| Recent Featured Videos and Articles | Eastern “Orthodoxy” Refuted | How To Avoid Sin | The Antichrist Identified! | What Fake Christians Get Wrong About Ephesians | Why So Many Can't Believe | “Magicians” Prove A Spiritual World Exists | Amazing Evidence For God | News Links |
| Vatican II “Catholic” Church Exposed | Steps To Convert | Outside The Church There Is No Salvation | E-Exchanges | The Holy Rosary | Padre Pio | Traditional Catholic Issues And Groups | Help Save Souls: Donate |  |
This section of our website (which is updated daily) contains some less formal – and short – e-mail exchanges that we’ve had which we feel may be of value to our readers. 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. This section also frequently includes, not only e-exchanges we have, but also our notes, updates and comments. Section containing some important recent posts. E-Exchange Archives.
This is one of the worst Vatican II Sect churches in the country.
On Feb. 2, 2026, Davide Pagliarani, the leader of the Lefebvrist Society of St. Pius X, announced that the SSPX plans to consecrate new bishops for their group on July 1. Remember, the SSPX claims to recognize the authority of the Vatican II antipopes, including Leo XIV. They even have the audacity to denounce sedevacantists who correctly point out that Leo XIV has no authority. According to canon 1382 of the 1983 Code of Canon Law (promulgated by Antipope John Paul II, whom the SSPX also claims to recognize): “A bishop who consecrates someone a bishop and the person who receives such a consecration from a bishop without a pontifical mandate incur an automatic (latae sententiae) excommunication reserved to the Apostolic See.”
Hence, the SSPX not only has no authorization to consecrate new bishops, but the one who consecrates and the one consecrated will both be automatically excommunicated by the Vatican II Sect. Nevertheless, the SSPX has announced its intention to consecrate the bishops anyway because they didn’t like Leo XIV’s recent response to their demands. Their official communiqué stated: “After much prayerful reflection, and having received a letter from the Holy See in recent days that in no way responds to our requests, Father Pagliarani, supported by the unanimous opinion of his Council, believes that the objective state of grave necessity in which souls find themselves requires such a decision.”
So, if their “pope” doesn’t give them what they want, they will just take it or do it anyway. This proves once again (what we’ve pointed out many times in the past) that at this time the positions of the SSPX are obstinately schismatic, inconsistent, insincere, and absurd. The SSPX is, sadly, a sect. They claim to recognize the hierarchy of the Vatican II “Church”, yet they have remained obstinately independent of their “Catholic hierarchy” for approximately 50 years. They lie to the public by solemnly professing that Leo XIV is the pope while they act as if he has no authority and treat him as if he’s nothing more than a mascot. The truth, of course, is that Leo XIV is a notorious heretic and an antipope who has no authority, but the SSPX won’t take that true position because they would lose a large number of their supporters and benefactors. The priests and leaders of the SSPX, as well as their obstinate supporters, are phonies who lie to God, including during the canon of the Mass.
The SSPX also takes the ridiculously inconsistent position that canonizations were binding throughout Church history, but ceased to be binding after Vatican II (even though the solemn formula that was used before Vatican II is also used by the Vatican II antipopes)! Few explanations of the current crisis are more absurd. Despite the inconsistency and absurdity of their positions at this time, the SSPX continues to gain many supporters and ordain many priests because the vast majority of “traditionalists” don’t care about the faith. They only care about externals, community, status, etc. They don’t care about God’s word. The fact that the SSPX has so many priests and followers is not a good fruit because they lack the faith and do not display obedience to God’s word. Since they reject God’s word and take false positions, their large numbers are in fact a deception. There are many Eastern “Orthodox” sects and other non-Catholic entities that ordain many priests, have many followers, etc. Their ordinations and followers are not good fruits since they deny the faith and disobey God’s word.
1 Samuel 15:22-23- “And Samuel said: Doth the Lord desire holocausts and victims, and not rather that the voice of the Lord should be obeyed? For obedience is better than sacrifices: and to hearken rather than to offer the fat of rams. For rebellion is like the sin of witchcraft, and stubbornness is like idolatry... Because therefore thou hast rejected the word of the Lord, the Lord hath also rejected thee…”
As we’ve documented many times, the SSPX also teaches the blatant heresy that souls can be saved in non-Christian religions. That position is directly contrary to many definitive pronouncements of the popes, as well as the teaching of Scripture and all the doctors of the Church. It’s a clear heresy, yet the stubborn supporters of the SSPX don’t care because they don’t have the faith. They only care about externals, and thus they cannot know or please God. We might have more to say about this development, but these videos cover the problems with the SSPX.
Fr. Ripperger, SSPX, FSSP, CMRI, Etc. Promote Grave Errors – Refuted By Cistercian Theologian
SSPX, CMRI & Francis vs. Powerful Papal Teaching
The Truth About The SSPX, The SSPX-MC, And Similar Groups
For a true explanation of what’s happening in Rome, see this video and our other videos:
Calvinists believe in Limited Atonement. That’s the idea that Christ did not shed His blood for all men but only for the elect. A number of verses contradict this heresy. 1 John 2:2 is a good example.
1 John 2:2: “He is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world (ὅλου τοῦ κόσμου).”
St. John teaches that Christ died not just for “our sins” (meaning the sins of the faithful), but also for the sins of the whole world. This is clear enough. However, this passage becomes even more potent in refuting Calvinism when you consider how St. John uses the word κόσμος (meaning “world”) in his epistle. St. John repeatedly uses the word κόσμος (“world”) to describe unbelievers and the world that is outside of God or hostile to Him. Here are four examples to demonstrate the point.
