a meter and a half.

     “Don’t be afraid,” she said, in a low musical tone, never to be forgotten.   “I won’t hurt you!”

They felt no fear now, in fact, but only a great joy and peace.  It was the ‘lightning,’ really, that had frightened them before.  Lucia was self-possessed enough to ask a question:

     [Lucia]: “Where does Your Excellency come from?”

     “I am from Heaven.”

     [Lucia]: “And what is it you want of me?”

     “I come to ask you to come here for six months in succession, on the thirteenth day at this same hour.  Then I will tell you who I am, and what I want.  And afterwards I will return here a seventh time.”

     [Lucia]: “And shall I go to Heaven too?”

“Yes, you will.”

     [Lucia]: “And Jacinta?”

     “Also.”

[Lucia]: “And Francisco?”

     “Also.  But he will have to say many Rosaries!”

Heaven!  Lucia suddenly remembered two girls who had died recently.  They were friends of her family, and used to go to her house to learn weaving from her sister Maria.

[Lucia]: “Is Maria da Neves now in Heaven?” she asked.

     “Yes, she is.”

[Lucia]: “And Amelia?”

     “She will be in Purgatory until the end of the world.

     “Do you wish to offer yourselves to God, to endure all the suffering that He may please to send you, as an act of reparation for the sins by which He is offended, and to ask for the conversion of sinners?”

[Lucia]: “Yes, we do.”

     “Then you will have much to suffer.  But the grace of God will be your comfort.”

As she spoke the words, “a grace de Deus,” [the grace of God] the Lady opened her lovely hands, and from the palms came two streams of light so intense that it not only enveloped the children with its radiance, but seemed to penetrate their breasts and to reach the most intimate parts of their hearts and souls, “making us see ourselves in God” – these are Lucia’s words – “more clearly in that light than in the best of mirrors.”  An irresistible impulse forced them to their knees and made them say, fervently: “O most holy Trinity, I adore You!  My God, my God, I love You in the Most Blessed Sacrament!”

     The Lady waited for them to finish this.  Then she said, “Say the Rosary every day, to obtain peace for the world, and the end of the war.”

     Immediately after this she began to rise serenely from the azinheira to glide away toward the east “until she disappeared in the immensity of the distance.” (Our Lady of Fatima, by William Thomas Walsh, pp. 51-52)

 

New Rosary

 

I read the chapter/pdf on Pope John Paul II from your web and it did concern me a bit.  I haven't gotten all the way through yet.

 

However, specifically with the details in the Luminous mysteries, I wasn't able to discern specific teaching which I thought was contrary to the teachings of the original church.  The one insert about the presence of Jesus at a wedding turned it into a sacrament was curious.  Jesus also attended a crucifiction.  Indeed though, it was a sacrafice that was coupled to the culmination of an entire teaching/Redemption.

 

At any rate it was not on par with the examples of regressions that may have been described about PJP II.  He may have only intended to reach out to other "churches" for peace, but I also think it may have been contrary to what was taught about the real meaning of the new Covennant - in which peace does not overcome something more important…

 

With regards,

David

 

MHFM: Obviously we’re not asserting that his insertion of new mysteries proves by itself that he was a manifest heretic.  All of his other heresies do.  Nor are we asserting that the mysteries which were chosen are bad things.  Of course not, since they pertain to the life of Our Lord.  We are merely pointing out that he changed it in order to change the traditional Rosary of 15 mysteries to something different, just like the Counter Church has tried to change everything else (Catechism, Mass, sacraments, teachings, etc.).  Since these new mysteries were inserted by a manifest heretic who can be proven to have been an antipope, they should obviously not be included in the Rosary. 

 

Positive responses to Coast to Coast

 

MHFM: Below are just a few of the positive responses we received from people who heard the program on Coast to Coast:

 

I cannot remember when I have heard anyone in our Church that is so informed and prolific in the support of our beliefs. Br. Dimond is a gift from the Holy Spirit.  Thank you for all you do. Your apparence on the Art Bell Coast to Coast program and your answers to the call in participants was the greatest. This is why I had order your book.


Jim Vondras

Florissant, MO 

----

I heard Brother Michael on Coast to Coast. Thank you so much.  You were a wonderful example of what St. Paul meant when he said "To every man an  answer,".  I enjoyed every minute of it and I prayed for you through the
whole show.

May God Bless you and your work as he uses you to spread the Word.

 

Holly

-----

Dear Brother:

 

What you are saying somehow rings true to me.  I am a Catholic from birth, and am extremely knowledgeable regarding history and religion, and find your message quite interesting.  I am very active in the Catholic community in Los Angeles, but live in horror as to what the local dioceses has done to the youths of our schools and churches… God bless you and keep you and give you strength to continue to spread your truth.

 

Francine V. Limon

Murrieta, California

---

Dear Brother Diamond: Last evening I listened to your discussion on Coast To Coast, with Art Bell. I was so impressed with your directness and courage, that I am compelled to send you this word of support. I agree totally with your position, and I intend to support you and your community as best as I can.

 

Regards,

Brian Bastinelli

---

 

Your time on art bell was refreshing and stimulating.

 

Robert

---

Hello Brother Michael Dimond,

 

I heard you today on Coast to coast and was startled by your commentary.  I went to your website and your video on various events such as the flood, was most clear and resonated with me…

Thank you.

 

Sincerely,

 

Steve DeJoseph

--- 

I enjoyed Brother Dimond’s time on Coast to Coast. 

 

Bobbie Luymes

Peers, AB

Canada

---

Dear Catholic Brothers and Sisters,   I was very happy to have heard Br. Dimond last night on a late night talk show.  I admired his ability to remain calm and forthright after the many questions and rudeness that he received from many callers. 