1 John 3:1: “See what kind of love the Father has given to us, that we should be called children of God; and so we are. The reason why the world does not know us (ὁ κόσμος οὐ γινώσκει ἡμᾶς) is that it did not know him.”
In 1 John 3:1 “the world” refers to those who do not believe or know God.
1 John 3:13: “Do not be surprised, brothers, that the world (ὁ κόσμος) hates you.”
In 1 John 3:13 “the world” refers to those who are anti-Christian.
1 John 4:4: “Little children, you are from God and have overcome them, for he who is in you is greater than he who is in the world (μείζων ἐστὶν ὁ ἐν ὑμῖν ἢ ὁ ἐν τῷ κόσμῳ).”
In 1 John 4:4 “the world” refers to people who are not “from God”, which means that they have not been born again and entered the Church.
1 John 5:19: “We know that we are from God, and the whole world lies in the power of the evil one (ὁ κόσμος ὅλος ἐν τῷ πονηρῷ κεῖται).”
In 1 John 5:19 “the world” refers to those who are under the power of the Devil and not in the Kingdom of God on earth.
Hence, when St. John says in 1 John 2:2 that Christ is the propitiation not only for our sins, but for the sins of “the whole world”, that obviously includes people who will never believe and are not among the elect. To claim otherwise is absurd. Calvinism is clearly contrary to the teaching of the Bible. However, the Catholic position is true and biblical.
Pope Paul III, Council of Trent, Decree on Justification, Sess. 6, Chap. 3: “But although Christ died for all, yet not all receive the benefit of His death, but those only to whom the merit of His Passion is communicated.”
On Jan. 25, 2026, Antipope Leo XIV held another mortally sinful ecumenical prayer event. It was an ecumenical vespers service in the Basilica of St. Paul Outside the Walls. It included Anglicans, various Protestants, and Eastern “Orthodox”. Our video Vatican II Is A New Religion shows that to participate in such a joint prayer service with notorious heretics and the representatives of non-Catholic sects has always been forbidden by Catholic teaching. Of course, we hope for the conversion of people who belong to those sects. However, such activity is mortally sinful and a manifestation of heresy. It’s worth noting that the Anglicans involved accept female “priests”, contraception, divorce and “remarriage”, same-sex “unions”, and more.
If his joint prayer service weren’t bad enough, during the event Antipope Leo XIV gave a homily in which he perverted St. Paul’s teaching in Ephesians 4. He applied the teaching about the unity of the Church of Christ to the heretics and the schismatics. He proclaimed that they share the same faith. He also stated: “We are one! We already are!”
Leo XIV, Homily During Ecumenical Vespers Service, Basilica of St Paul Outside the Walls, Sunday, 25 January 2026, with Anglicans, “Orthodox” and Other Protestants: "In the passage from the Letter to the Ephesians chosen as the theme for this year’s Week of Prayer, we repeatedly hear the adjective one’: one body, one Spirit, one hope, one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God (cf. Eph 4:4-6). Dear brothers and sisters, how can these inspired words not touch us deeply? How can our hearts not burn within us when we hear them?
Yes, ‘we share the same faith in the one and only God, the Father of all people; we confess together the one Lord and true Son of God, Jesus Christ, and the one Holy Spirit, who inspires us and impels us towards full unity and the common witness to the Gospel’ (Apostolic Letter In Unitate Fidei, 23 November 2025, 12). We are one! We already are! Let us recognize it, experience it and make it visible!” (https://www.vatican.va/content/leo-xiv/en/homilies/2026/documents/20260125-vespri-unita-cristiani.html)
This of course is manifestly heretical. Protestants, Eastern “Orthodox” and others who dissent from the Papacy or any Catholic dogma have no faith. They are also alien to the Church of Christ, and we don’t hold communion with them. For more on this matter, see the quotes below and this video/article.
Pope Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum (# 9), June 29, 1896: “But he who dissents in one point of divinely revealed truth absolutely rejects all faith, since he thereby refuses to honor God as the supreme truth and the formal motive of faith.”
Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, Bull Cantate Domino, 1441: “It [the Holy Roman Church] condemns, rejects and anathematizes all who think opposed and contrary things, and declares them to be aliens from the Body of Christ, which is the Church.”
Pope Pius XI, Mortalium Animos (# 11), Jan. 6, 1928: “Furthermore, in this one Church of Christ no man can be or remain who does not accept, recognize and obey the authority and supremacy of Peter and his legitimate successors.”
Pope Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum (# 9), June 29, 1896: “The practice of the Church has always been the same, and that with the consenting judgment [i.e. consensus] of the holy fathers who certainly were accustomed to hold as having no part of Catholic communion and as banished from the Church whoever had departed in even the least way from the doctrine proposed by the authentic Magisterium.”
Leo XIV is a manifestly heretical antipope. Those who ignore all of these facts and continue to regard him as the pope will be condemned. In his homily, Leo XIV also referred to his recent “Apostolic Letter” In Unitate Fidei (dated to Nov. 23, 2025). We have a post about that letter: Leo XIV’s New “Apostolic Letter” In Unitate Fidei: An Ecumenical Abomination. We show that his document In Unitate Fidei teaches the same heresy that he manifested in his ecumenical vespers service. That heresy is the Vatican II position that Protestants, “Orthodox” and others who reject Catholic teaching belong to the true Church of Christ – a false position condemned by the Catholic Church.
Dear Brothers,
Just want to share a few quotes with you from a book I'm reading. A priest wrote this in 1871, and it's amazing how he harbored no delusions about what was already going on in his day. He describes the activity of the devil from a historical perspective.
The Devil by Fr. Delaporte (1871) Page 117. Speaking of the secret societies, Delaporte says: “‘Our final end,’ wrote one of the high dignitaries of that gloomy empire, in 1819, ‘our final end is that of Voltaire and the French Revolution, the annihilation of Catholicity, and even of the Christian idea for ever.’ This, then is their object. Another will give a sketch of their proceedings: ‘It is decided in our councils that we want no more Christians. Let us make no martyrs, but make vice popular amongst the masses. Let them breath it through the five senses. Make hearts vicious and you will have no more Catholics…’
“‘Satan and his imps have a plan, the existence of which it is not hard to discover, nor its development to follow: to break up the society of which the Man-God is the Head, and to substitute for it a society governed by the prince of darkness.
“This mystery of iniquity is partially accomplished; the Catholic Church is not crumbling away and will not crumble a way; but the infernal church is being formed and disciplined. It has hatred for its bond. It gives the first posts to those who most hate Jesus Christ and His mystical body; it swells its ranks with the indifferent themselves, because he who is not for Jesus Christ is against Him.”
Page 122: "It is very natural that the occult sciences should be practiced in the darkness of occult societies; what is certain from all that has transpired of their machinations and the solemn decisions of the Church, is, that they are the instruments of the infernal powers in their struggle against Christ and His faithful people; they are the Synagogue of Satan , the earthly army of anti-Christianity, hateful, hypocritical, murderous. The secret societies are the central focus of revolution, and ‘REVOLUTION, said Pius IX, in his encyclical of December 8, 1853) is INSPIRED BY SATAN HIMSELF. Its object is to destroy from top to bottom, the edifice of Christianity, and to reconstruct on its ruins the social order of Paganism.’ Paganism is the public reign of the evil spirits substituted for that of God.”
And here we are!
Lee Ann
Psalm 106 contains some very sad verses about how the people mingled with the heathens and became like them. As a consequence they sacrificed their own sons and daughters and polluted the land with their blood. This is analogous to the sin of abortion in our day. It often occurs because people fornicate and act like the pagans around them. They then shed the blood of their own sons and daughters and pollute the land, similar to those described in Psalm 106.
Psalm 106:35-40- “… they mixed with the heathens and learned to do as they did. They served their idols, which became a snare to them. They sacrificed their sons and their daughters to the demons; they poured out innocent blood, the blood of their sons and daughters, whom they sacrificed to the idols of Canaan, and the land was polluted with blood. Thus they became unclean by their acts, and played the whore in their deeds. And the Lord was exceedingly angry with his people: and he abhorred his inheritance.”
This is one of the quotes that’s included in our recent video (Sam Shamoun: Ecumenical Fake Christian Exposed). It further contradicts those people who think that it’s not really a big deal for Protestants and the Eastern “Orthodox” to deny the Papacy.
St. Robert Bellarmine, De Romano Pontifice, Book 1, Chap. 10: “For it is in truth not a simple error, but a pernicious heresy to deny the primacy of Blessed Peter instituted by Christ.”
Sam Shamoun: Ecumenical Fake Christian Exposed
Sincere Question: How is your position that Heretics lose office instantaneously not Donatism?
Dershogun
In charity, your incorrect understanding of Donatism has led you to conflate distinct issues. Donatism was the false belief that wicked or unholy ministers could not validly perform sacraments. That’s false. It’s not the traditional teaching of the Catholic Church because a wicked person or someone outside the Church can validly perform a sacrament (e.g. baptism) if he observes the requisite matter, form, etc. Donatists also held that the Church only consisted of the morally pure. That’s also false because not every grave sin (but only schism, heresy or apostasy) severs a man from the Church.
Pope Pius XII, Mystici Corporis Christi (#23), June 29, 1943: “For not every offense, although it may be a grave evil, is such as by its very own nature to sever a man from the Body of the Church, as does schism or heresy or apostasy.”
So, the Catholic Church rejects the position of the Donatists that unholy people cannot perform sacraments or be part of the Church. But the Catholic Church teaches that if someone denies the faith (and is a heretic) he automatically loses membership in the Church and therefore cannot rule it. The position that heretics automatically lose membership and authority in the Church is not only found in authoritative papal teaching but was articulated by the very doctors of the Church who condemned Donatism. So, our position is Catholic and has nothing to do with Donatism.
Pope St. Celestine, To The Clergy And People Of Constantinople: “Nevertheless, lest the sentence of him who had already called down a divine sentence upon himself should appear to have force even for a time, the authority of Our Apostolic See has openly ordained that no bishop, cleric, or Christian of any profession, who were deposed from their position or from communion by Nestorius and those of his ilk from the time [ex quo] they began to preach heresy, is to be seen as either deposed or excommunicated. But all these have been and until now remain in Our communion, because he who stumbled in preaching such things was not able to depose or remove anyone.”
Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, Bull Cantate Domino, 1441: “It [the Holy Roman Church] condemns, rejects and anathematizes all who think opposed and contrary things, and declares them to be aliens from the Body of Christ, which is the Church.”