 

Boo

 

 Dear Brother Diamond,

   I just finished listening to you on Coast-to-Coast AM and was very excited to hear you doing such a fantastic job of Catholic Apologetics to the callers in. I am proud to be Catholic when someone like you handled the callers’ objections and misconceptions of our Catholic faith very gracefully…

 

~Peter Vü

-----------

Another Great Show,  I sat up to 4am listening to the show with some people that are in the fake church  and they were speechless...Im glad I  recorded the show on audio tape....  Good Job

 

-Steve

Marshall WI

 

More stories from the Novus Ordo

 

I just remembered something from Newchurch.  One of my last pastors was head of Diocesan Ecumenism and the rule was that no priest was allowed to pray the Rosary at funeral services lest it should offend the Protestants who were present.  Also, when we exchanged churches with the Protestants, or when this church had a Christmas lights festival where people visited the decorated church, no proselytizing was allowed.  A history of the building of the church that contained nothing Catholic was available.

 

Prisoner wants to convert

 

I had occasion to hear you on coast to coast am with Art Bell.  I am in Jail for perhaps the rest of my natural life and I wish to convert.  I believe that Christ lived, died and rose again to save me.  I would like you to send me the information on the steps I need to become a Catholic.  Please.

 

Respectfully,

 

Raymond H. (we have withheld his full name)

 

Charismatic movement

 

I HAVE JUST COME ACROSS YOUR WEBSITE AND AM QUITE INTRIGUED AND CONFUSED ABOUT MY CATHOLIC FAITH RIGHT NOW. I DONT KNOW WHAT TO BELIEVE ANYMORE. I PRAY THE ROSARY AND HAVE BEEN A FOLLOWER OF THE DIVINE MERCY PRAYERS WHICH HAS STRENGTHENED MY FAITH. MY QUESTION TO YOU HOWEVER IS WHAT IS YOUR OPINION OF THE CHARISMATIC MOVEMENT. I SEARCHED YOUR WEBSITE AND COULD NOT FIND ANY INFO ABOUT IT. YOU SEE MANY YEARS AGO, I WAS AWAY FROM THE FAITH, BUT I CAME BACK AFTER AN EXPERIENCE IN THE CATHOLIC CHARISMATIC MOVEMENT. I WOULD APPRECIATE YOUR VIEWS EITHER ON THE MAIN WEBSITE OR DIRECTLY. 

 

CARL

 

MHFM: The article below covers the Charismatic movement.  I would strongly encourage you to read it.  It can also be found on the “Guide” to our website.  There one will also find an article on The Divine Mercy Devotion, and why Catholics should avoid it.

 

EWTN and the Charismatic Movement [PDF File]

(This article covers what a Catholic should think of Mother Angelica, the Eternal Word Television Network, and the Charismatic movement)

 

What else?

 

Dear Brothers -   in a response to my sister in which I had sent her the following:  her answer follows... hurt, angry, the whole emotional gambit.      Please help us to understand get them to see that we are merely trying follow God through His True Church...  what else can we say to them?  whenever we would try to quote something from the Bible we are "displaying cult like behaviour" and mentally sick...  not thinking with our own minds....???   according to them.    melanie & bill

 

MHFM: If you've been repeatedly rejected by them, there's nothing more to say to them and you should not continue.  St. Paul says that we should avoid the heretic after the second rebuke (Titus 3:10).  Many people waste much time disputing with obstinate heretics of bad will who will not be convinced by anything that is said.  In some cases, with those of weak faith, not only will much time be wasted disputing with these totally obstinate heretics, but listening to their unbelief over and over can cause some to be weakened in their own convictions. 

 

SSPX

 

I am a devout Roman Catholic and I have read a lot on the web site listed after your interview on Art Bell's radio show.  I thought I understood what you were saying until I read the part about Pius X. I wonder now what you are suggesting. Until I read the opinion about the Pius X movement, it seemed as if you were in agreement with them.  Did I miss something? If so, what? I did miss a lot of the radio show as it is on very late in this area.

John Beal

Cave Creek AZ

 

MHFM: On our website there is a section on the SSPX.  It explains that they do some good things; for instance, they oppose the New Mass, much of Vatican II, false ecumenism, and they promote many traditional Catholic things.  However, their positions are actually heretical in a number of key areas.   This article explains it: The File on the Positions of the Society of St. Pius X

 

Slavery?

 

On "Coast to Coast," when your spokesman, Brother Michael Diamond, was questioned about the church's acceptance of slavery, he sited a specific Pope as the "most recent" to condemn slavery. It would have been more useful to most of us if he had told us when this was said & when (or if?) earlier Popes objected to this horrid practice.

Chuck Little
29 Palms, Ca.

 

MHFM:  There are many papal documents we could cite against slavery, but below is just one for now.  It comes from Pope Paul III’s Bull, Sublimus Dei, May 29, 1537.  It’s interesting to note something in addition to the condemnation of slavery in this Bull.  Speaking in context about those above the age of reason and about those who haven’t heard of Jesus Christ, Pope Paul III declares that no one “may obtain salvation save through faith in our Lord Jesus Christ,” thus providing another example of the traditional dogmatic teaching of the Church on the necessity of believing in Christ for salvation. (This quote, by the way, is found in the 2nd edition of our book, Outside the Catholic Church There is Absolutely No Salvation.)  This is a dogmatic truth which is rejected not only by the counterfeit post-Vatican II sect, but unfortunately by many “traditionalists” and “traditional priests” who believe that some Jews or Muslims or pagans can be saved. 

                                                                                                        

Pope Paul III, Sublimus Dei, May 29, 1537:  (Topic: the enslavement and evangelization of Indians)

 

“To all faithful Christians to whom this writing may come, health in Christ our Lord and the apostolic benediction. The sublime God so loved the human race that He created man in such wise that he might participate, not only in the good that other creatures enjoy, but endowed him with capacity to attain to the inaccessible and invisible Supreme Good and behold it face to face; and since man, according to the testimony of the sacred scriptures, has been created to enjoy eternal life and happiness, which none may obtain save through faith in our Lord Jesus Christ, it is necessary that he should possess the nature and faculties enabling him to receive that faith; and that whoever is thus endowed should be capable of receiving that same faith. Nor is it credible that any one should possess so little understanding as to desire the faith and yet be destitute of the most necessary faculty to enable him to receive it. Hence Christ, who is the Truth itself, that has never failed and can never fail, said to the preachers of the faith whom He chose for that office 'Go ye and teach all nations.' He said all, without exception, for all are capable of receiving the doctrines of the faith.