St. Robert Bellarmine, De Romano Pontifice, Book 2, Chap. 30: “For when those Fathers say that heretics lose jurisdiction, they do not adduce any human laws, none of which perhaps even existed at that time on this matter, but they argue from the nature of heresy. The Council of Constance, on the other hand, does not speak except concerning the excommunicated; that is, concerning those who through a sentence of the Church have lost jurisdiction. Heretics, however, even before an excommunication are outside the Church and deprived of all jurisdiction, for they are condemned by their own judgment, as the Apostle teaches in Titus 3. In other words, they have been cut off from the body of the Church without excommunication, as Jerome explains.”
St. Robert Bellarmine, De Romano Pontifice, Book 2, Chap. 30: “... a manifestly heretical Pope automatically ceases to be the Pope and the head just as he automatically ceases to be a Christian and a member of the body of the Church, and that for this reason he may be judged and punished by the Church. This is the judgment of all the ancient Fathers, who teach that manifest heretics immediately lose all jurisdiction...”
St. Robert Bellarmine, De Ecclesia Militante, Chap. 10: “For that reason [Popes] Celestine and Nicholas, in the passages cited, say that a heretical bishop, from the time he began to preach heresies, was not able to loose or bind anyone…”
Great Channel
Sam Shamoun: Ecumenical Fake Christian Exposed
Great video, great channel.
AL Chemist
Video
Sam Shamoun: Ecumenical Fake Christian Exposed
Another awesome video from MHFM.
P S M
Proves
Sam Shamoun: Ecumenical Fake Christian Exposed
An essential exposure. This video proves that one cannot defeat the darkness of Islam while remaining in the darkness of heresy. Knowing the errors of the Quran is useless for salvation if one rejects the Dogmas of the True Catholic Church. Shamoun's position is logically and spiritually bankrupt. Thank you MHFM for your tireless work; after 7 years in darkness, God performed a miracle in my life exactly 70 days before my conversion. May Our Lord and Our Queen protect the MHFM for leading souls to the true Light. I encourage everyone to study the information provided on the… webpage. Standing from Portugal.
Soldierofourrique
Comment
Sam Shamoun: Ecumenical Fake Christian Exposed
Great video. Thank you brothers. God bless.
Petervaclavek
Shocking
Sam Shamoun: Ecumenical Fake Christian Exposed
Absolutely shocking and frightening! What Our Lord Jesus Christ must think; He needs to work out his salvation with fear and trembling.
TheJet
St. Robert Bellarmine, On Purgatory, Book 2, Chap. 6: “The eighth is the common position of the scholastics: that Purgatory is within the bowels of the earth, near to Hell itself. The scholastics by a common consensus designate within the earth four cavities, or one divided into four parts: one for the damned; another for those to be purged; the third for infants dying without baptism; the fourth for the just who died before the passion of Christ, which now remains empty.”
Fascinating Video
Did St. Paul Really Rebuke St. Peter In Galatians 2?
Fascinating video…
Monqui
The foundation of charity is faith pure and undefiled (Pope Pius XI), so why is charity the greatest of faith, hope and charity (1 Cor. 13:13)?
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)… The foundation of charity is faith pure and undefiled…”
1 Cor. 13:13: “And now these three remain: faith, hope, and love; but the greatest of these is charity.”
The answer is that charity is what animates or gives life to faith. Hence, it is called the form of faith. A person who possesses faith without charity has an unformed faith (fides informis), while one who possesses faith and charity has a formed faith (fides formata).
St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, Pt. II-II, Q. 4, A. 3, Reply to Obj. 1: “Charity is called the form of faith, inasmuch as through it the act of faith is perfected and formed.”
Faith without charity (i.e. an unformed faith) is dead, lifeless, and barren. It is not living or moving.
James 2:17: “So faith also, if it does not have works, is dead in itself.”
James 2:20: “Do you want to be shown, you foolish person, that faith without works is barren?”
James 2:26: “For even as the body without the spirit is dead; so also faith without works is dead.”
Charity is what unites men to God. Even though charity cannot exist without faith, the possession of charity – since it’s the perfection of faith – necessarily means that one possesses faith (i.e. a faith working through charity, Gal. 5:6) and is united to God. Hence, it is the greatest.
Galatians 5:6- “For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision counts for anything, but only faith working through charity.”
Also note that in the Council of Trent’s Decree on Justification, it is taught that catechumens do not have the faith that bestows eternal life until they are baptized, and that when they are baptized they are infused with faith, hope and charity. This is more proof that no one can be saved without the Sacrament of Baptism.
Council of Trent, Decree on Justification, Sess. 6, Chap. 7: “… whence, man, through Jesus Christ, in whom he is ingrafted, receives, in the said justification, together with the remission of sins, all these (gifts) infused at once, faith, hope, and charity. For faith, unless hope and charity be added to it, neither unites man perfectly with Christ, nor makes him a living member of His body. For which reason it is most truly said, that ‘Faith without works is dead and profitless’; and, ‘In Christ Jesus neither circumcision, avails anything, nor uncircumcision, but faith which worketh by charity’. This faith, catechumens beg of the Church (according to Apostolic Tradition) before the Sacrament of Baptism, when they beg for the faith which bestows life everlasting, which, without hope and charity, faith cannot bestow: whence also do they immediately hear that word of Christ; If thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.”
Manichaeans were radical dualists, believing in two rival supreme principles and many associated heresies.
“Manichaeism is a religion founded by the Persian Mani in the latter half of the third century. It purported to be the true synthesis of all the religious systems then known, and actually consisted of Zoroastrian Dualism, Babylonian folklore, Buddhist ethics, and some small and superficial, additions of Christian elements. As the theory of two eternal principles, good and evil, is predominant in this fusion of ideas and gives color to the whole, Manichaeism is classified as a form of religious Dualism. It spread with extraordinary rapidity in both East and West and maintained a sporadic and intermittent existence in the West (Africa, Spain, France, North Italy, the Balkans) for a thousand years, but it flourished mainly in the land of its birth, (Mesopotamia, Babylonia, Turkestan) and even further East in Northern India, Western China, and Tibet, where, c. A.D. 1000, the bulk of the population professed its tenets and where it died out at an uncertain date.” (J. Arendzen, “Manichaeism”, The Catholic Encyclopedia, 1910)
Some of the Manichaeans engaged in perverse rites. They were a significant problem at the time of Pope St. Leo the Great. He described their wickedness and told Catholics to avoid all friendship with them.
Pope St. Leo the Great, Sermon 16, Dec. 12, 443: “But while he [the Devil] retains this ever-varying supremacy over all the heresies, yet he has built his citadel upon the madness of the Manichaeans, and found in them the most spacious court in which to strut and boast himself: for there he possesses not one form of misbelief only, but a general compound of all errors and ungodliness. For all that is idolatrous in the heathen, all that is blind in carnal Jews, all that is unlawful in the secrets of the magic art, all finally that is profane and blasphemous in all the heresies is gathered together with all manner of filth in these men as if in a cesspool. And hence it is too long a matter to describe all their ungodly acts: for the number of the charges against them exceeds my supply of words… in that sect no modesty, no sense of honor, no chastity whatever is found: for their law is falsehood, their religion the devil, their sacrifice immorality. And so, dearly beloved, renounce all friendship with these men who are utterly abominable and pestilential, and whom disturbances in other districts have brought in great numbers to the city…”
So Terrifying
Man Shot & Saw Hell – Shocking Must-See Video
This video should be called scared straight. So terrifying…
Karin B
Karol Wojtyla – Facing The People
A Prophet Explains The Vatican II Apostasy From Catholicism
I am a Pole and I know from a Polish source that Karol Wojtyła later John Paul II, when he was a priest he "celebrated a mass" with the face towards the people and not God. And he did it before the novus ordo was invented! And he was the first one ever in Poland to have done this and it was something revolutionary for the Church.
Gwido
Protestants hold that justification consists in the imputation of the righteousness of Christ. After explaining that someone cannot truly be called just by a merely external (rather than an inhering) form, St. Robert Bellarmine comments on another reason why the aforementioned Protestant position is false.
St. Robert Bellarmine, De Justificatione, Book 2, Chap. 7: “For if Christ's righteousness were truly imputed to us in such a way that we were held and reckoned righteous through it, just as if it were properly our own intrinsic and formal righteousness, then undoubtedly we ought to be held and reckoned no less righteous than Christ himself: consequently, we ought to be called and held redeemers and saviors of the world, and to receive other titles and attributes of that kind – which is most absurd.”
Eutyches (who died in 454) was a heretical archimandrite in the area of Constantinople who taught the Monophysite heresy. He held the following heretical position: “I confess that Our Lord had two natures before the union but after the union I confess but one.” By denying that Our Lord had two natures, he denied Jesus’ true humanity. Eutyches was condemned by Bishop Flavian of Constantinople at a synod in Constantinople on Nov. 22, 448. Following his condemnation by Flavian, Eutyches appealed to Pope St. Leo the Great. In Eutyches’ appeal to Pope Leo there’s an interesting acknowledgment of the pope’s authority to intervene in Church affairs in the East and to issue authoritative rulings.
Eutyches of Constantinople to Pope Leo (Letter 21 in the collection of Pope Leo’s letters), Winter 448-449: “I asked them to let your holiness know these things, that you might judge what seemed right to you, undertaking by all means to follow your ruling… I take refuge, therefore, with you the defender of religion and abhorrer of such factions… I beseech you not to be prejudiced against me by their insidious designs about me, but to pronounce the sentence which shall seem to you right upon the faith, and in the future not to allow any slander to be uttered against me by this faction, nor let one be expelled and banished from the number of the orthodox.”
Pope St. Leo the Great upheld the condemnation of Eutyches and condemned his false position in his famous Tome (Letter 13, June 13, 449).
Pope St. Leo the Great, Tome to Flavian (Letter 13), June 13, 449: “But when during your cross-examination Eutyches replied and said, I confess that our Lord had two natures before the union but after the union I confess but one, I am surprised that so absurd and mistaken a statement of his should not have been criticized and rebuked by his judges, and that an utterance which reaches the height of stupidity and blasphemy should be allowed to pass as if nothing offensive had been heard: for the impiety of saying that the Son of God was of two natures before His incarnation is only equalled by the iniquity of asserting that there was but one nature in Him after the Word became flesh.”
Eutyches was also condemned at the Council of Chalcedon in 451. Sadly, Eutyches remained obstinate to the end and did not fulfill his promise of following the ruling of Pope Leo. Nevertheless, his letter to Leo is additional evidence that the East recognized that a Roman Pontiff possessed a global jurisdiction that extended into the East.
Information
Eastern “Orthodox” Deception About The Papacy Exposed – Early Pope Proves Catholicism
… you guys do an absolutely fantastic job presenting your information and your sources and dates and time periods.
Clint
Against “Orthodoxy”
The best against orthodoxy I have ever seen.
Vaghalla
Leo XIV In Harmony With Francis
Dear Brothers,
Just wanted to share this thought with you.