 

The enemy of the human race, who opposes all good deeds in order to bring men to destruction, beholding and envying this, invented a means never before heard of, by which he might hinder the preaching of God's word of Salvation to the people: he inspired his satellites who, to please him, have not hesitated to publish abroad that the Indians of the West and the South, and other people of whom We have recent knowledge should be treated as dumb brutes created for our service, pretending that they are incapable of receiving the Catholic Faith.

We, who, though unworthy, exercise on earth the power of our Lord and seek with all our might to bring those sheep of His flock who are outside into the fold committed to our charge, consider, however, that the Indians are truly men and that they are not only capable of understanding the Catholic Faith but, according to our information, they desire exceedingly to receive it. Desiring to provide ample remedy for these evils, We define and declare by these Our letters, or by any translation thereof signed by any notary public and sealed with the seal of any ecclesiastical dignitary, to which the same credit shall be given as to the originals, that, notwithstanding whatever may have been or may be said to the contrary, the said Indians and all other people who may later be discovered by Christians, are by no means to be deprived of their liberty or the possession of their property, even though they be outside the faith of Jesus Christ; and that they may and should, freely and legitimately, enjoy their liberty and the possession of their property; nor should they be in any way enslaved; should the contrary happen, it shall be null and have no effect.

 

By virtue of Our apostolic authority We define and declare by these present letters, or by any translation thereof signed by any notary public and sealed with the seal of any ecclesiastical dignitary, which shall thus command the same obedience as the originals, that the said Indians and other peoples should be converted to the faith of Jesus Christ by preaching the word of God and by the example of good and holy living.”

 

On our previous show

 

Dear Brothers,

The show with Gregory Safreed was very interesting. It would be great to have him on again so he could tell us what the reaction was of his N.O. parish when he quit.  Since he was actually an administrator, hopefully he could influence more parishioners to get out of there.

Concerning the call from "Peter" who found it almost unbeleivable that a priest or bishop could actually encourage such immoral activity such as looking at Playboy magazine or seeking out a prostitute, it should be noted that Mel Gibson himself actually gave an interview with Playboy back during the time when he made the movie Braveheart.  Someone online posted an excerpt of the interview.  William F. Buckley, another "Catholic" wrote "extensively" for Playboy. Here is a link to the article in which he admitted this:

http://www.nationalreview.com/buckley/buckley200312191325.asp

So what kind of "Catholics" would do such things? These are just 2 examples to show that what Mr. Safreed was told to do by these so-called "Catholic clergy" really shouldn't be so shocking.

Bridget

 

heard, wondering?

 

I heard Brother Diamond on Coast to Coast the other night and as a protestant convert to the Catholic faith 9 years ago I have some questions.  First let me say that I loved the passion, knowledge and love that Brother Diamond has for the Catholic faith and what we believe in regards to the one true faith, Mary, Eucharist, Confession, The Pope etc. 

 

Where I started to get uneasy and now I’m questioning and looking for answers is once he started talking about the current Roman Catholic Church as not being the true church, invalid masses and Anti-Popes.  As a convert to the faith I can honestly say that there are some things about the mass that I don’t like.  I don’t like they way some younger priest say mass, especially during the consecration, it took me a long time to get use to contemporary music groups but thankfully I’ve never been subject to clown masses or other ridiculous things such as that.  And I do whish in many ways the church is the way it was pre Vatican II even though I’ve never experienced it.

 

If I were to agree with you…then what?  What do you do if you don’t have a pope to follow?  Just wait it out?  Wouldn’t you then be a protestant…a “protester” of the Catholic faith?  You obviously believe that a “true” pope is necessary and designed by Christ so it’s like you’re a lost sheep without a shepherd.  It feels wrong to abandon it even though I don’t agree with it 100%.  Wouldn’t I be just like Martin Luther?

 

Brother Diamond spoke about Jesus setting up Peter as the 1st Pope which I agree, and gave him the authority to bind and loose which I agree, so why is it that what happened at Vatican II doesn’t fall under that?  I know you don’t like that changes, and I don’t like all of them either, but if we believe what Jesus said then shouldn’t we believe that the Pope is leading us in the way that God wants us to go as a church?  This is my biggest stumbling block…

 

Ryan McLellan Sr.

Goffstown, NH

 

MHFM: Ryan, we strongly suggest that you consult the information on our website and in our DVDs and books, for they answer many of your questions.  The reason that Vatican II was not protected by the authority of St. Peter is because the men who called and confirmed it, John XXIII and Paul VI, were radical and public heretics prior to their “elections.”  According to the teaching of Pope Paul IV, the election of such a heretic is invalid.  There is also evidence that neither one of them was lawfully elected at all (in addition to the fact that they were excluded because they were heretics).  Evidence suggests that Cardinal Siri was elected first and then his election was uncanonically set aside.  Thus, there is no violation of the promise that Peter’s faith will not fail (Lk. 22:32) because these men never lawfully assumed that authority.  That is proven by examining the teaching of Vatican II, which we do in our material.  Vatican II authoritatively teaches the opposite of true popes on many issues, which is impossible if the man who confirmed it was a true pope.  Regarding Luther, it’s precisely because we maintain fidelity to the Catholic dogmas which oppose and refute Luther that we denounce the Vatican II sect.  The Vatican II sect agrees with Luther on Justification, and holds that Lutherans don’t even need to accept the Papal Primacy to be Christians.  The Vatican II antipopes – specifically John Paul II and Benedict XVI – have also praised the arch-heretic Luther!  This is a quick answer to your question; a more thorough consultation of the our material will make it more clear for you: the Vatican II sect is Protestant and a revolution against the Papacy and holds the Papacy to be utterly meaningless.  It’s a fact of Church history that, at certain times in the past (e.g., the Great Western Schism), antipopes have reigned in Rome.  Thus, it’s really not a surprise that God would allow a deception with antipopes in Rome to happen at the end of the world.  The facts proving that this is what’s going on today are irrefutable.

 

Convert

 

Hi!

 

I live in a rural area south of Canandaigua, NY.  I work two full time jobs over the internet, so it is difficult for me to travel anywhere.

 

Is it possible for me to study and become a member and baptized in the true church?

 

Thank you,

Claire

 

MHFM: Claire, on the “Guide” to our website there is the profession of faith for converts from the Council of Trent, as well as the form of baptism.  Anyone can baptize you if you know the basic catechism and accept all the teachings of the Catholic Church.  We would also recommend that you start praying the Rosary each day.  So, yes, if you follow the simple steps for a convert that are listed on our website then you can quickly become a Catholic. If you have already been validly baptized, then a general confession of all mortal sins to a validly ordained priest (with a mention of adherence to other sects) would be necessary.  If there is some doubt about whether you have been validly baptized, a conditional baptism (which anyone can perform for you) could be done prior to your general confession.  The conditional form of baptism is also given on our website.

 

Introduction to Terms and Principles discussed on this website

 

For those who are new to this website, you might want to check out the “Introduction to Terms” which is found as the topmost entry on the “Guide” to our website which is located our mainpage.  We have also quoted and linked to this introduction here for your convenience:

 

This website is dedicated to defending and spreading the Catholic Faith, as taught and defined by the authoritative teachings of the popes throughout history.  It is also dedicated to exposing in great detail the post-Vatican II pseudo-“Church” and the New Mass which purport to be Catholic, but are not.  Please consult the “Glossary of Terms and Principles” below for a more helpful introduction to the material on this website and for an explanation of the Catholic basis for the conclusions asserted here.  It explains such terms as “Magisterium,” the Church’s “indefectibility,” “ecumenism,” “sedevacantism,” “Papacy,” “Papal Infallibility,” “heretic,” “antipope,” and others.  It also explains important principles about what the Catholic Church teaches about other religions, that heretics cease to be members of the Church, the new teachings after Vatican II, etc.

The Glossary of Terms and Principles [PDF]

(This glossary contains important definitions of key terms and principles about the Catholic Faith, about the post-Vatican II “Church,” about how the Catholic Church views non-Catholic religions, etc. which people should see.)

 

Huge Response to Coast to Coast

 

MHFM: It was another huge response to Bro. Michael’s appearance on Coast to Coast AM.  We will be posting a few of the e-mails that we have received.

 

New Mass is the Abomination of Desolation

 

MHFM: For those who are interested in prophecy, you might want to look at this article on the New Mass as the Abomination of Desolation in the holy place as prophesied in Matthew 24:15.

 

The New Mass is the Abomination of Desolation - and the First Four Vatican II Antipopes parallel the Four False High Priests at the time of the Abomination of Desolation in the Machabees

 

Ordination

 

Hello Brothers,

  What proof can someone give that he was ordained before 1968?  Is that person's word supposed to be good enough?

T.D.

 

MHFM: In most cases, yes, you would have to go by the person’s word.  But there are obviously things which could tip you off that his word might not be reliable.  For instance, if he has always been a “priest” in the Novus Ordo diocese, but is clearly not old enough to have been ordained before 1968 and if he wasn’t ordained in the Eastern Rite, then there is a good chance that he is not telling you the truth or isn’t accurate with his information.  In another case, if you are dealing with a person who is not merely known to be heretical, but shady and dishonest about other matters, then there is a good chance that his word is not reliable about when or in what rite he was ordained.  On this matter we could cite the case of an independent “priest” from Pennsylvania who celebrates the traditional Latin Mass.  He told numerous people different things about whether he held the sedevacantist position; we’re talking about clear contradictions.  He was also “ordained” right around the time when the changes to the rite of ordination started to be implemented.  So, one would have to trust his word on the rite used when he was ordained.  Since he contradicted himself and wasn’t forthright on his position about the antipope, we do not feel that his claim that he was ordained in the traditional rite of ordination is reliable.  He was the type who basically wanted to tell people what they wanted to hear, so there is a very good chance that he was doing that when addressing concerned individuals about his ordination.

 

Canada

 

Hello,

My name is Josh Fougere.  I live in an isolated rural area of Nova Scotia, I have two questions.  The first is: How can I find churchs that have valid sacraments within Canada?  The second question is:  Have you ever heard of  the prophecies of the great monarch?  If so, what are your thoughts on them?   Thanks a lot for all the support you give to us who are lost.

Josh

 

MHFM: Josh, the question of where to receive valid sacraments in Canada is a tough one.  We would say that your best option is a valid Eastern Rite priest (e.g., a Byzantine priest).  If he is not a notorious supporter of the Vatican II religion, we believe you could receive sacraments from him without supporting him at all.  Many of these priests are so heretical, however, that you couldn't even go to them at all.  It's a tough situation, but you could probably find one there in Canada.

 

Regarding the great monarch, we are familiar with some of the prophecies about it.  We don’t really have an opinion on it because there are so many prophecies about the great monarch which contradict one another that it makes it difficult to make sense out of them.

 

May 4th Radio program Archived

 

The latest radio program has now been archived: Archived Radio Programs.

 

Guest

 

Tonight (Fri, May 4) we will have Gregory Safreed as a guest on our radio program.  He is the former pastoral administrator of two Novus Ordo parishes in the Diocese of New Ulm, MN.  We will be discussing the outrageous things he saw in the Novus Ordo “Church” and in Novus Ordo seminaries.

 

Third Order Novus Ordo?

 

Bro. Dimond, I have been clothed into the Discalced Carmelites Secular and I wonder if they would ask me to leave if they saw that I refused to go to the new mass offered at the monastery when we are supposed to occasionally and that I did not believe the last 5 popes where true. What do you think? I truly believe God has called me to this order and to serve him here.

 

Sincerely Deb

 

MHFM: We’re very glad to hear about your interest.  Regarding being a third order or secular member of a Novus Ordo religious order, that's not something a Catholic could do.  A Catholic can have nothing to do with the false Vatican II sect or the New Mass.  You should take off the habit if you do wear it, and have nothing to do with their monastery.  God is calling you to serve him as an uncompromising supporter of the Catholic Faith of all times.