An interesting comment was made in an article published by Rome Reports, January 8, 2026. ("Why has Pope Leo convened all the cardinals in Rome?") It is another explicit affirmation of what you have said about Leo simply continuing the program of Francis. Here is the comment: "Up until the close of the Jubilee, Pope Leo spent much of his time fulfilling the incomplete work of his predecessor — those items Pope Francis left unfinished at his death: Jubilee events, the trip to Turkey and Lebanon, or Synodal matters.
In wake of the Jubilee Year, it is fitting now that the Pope should host this extraordinary consistory from January 7-8, the first days after the Jubilee. 170 cardinals from around the world were present in Rome for the first day of this two day gathering."
Even the Vatican II Sect recognizes that Leo has essentially been continuing Francis' agenda, and feel that it is only "fitting" that Leo should now start his own so-called pontificate. What they don't recognize, of course, is that the timing of the events of the day (in the world and in the counterfeit church) may be much more than just coincidental.
Lee Ann
Jesus Called Peter Adversary, Not The Devil, In Matthew 16:23
St. Robert Bellarmine points out that when Our Lord rebuked St. Peter (as recorded in Mt. 16:23), he did not call him the devil but rather an adversary.
St. Robert Bellarmine, De Romano Pontifice, Book 1, Chap. 12: “For Peter has a revelation from the gift of the Lord, and receives the keys; but, on account of his own weakness, he is scandalized by the passion and death of Christ [Mt. 16:23]. Nor should the name Satan bother us. For it does not signify the devil but an adversary, since śāṭān among the Hebrews is nothing other than an adversary. Therefore, although the devil in various places is called Satan, the name Satan does not in every place indicate the devil.”
Turned Their Back On God
A Prophet Explains The Vatican II Apostasy From Catholicism
Excellent video brothers. One has to wonder how people can be so deceived to believe that a irreverent mass were the "priests" turn their back on God could come from the catholic church. A symptom of the generale dissidium we live in.
Augustinus
Galatians 1 contains more proof against Protestant salvation doctrine. In Galatians 1:6 St. Paul says that he’s astonished at how quickly certain people have been removed from the One who called them and have turned to a different gospel. He uses the word μετατίθεσθε, the present passive/middle indicative, 2nd person plural of μετατίθημι (metatithemi). μετατίθημι (metatithemi) means to transfer or remove something or someone from one place, position or situation to another. It involves a change of place, position or status.
Galatians 1:6- “I am astonished that you are so quickly removed (μετατίθεσθε) from the one who called (καλέσαντος) you in the grace (ἐν χάριτι) of Christ and are turning to a different gospel.”
Thus, certain people who belonged to God in His grace (ἐν χάριτι) have transferred themselves to a different state and to a different gospel. That indicates that justified Christians can fall away. St. Paul also describes these individuals as having been called. Many Protestants consider “calling” be simultaneous with justification. That’s how many of them would understand St. Paul’s reference to his own calling in Galatians 1:15 in the very same chapter.
Galatians 1:15- “But when he who had set me apart before I was born, and who called (καλέσας) me through his grace (διὰ τῆς χάριτος), was pleased to reveal his Son to me, in order that I might preach him among the Gentiles, I did not immediately consult with anyone.”
Galatians chapter 1 is simply more evidence that true believers who at one time were justified by God’s grace can fall away, and therefore that Protestant salvation doctrine is false.
Why Does St. Paul Address His Epistles “To The Saints”?
Ephesians 1:1 — “Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ, by the will of God, to all the saints who are at Ephesus, and to the faithful in Christ Jesus.”
Philippians 1:1 — “To all the saints in Christ Jesus who are at Philippi...”
Colossians 1:2 — “To the saints and faithful brothers in Christ at Colossae…”
1 Corinthians 1:2 — “To the church of God that is in Corinth, to those sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints...”
2 Corinthians 1:1 — “To the church of God that is at Corinth, with all the saints who are in the whole of Achaia.”
The word that St. Paul uses in Ephesians 1:1, Philippians 1:1, and Colossians 1:2 is ἁγίοις. It simply means "the sanctified ones", referring to those who have been sanctified in baptism. In the same epistle St. Paul repeatedly warns the ἁγίοις (the sanctified ones) that if they commit grave sins they won't be saved. That refutes Protestantism. See: What Millions Of Fake Christians Get Wrong About Ephesians.
Your Videos Showed Me
“Orthodoxy” Devastated, Catholicism Vindicated, By The 7th Council (Nicaea II)
I nearly became “Orthodox” but your videos showed me that it is Catholicism that has the correct theology and dogma.
D… urlz
Comment
The Mark Of The Beast As An Unlawful New Form Of Worship (St. Thomas)
Awesome work!
Carlos
Very Interesting
The Mark Of The Beast As An Unlawful New Form Of Worship (St. Thomas)
Very interesting…
Ian
Our videos provide overwhelming evidence that the Vatican II apostasy fulfills prophecies about the Whore of Babylon, the return of the beast (or pagan Rome), the Antichrist, etc. See, for example (among others):
A Prophet Explains The Vatican II Apostasy From Catholicism
The Temple Of God And The Antichrist Located
The Antichrist's Distinguishing Mark
We have also argued that the mark of the beast on the hand or forehead is a spiritual mark and a symbol of submission to the false ecclesiastical authority of the Vatican II Sect and its antipopes. The mark on the hand or forehead is therefore connected to the false worship imposed by the false authority of the end-times Counter Church. Well, it’s very interesting to note that St. Thomas Aquinas gives two possible meanings for the character/mark of the beast. He mentions 1) a malice connected to eternal punishment and 2) an unlawful form of worship. His identification of the mark of the beast with an unlawful form of worship corresponds precisely with our view and with what we’ve seen after Vatican II. The rites of all seven sacraments were changed after Vatican II. Invalidating changes were made to a number of them, including the Eucharist. An evil and unlawful form of worship has been imposed upon followers of the beast (i.e. the end-times Counter Church) by means of the New Mass, false ecumenism, and the veneration of the Vatican II antipopes (most notably Antipope John Paul II, who taught that every man is Jesus Christ). Here’s what St. Thomas said about the mark or character of the beast.