 

SSPX priests

 

So here is my question:  Might it not be possible, even likely, that some SSPX priests are closet Sedevacantists?   If so and they have decided to hold that position quietly in order to give souls access to the Sacraments (this guy must hear hundreds of confessions per week) are they sinning, or performing a service for the remnant underground Church?... 

  

Follow-up, can one support a priest, whom one deems not to be heretical apart from supporting the SSPX, which I agree has an illogical, really ridiculous position?

 

Bill Mulligan    

 

MHFM: It is probable that numerous priests in the SSPX are closet sedevacantists.  To your second question, it would be wrong for them to publicly remain in union with the SSPX as closet sedevacantists; for they are publicly affiliating themselves with the position that Benedict XVI is the pope (even though they reject that position privately), in addition to the SSPX’s heresy on the salvation dogma.  Standing for the truths of the faith is more important than dispensing the sacraments to individuals who are learning heretical positions from a group which espouses heretical positions. To your third question, no, one could not support a priest who seems to hold the correct position privately, but still affiliates himself with a heretical group publicly. 

 

More on Siri

 

Dear Dimond Brothers:

My family has benefitted from the information contained on your website, and we have shared it with others. Thank you for your work. One question that is continually debated among us relates to the following statement taken from your article on Cardinal Siri:

"* Note: We believe that Cardinal Siri was elected pope and unlawfully forced to resign – thus invalidating the “elections” of John XXIII and Paul VI.  But his failure to oppose the apostasy, stand up for his office and denounce the Antipopes in the decades following those fateful days preclude Catholics from holding that he remained pope in the decades following the 1958 and 1963 conclaves.  Cardinal Siri may have been paralyzed by fear, uncertainty and confusion about his status and what to do about it; nevertheless one cannot recognize that he remained pope in the years following his elections because, at least in the external forum, he did not stand up for his office or oppose the antipopes.*"

Without exception, nearly everyone who considers the events regarding Siri is perplexed by his inability to fight the crimes within the church. However, there is much evidence to suggest that Siri was under constant threats his entire life, including the prospect of horrific crimes against his flock. Perhaps he could be labeled as a poor Pope or a weak Pope. Nevertheless, it would appear that he maintained the hope of one day reclaiming the papacy (he nearly was elected over JPI in 1977 and vigorously lobbied for the chair). While we are free to question Siri's prudential judgment, it is difficult to comprehend the weights he bore on his shoulders. Perhaps he recognized how far the cancer had spread in the church and felt abandoned without recourse. It is a fact that he was drugged throughout Vatican II, as he even collapsed and went into convulsions (the only time this happened in his life) during his one moment to speak. Peter denied Christ three times, but he did not lose the Papal chair. Prophetically, there is much evidence, particularly from A. C. Emmerich, which accurately foretells these circumstances. Is it conceivable, in your opinion, that Siri always remained Pope, though he was exiled as a captive in his own diocese? It is not without precedent for a pope to handpick a successor before his death. It has happened twice before. Please offer your thoughts on the subject. Is it absolutely,
unequivocally impossible that he remained pope?

In Christ,

Mr. T S

 

MHFM: Yes, in our view it is definite that he did not remain pope.  A validly elected pope loses his office by resignation or by adherence to heresy.  We give our explanation for our position on this matter on the radio program.  We encourage you to listen to it in the Archived Radio Programs, if you haven’t heard it yet.  Among the reasons we give, Siri publicly accepted the Vatican II antipopes, thus proving that he regarded them as the true popes.  He said the funeral homily for Antipope John Paul I.  He was pictured on the balcony as John Paul II emerged as the newly elected “pope.”  He worked to bring Lefebvre into full union with Antipope John Paul II and Vatican II.  He accepted the New Mass in his diocese.  It’s utterly ridiculous to assert that he remained pope.  In addition, it’s counterproductive.  We have a slam dunk case against the Vatican II antipopes which is based on sure and unassailable doctrinal grounds and arguments.  No one can refute it; if one tries to debate it he gets blown away because the facts and the heresies cannot be answered.  By focusing on the doctrinally untenable position that Cardinal Siri remained pope when, in the external forum, he manifested allegiance to the antipopes, one provides enemies of the truth with an easy way to attack and avoid the unshakable doctrinal arguments which obliterate their position.  It hurts the case of traditional Catholics against the Counter Church.  Here’s the quote from the Biography of Marcel Lefebvre to which reference was made on the radio program:

 

Bishop Tissier De Mallerais, The Biography of Marcel Lefebvre, p. 508: “On Nov. 18, through an initiative of Cardinal Siri, John Paul II received the archbishop [Lefebvre] who said he was ready ‘accept the Council in the light of Tradition.’  [The footnote says:]… The cardinal [Siri] flattered himself with having brought Archbishop Lefebvre to ‘accept the whole Council,’ but the reservation expressed by the Archbishop was of capital importance.”

 

According to this, Siri not only worked to bring Lefebvre into union with Antipope John Paul II, but “flattered himself” that he got Lefebvre to accept all of Vatican II. 

 

Finally, you bring up the point that St. Peter denied Christ three times.  Our opponent in the debate brought that up, and we responded by pointing out that St. Peter wasn’t made the pope until after the Resurrection, as defined by Vatican I.  In Matthew 16 Jesus promised Peter that He would build His Church upon Him, but John 21 (after the Resurrection) is when He actually gave St. Peter jurisdiction over the Church.

 

Pope Pius IX, Vatican I, Sess. 4, Chap. 1: “And upon Simon Peter alone Jesus after His resurrection conferred the jurisdiction of the highest pastor and rector over his entire fold, saying: ‘Feed my lambs…’ (John 21:15).” (Denz. 1822)

 

It was somewhat amusing to note that, after our opponent in the debate was completely refuted on this point, he tried to downplay it by saying something like: “that really wasn’t a big matter of contention anyway.”

 

Staggering implications

 

Brothers,

 

It will be interesting to see how the SSPX spins this one!  I don't think Bishop Williamson

will be able to pass it off as just another example of Ben16's liberal-infected mind.