St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, Pt. III, Q. 63, A. 3, Reply to Obj. 3: “A character distinguishes one from another, in relation to some particular end, to which he, who receives the character is ordained: as has been stated concerning the military character (Article 1) by which a soldier of the king is distinguished from the enemy's soldier in relation to the battle. In like manner the character of the faithful is that by which the faithful of Christ are distinguished from the servants of the devil, either in relation to eternal life, or in relation to the worship of the Church that now is. Of these the former is the result of charity and grace, as the objection runs; while the latter results from the sacramental character. Wherefore the ‘character of the beast’ may be understood by opposition, to mean either the obstinate malice for which some are assigned to eternal punishment, or the profession of an unlawful form of worship.”
According to Catholic dogma, a spiritual mark or character is conferred by the sacraments of baptism, confirmation and holy orders. This spiritual mark or character appoints people for divine worship. The “character/mark” is therefore connected to the sacraments and divine worship.
St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, Pt. 3, Q. 63, A. 2: “The sacraments of the New Law produce a character, insofar as by them we are deputed to the worship of God according to the rite of the Christian religion.”
St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, Pt. 3, Q. 63, Art. 2: “… a character signifies a certain spiritual power ordained unto things pertaining to the divine worship."
St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, Pt. 3, Q. 63, Art. 6, Reply to Obj. 2: "Some sacraments, which imprint a character, bestow on man a certain consecration, thus deputing him to the divine worship."
It makes sense that the mark of the beast would be a direct contrast to the mark of Christ and therefore that it would involve a new and false system of worship. By means of these new rites deceived individuals (who wrongly believe they are following the Catholic Church but are actually following apostate antipopes) are appointed to the worship of the beast (by means of the veneration of Antipope John Paul II, the New Mass, etc.). This occurs by way of a massive spiritual deception and a takeover of the temple of God. See: The Temple of God and the Antichrist Located. The beast is pagan Rome under the guise or appearance of the Church, and it occupies the Church’s physical structures. This is why the followers of the beast “wonder” when they see the return of the beast/pagan Rome.
A SPIRITUAL MARK ON THE HAND AND HEAD IN THE OLD TESTAMENT
The teaching of the Old Testament supports the conclusion that the apocalyptic character/mark on the hand or forehead is spiritual rather than physical and that it symbolizes the false worship of the end-times Counter Church. In the Old Testament God commanded people to keep His words and observances as a sign on their hand and forehead. God was referring to a symbolic or spiritual sign on the hand and head, not a physical mark.
Deuteronomy 6:6-8: “And these words that I command you today shall be on your heart. You shall teach them diligently to your children, and shall talk of them when you sit in your house, and when you walk by the way, and when you lie down, and when you rise. You shall bind them as a sign on your hand, and they shall be as frontlets between your eyes.”
Deuteronomy 11:18: “Fix these words of mine in your hearts and minds; tie them as symbols on your hands and bind them on your foreheads.”
In fact, God mentions the spiritual mark on the hand and forehead in connection to observing the Passover.
Exodus 13:9, Regarding the Feast of Unleavened Bread commemorating the Exodus: “This observance will be for you like a sign on your hand and a reminder on your forehead that the law of the Lord is to be on your lips. For the Lord brought you out of Egypt with his mighty hand.”
Exodus 13:16: “So it shall serve as a sign on your hand and a symbol on your forehead, for with a mighty hand the Lord brought us out of Egypt.”
The Catholic Mass is the new Passover sacrifice that was prefigured by the ancient Passover sacrifice.
Council of Trent, Sess. 22, Decree on the Sacrifice of the Mass: “For, having celebrated the ancient Passover, which the multitude of the children of Israel immolated in memory of their going out of Egypt, He instituted the new Passover, (to wit) Himself to be immolated…”
So, the mark on the hand or forehead in the Old Testament was a spiritual sign or a symbol representing the proper observance of God’s laws and the sacrifice He instituted. It follows therefore that the apocalyptic mark of the beast on the hand or forehead is a spiritual sign that represents an improper observance of the Mass (the new Passover sacrifice) and a false ecclesiastical structure that deviates from the Lord’s commands and teachings. With regard to the aspect of the mark that deals with buying/selling, we believe that connects to the symbol of the beast (Europa) that is found on the currency of the European Union and the Vatican City State (the political dimension of the beast), as explained in our video Apocalypse Now In The Vatican. The beast has a political and a spiritual dimension. Also note that people are not directly said to be condemned for buying and selling with the mark of the beast but rather for receiving the mark on their hand or in their forehead (the spiritual mark). However, the fact that no one can buy or sell without the mark of the beast also applies, we believe, to the fact that true Catholics who will not submit to the Vatican II Sect and its false worship are denounced as “outsiders”, “schismatics”, “illicit”, and “unapproved”. People literally cannot function within the Vatican II Sect, economically or otherwise, without the mark. True Catholics are ostracized because they won’t receive the mark of the Counter Church, while people like James Martin are fully endorsed.