After all, according to the bishop, he is "good hearted, a dear pope".    

 

T Quinlan

 

MHFM: Unfortunately, if they’ve seen all the other heresies and still accept him as a Catholic then I don’t think this one will put them over the edge.  If they have accepted all the others, they are very much in the grip of the evil one.

 

----

Thank you for you great clarification on Limbo!  We needed the quotes from the great Fathers of the Church.  Benedict XVI again overturned the whole teachings of the great and holy councils,and your verifying of all the teachings, gives us ammunition to use against all these liberals who will argue with us. The liberal media just reported the "new and false" facts of Bendicts XVI, and made him into the "right" teachings, like to 2 quotes you used at the beginning of your article-the Fox news one said "the conclusion of the many factors they considered" WHAT factors? They are so vague because they are wrong.

Thank you again for a great article!

 

Sincerely,

Kathryn Rubio

Solon, OH

 

Comment

 

Dear MHFM,  

 

I just wanted to let you know first, before going any further, that your last radio program was wonderful. Especially the story of the Japanese Martyrs and the question regarding depression. I also wanted to thank you for the quote which you placed on your web site (28APR07) under Doctrine. I have been having a hard time with this issue, and couldn't find anything that the Church had written on this…

 

May Our Lord and Savior JESUS CHRIST and the Immaculate Heart of His Mother Mary be with you,
                                                                              

 Charlie Plante
 

Attack

 

SUBJ: HERETICS

 

YOU !! most "holierthanthou" "brothers..Yep, you 2 are really brothers so that makes you capable of using the "brother" part of your names. YOU are the true heretics!! I am appalled at what you have been putting out in the name of MY Catholic Church. You need true forgiveness because you have been successful in pulling my 93 year old mother away from Mass for the first time since she became a convert in 1946. She somehow started getting "crap" from your most vile monastery( I'm sure it's a business only) and for some stupid reason she is falling for your lies. She missed Mass on Easter Sunday for the first time EVER ! Aren't you proud of your "money-making" selves?? We have discovered that you are not a true monastery and are definitely NOT associated with the Benedictine Monasteries. I have armed myself with plenty of writings to try and prove to her how FALSE you two are.. I'm sure you have a FAMILY of heretics working for you too. Money is the "root of all evil " and you are truly EVIL.  My family is truly sickened by what you send out and I pray that God will reward you JUSTLY- "NOT".  I pray that we can save our mother before her life ends. She now doesn't even believe that the Eucharist is real. You are truly Sick,Sick people are are anti-catholic and real "tools of the devil".

 

MHFM: You obviously don't have a clue about the Catholic Faith, and you lack the good will to uncover your ignorance. You are not even remotely Catholic.  You probably haven't even read one papal encyclical, probably couldn't even name the first council of the Church, or explain what the Papacy is.  You are a vile heretic, totally blind to the truth, and headed for Hell. 

 

We sell our material for probably for less money than any organization in the world (e.g., DVDs for less than a dollar with no shipping charge), which shows how utterly baseless and malicious your false accusation is.  By the way, money is not the root of all evil, as you say; it's the "desire of money" which is the root of all evil (1 Tim. 6:10).  You are a prime example of a person of bad will, which is why you fail to respond to even one specific point we bring forward and instead you focus on launching easily refuted personal attacks. You are a prime example of why God sends people to Hell forever: you hate the truth. 

 

Why bother?

 

I recently returned to the Catholic Church after a void of 30 + years. I am trying to be good and during those years I made an effort to be good during the last 15 or so. Reading your site and the fact that only one in one hundren thousand might reach Heaven and the rest go to hell, I wonder why poeple like myself and so many others are even bother to try to get to heave. We have no chance. I thought that Christ said that all we had to do to reach Heaven was to believe He was God. No amount of good works could get us in Heaven. If the Rapture is coming, so few people would be taken up, that no would would know it came and went.

Help me out here.

 

Holly

 

MHFM: First of all, it’s quite surprising that you would say that you “returned to the Catholic Church” when you clearly hold Protestant views of salvation.  You thought that Christ said that all we had to do was believe that He is God?  That’s pure Protestantism.  A man is justified by works, and not by faith alone (James 2:24).  Belief in Christ is necessary, of course, but He also said you must hear the Church (Mt. 18:17) under pain of damnation, and that He will render to every man “according to His works” (Mt. 16:27).  The Bible also clearly teaches that all who die in grave sin are lost, and it specifically mentions fornicators, adulterers, drunkards, etc. (1 Cor. 6:9).  Christ also includes with adulterers those who lust in their hearts (Mt. 5:28).  Thus, to say that all one has to do to reach Heaven is to believe in God couldn’t be farther from Biblical truth and Catholic teaching.

 

Now, to your rather pessimistic outlook (why bother?), we would say, first of all, that if you don’t bother you are definitely going to be miserable for all of eternity.  Hence, even if it were excruciatingly difficult and painful to reach Heaven, you should do your utmost to do it because eternal Hell is INFINITELY worse than any effort you might make here on Earth.  But the truth is that for those who truly believe in God, accept His full truth, don’t compromise it and want to do the right thing, it’s not hard to reach Heaven.  As Christ said, “My yoke is sweet and My burden light” (Mt. 11:30).  The reason that so few make it is not because it’s that hard, but because they refuse to believe the simple and easy things He has revealed, and do the simple and easy things He has commanded.  Those who do what God wants and believe what He says realize that they are much happier than they were before.

 

Friday’s Radio Program

 

MHFM: Friday’s radio program has been uploaded to the Archived Radio Programs.  It is also linked to here, with a description:

 

April 27th, 2007 Radio Program [58 min. – discusses: the incredible sufferings of the Japanese martyrs, the question of whether Siri remained pope, a person defending Sr. Faustina’s devotion, questions about the Joint Declaration, Fr. Ryan, depression and more, and an in-depth discussion of John Paul II’s incredible teaching that man is Christ, with a special and revealing look at specifics from Evangelium Vitae, Redemptor Hominis and other encyclicals.]

 

Novus Ordo “bishop” on SSPX

 

On Saturday, April 14, 2007, the Newchurch Bishop of Altoona-Johnstown, Pennsylvania, Joseph Adamec, gave an emphatic No! to an "Indult" Mass in the Newchurch diocese, even if a new "indult" were issued by Newvatican. Expressing the opinion of the bishops of the United States, Adamec said that the "Indult" Mass is only a concession to the schismatic Society of St. Pius X (SSPX). Adamec said that he might be willing to make available a Novus Ordo service partially in Latin, but not the "Indult" Mass. He said that if the "Indult" Mass were made available, it would signal a reversion to an outdated religion.

 

In…

 

MHFM: It’s interesting to hear what these apostates are up to.  It’s also another example of a Novus Ordo “bishop” labeling the Society of St. Pius X schismatic.

 

Recent radio shows archived

 

Dear Brs.

Do you have an available tape of Friday's live radio show (4/20/07)?

Bernadette

--

Hi brothers,

I got your new book and i'm really enjoying it. I missed your radio program that youhad last week and i'm wondering if you are going to put it in the "Achieved Radio Programs" for download.

thanks,
Glenn

 

MHFM: We have just archived our six most recent radio shows.  They are found here: Archived Radio Programs.  They can also be found by clicking on the “Radio” section of the Guide on our website.   We will be adding descriptions of what these shows contain in the next few days.  So far we have descriptions of three of the most recent shows.

 

Realizing we don’t have a pope

 

Dear Brothers Michael and Peter:


I just finished listening to your radio program of August 22.  Although I have suspected it for some time, I have not been willing to admit it to myself, We do not have a Pope!  This program filled in the blanks, enough to convince me of this fact.  I became acquainted with the writings of Father Feeny many years ago, and did not have any trouble accepting EENS and One Baptism… I already have some of your VHS tapes.  I intend to order the DVD set in a few minutes.  I forgot to tune in to your program last Friday, and was disappointed to find that it was not archived.  I will make it a point to listen and record it this Friday.  Are you going to archive them also?  They make great podcasts, and I am able to listen to something worthwhile at work. Keep up the good work.  Thank you again so much, for so much.

Our Lady, Pray for us,

Charles H. Ivers
Benbrook, Texas

 

Book/Jurisdiction

 

Dear MHFM:

 

I read your new book and it is great!  It is "making the rounds" of our friends and relatives.  However, I noticed it doesn't address the problem of no jurisdiction for many of the "group" and independent priests today; even with the few who are truly solid in the Faith, this is an issue. I noticed your quote of Pius IX, Graves ac diuturnae (#4) March 23, 1875, which seems to condemn those who operate without jurisdiction, and I am wondering what your thoughts are on this issue in general, and how the Pius IX quote may or may not apply with regard to our situation today among the so-called Traditionalist priests, assuming they are solid in every regard otherwise, yet appearing to have no jurisdiction or "a legitimate mission" (an official sanction)….

 

-Bruce

 

MHFM: We thought about including a short section on jurisdiction in the book, but we decided against it.  The book is primarily about the Vatican II sect.  While it does cover many issues which pertain to “traditionalist” controversies, the issues covered in the book are “traditionalist” controversies vis-à-vis the Vatican II sect.  There simply wasn’t room (nor was it necessarily appropriate since it would shift off topic) to include a section on every controversy among traditionalists.  For instance, we could have included something on the claim that Lefebvre’s priestly orders are invalid because he was ordained and consecrated by one alleged to have been a Freemason (Cardinal Lienart), but you get the idea.

 

Regarding our thoughts on jurisdiction, we will post something on this topic.  Not too long ago, after having been sidetracked on other matters for some time (and still getting sidetracked quite frequently), a start has been able to be made on one article.  After that particular article is posted, something else on jurisdiction will be done, which will hopefully clarify some misunderstandings on that issue.

 

On New Book

 

I forgot to tell you I finally finished the book you and Brother Michael wrote.  I bought it mostly for a reference book...but after I got through the first 10 pages, it was anything but "singing to the choir"....I couldn't put the book down.....there was so much information that I didn't know about....or I've heard you mention on the website....but with greater detail in the book, I actually understood it.  The short section that touched on divorce really made me lose sleep....I think divorce and remarriage is so integrated into our society that, even though I know it's completely wrong and terrible, I've become numb to it (especially since I was born in 76). 

 

Anyway, the ironic point is that I bought it to be able to defend the truth to others quickly, but it actually was perfectly for me....And what seems as such a big book, didn't seem big enough at the end.

 

Thank you! Thank you! Thank you!  And may God reward you for perseverance in the truth! 

 

Teri Thurman

 

SSPX radio program

 

Dear Brothers Dimond

I was listening to your radio programme on the SSPX and I couldn't help but agree with all the comments made by yourselves, your guest speaker and other callers. These comments concurred with many of my own experiences when I was attending an SSPX chapel in England. I was involved with the SSPX for a couple of years a few years ago, before I had come to explicitly accept the sedevacantist position and the necessity of water baptism and membership of the Catholic Church for salvation. Being involved in the SSPX delayed my coming to accept those positions as the SSPX propaganda was aimed at condemning
sedevacantists and 'Feeneyites' as heretics and beyond the pale.  So there was no room for discussion of these issues privately with priests or other Faithful or publicly.  Somebody who was vocal on the salvation dogma was condemned as a heretic in a slanging match with the District Superior in the Church hall after Mass one Sunday. For the SSPX, a questioning of their position can lead to their many tactics to freeze you out, such as withholding the Sacraments from you
and/or calumnising you among the faithful.  This behaviour put me on my guard and did not provide an incentive to debate.

But what also concerned me was the cultishness of the SSPX: the almost idolatry of the faithful towards the Priests and Lefebvre, who to them
appeared the arbiters of all Catholic Truth.  I also was concerned that the SSPX wanted to keep Catholics dependent totally on them.  For example, they said Catholics could not go elsewhere to the Indult Mass, even though the Indult offered the same 1962 mass permitted by the Diocesan authorities they claimed to recognise! I was amazed that a couple who were getting married were advised by the local SSPX to get married in a  civil Registry Office rather than the 'Conciliar
Church' and   receive a blessing from the SSPX. In this way, the SSPX informed this couple that there would be less paperwork for the SSPX than if they conducted the wedding ceremony themselves. I also became concerned at the totally novel innovation of 'Canonical commissions' in which the SSPX has taken over powers reserved to Rome concerning granting annulments and other adjudications.

Finally, I became concerned about the self aggrandisement and inward lookingness of the SSPX.  From my observations, the faithful were
often treated as fodder or drones to serve the priests, often with unreasonable impositions placed on them. For this reason, I noticed
there was quite a turnover of people who would come along, offer to get involved, but would subsequently leave in acrimonious circumstances due to the unreasonable cultish behaviour of the priests or other Faithful. For example, within days of my first inquiry about the SSPX, the District Superior telephoned me to ask if I could drop everything and go to the SSPX school to teach!  This would have been a live in position. I was even offered a room at the SSPX District headquarters, and somebody else I knew was invited to live there! Fortunately, I was cautious of such offers to get further involved, as I feared that a fall out with the priests would also leave me homeless and without a job, as has happened to others who made sacrifices to help them.  I nonetheless gave a lot of help to the SSPX, and was the first assistant editor of their new District Magazine. However, I found the contradictory position of the SSPX on so many issues, and the cultishness of that organisation, impossible to reconcile with Catholic truth and practice. When I left the SSPX, I withdrew permission for them to reproduce my copyrighted writings on their website but to my astonishment they refused to do so.  They only complied after I complained to the webhosting company who took down the website because it breached conditions of their webhosting contract.

Thank you for highlighting for listeners the contradictory positions of the SSPX and the fact that, sadly, they are to be avoided.

Best wishes

Gerard

----


Good show… The Saint Pius church topic hit upon reality at the community level.  I personally have drawn conclusions about the community level in reference to the sedevacantism position but haven't heard any discussion of it.  I think your discussion was helpful.  I have no history with the St. Pius churches having grown up in NW Chicago.  Knowing that these churches almost have it right but don't is a curiosity.  Being a lone Catholic I do imagine what life was like in history when entire communities were Catholic.

Maybe your last show could be posted on the web site so I may listen to it again….

Rob Urbasic
Denver, Colorado

 

Barrage of E-mails about new limbo heresy

 

Vatican buries Limbo :

 

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070420/ts_nm/pope_limbo_dc

 

Fa

---

Brothers,

This new belief of the Vatican II church that says that babies who die without baptism go to heaven anyway, is a direct attack on the Blessed Mother andher Immaculate Conception. They might as well declare EVERYONE to be conceived without sin.

Bridget

---

B16 threw out Limbo with the bathwater. Why fight abortion then—if unbatized infants are going to heaven—you are doing God a favor to Abort your kid—is the logic!! Why chance a soul to come in the world—because the majority of souls living do not go to heaven [Traditional teaching]—so you are doing a good thing then—because isn’t the ultimate goal to get all souls to heaven? B16 just gave now heretical approval for the fast track method!

 

Pope revises Catholic teaching on 'limbo'

Pontiff approves report saying there is hope for unbaptized babies

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/nationworld/bal-pope0420,0,6597293.story?coll=bal-nationworld-headlines

 

Pope Revises 'Limbo,' Says There Is Hope for Unbaptized Babies

 

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,267420,00.html

 

JY

---

Pope revises 'limbo' for babies - Yahoo! News

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070420/ap_on_re_eu/vatican_limbo

 

SN

---

How much longer will Our Lord be able to stay the Hand of God the Father?  B-16 has just openly destroyed the reason for the Catholic Faith in his position that Limbo does not exist & that Baptism is only a protestant rite, bringing one into the faith community.  I know he is (an or THE) Anti-Christ...

 

Jennifer

----

Pope revises 'limbo' for babies - Yahoo! News

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070420/ap_on_re_eu/vatican_limbo

 

Lida Lewis

 

MHFM: This is undoubtedly a huge scandal both for those people inside the Vatican II sect and for Protestants, etc.  One headline we read said: “Catholic Church reverses its teaching.”  But for those of us who know that Antipope Benedict XVI is an antipope, and that the Vatican II sect is not the Catholic Church, it is a huge vindication.  We wonder what those heretics who said that sedevacantism is absurd are saying right about now…

 

Searching and open

 

Dear Brothers in Christ

 

    Today, I just recieved, by fate, a copy of your free DVD in the mail...  After watching the first 5 minutes, I had to go to website... its overwhelming!  I have much studying to do at your website, and so many questions...I was raised in the Post Vatican II church, and within  a very old fashioned and devout Catholic Family, thank God.  Something always seemed to "be missing" within my church... but I was lucky in that my family's pre-vatican II devotions, made up for it.  At a young age I knew I had a vocation, but it took me until I was 37 to go off and pursue it.  I was with The Servants of the Paraclete, and The Vocationist Fathers, as well as doing visits and retreats with The OFM's, Norbertines and others...  What I experienced there, sickened my soul, and well, pretty much murdered my vocation.  Yes I spoke up to Church authorities, and was pretty much blown off or told to shut up, I was pretty much advised not to speak about the things I witnessed in religious life, because I would be responsible for scandalizing others' faith... 

   You have no idea what it does to me to sit in church every week, surrounded by so many good

souls, knowing that wolves are tending the flock... and not knowing what to do about it, or worse yet, believing that I must be the one at fault, that I must be so outside the church that I cannot feel the devotion, love and respect of God in my church anymore.  For love of God, my priest even criticizes the rosary as being Idolatry, and openly discourages devotion to the Blessed Mother... 

    I'm sorry, I'm digressing...  I do not know where this new revelation will lead me, but I want to thank you

for all the information on your website, that I will be reading in the next few days...  I know that the Catholic Church must condemn you as heretics, Ha! Ha!  Thats kind of ironic isn't it?  But after what I've seen with my own eyes, within the Church, I'm going to "listen" with an open mind, and discerning heart.