In our video called Saints & Theologians On The End Times we also showed that St. Thomas connected the end-times with a secession from the spiritual empire of the Romans, that is, with a general defection from the Catholic faith of the Roman Church. Hence, in two different areas St. Thomas’ comments on the end-times were remarkably prescient: 1) By recognizing that the mark of the beast potentially symbolizes a new false form of worship and 2) by asserting that a primary sign of the end-times is a secession from the spiritual empire of the Romans (i.e. a defection from the faith of the Roman Church).
Two other considerations support our conclusion about the mark of the beast. First, the mark of the beast is connected to the veneration of the image of the beast – the veneration of the one who was wounded. The evidence is overwhelming that John Paul II and his false canonization fulfill that prophecy. Since the veneration of the one who is wounded is fulfilled by the Vatican II Sect, it makes sense that the mark on the hand or forehead would be as well. Second, if the mark on the right hand or forehead were a physical mark, that would not deceive basically anyone. But the veneration of the end-times beast is imposed by way of deception. All of these points support the conclusion that the mark of the beast on the right hand or forehead is a spiritual mark that symbolizes the false worship and false authority of the Vatican II Sect, the end-times Counter Church.
Vatican II, Heretics & Ignorance Objection
Vatican II’s Protestant Heresy
What if a defender of the Vatican II sect says that the statements about Protestants and schismatics being in the Body of Christ in Unitatis Redintegratio #3 only refer to members of Protestant and schismatic sects who are invincibly ignorant?
Kristian
That doesn’t work at all because the paragraph (Unitatis Redintegratio #3) refers to “dissensions” (which includes people who reject Catholic teaching), and it speaks of all the members of these communities without limiting it to the supposedly ignorant. It also says this is true in spite of these differences. It also refers to the differences in doctrine as “obstacles”, rather than merely claiming that the individuals do not know Catholic doctrine. Further, it speaks of those who are separated from full communion, and a baptized person only separates himself from full communion through the offense of heresy, schism or apostasy (which involves a willful rejection or separation). Moreover, Lumen Gentium #15 says the same thing about those who “do not preserve communion under the successor of St. Peter”, which of course applies to people who dissent from or reject Church teaching. Hence, Vatican II clearly teaches that people who dissent from the Papacy and other dogmas are in the Body of Christ, which is the opposite of defined Catholic teaching. It also teaches that they are justified in baptism, as covered here. That’s also directly contrary to Catholic teaching.
Makes Sense
Protestants Misunderstand The Pharisee & The Tax Collector (Luke 18)
Amazing. I never heard it explained that way and it makes perfectly good sense...
Enrico
Eye-Opening
A Prophet Explains The Vatican II Apostasy From Catholicism
Very eye-opening and relevant. Thank you.
Lou
St. Thomas points out that Our Lord “willed to be born at Bethlehem, where David was born, in order that by the very birthplace the promise made to David might be shown to be fulfilled.” (Summa Theologiae, Pt. III, Q. 35, A. 7) This is why the New Testament accounts that deal with the circumstances of Our Lord’s birth repeatedly mention the connection to David. They emphasize that the birth occurred in the city of David and that Jesus was of the lineage of David.
Luke 2:4-5,11: “And Joseph also went up from Galilee, from the town of Nazareth, to Judea, to the city of David, which is called Bethlehem, because he was of the house and lineage of David, to be registered with Mary, his betrothed, who was with child… for unto you is born this day in the city of David a Savior, who is Christ the Lord.”
Luke 1:32: “He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High. And the Lord God will give to him the throne of his father David.”
Matthew 1:18-20: “Now the birth of Jesus took place in this way… But as he considered these things, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream, saying, ‘Joseph, son of David, do not fear to take Mary as your wife, for that which is conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit.’”
Jesus’ birth in the city of Bethlehem was a powerful fulfillment of the prophecy in Micah 5:2, which was made approximately 700 years in advance.
Micah 5:2: “But you, O Bethlehem Ephrathah, who are too little to be among the clans of Judah, from you shall come forth for me one who is to be ruler in Israel, whose coming forth is from of old, from ancient days.”
At the time of Our Lord’s birth Bethlehem was the smallest town in the area. It was considered to be a very humble and insignificant location. Then Jesus was born in this tiny town, and He changed the entire history of the world. That is a striking fulfillment of Micah 5:2’s prophecy about “the one who was to be ruler”, which was made in the 8th century BC.
Indeed, Christ rules over all men since all things were committed to Him by His Father (Pope Pius XI, Quas Primas #17). However, this was manifested explicitly and powerfully by the Christianization of the Roman Empire, the many kingdoms dedicated to Him, and most importantly by the Church in which He spiritually rules. He rules on earth through His spiritual kingdom.
Pope Pius XI, Quas Primas (#15), Dec. 11, 1925: “This kingdom is spiritual and is concerned with spiritual things. That this is so the above quotations from Scripture amply prove, and Christ by his own action confirms it. On many occasions, when the Jews and even the Apostles wrongly supposed that the Messiah would restore the liberties and the kingdom of Israel, he repelled and denied such a suggestion. When the populace thronged around him in admiration and would have acclaimed him King, he shrank from the honor and sought safety in flight. Before the Roman magistrate he declared that his kingdom was not of this world.”
Pope Pius XI, Quas Primas (#33), Dec. 11, 1925: “He must reign in our minds, which should assent with perfect submission and firm belief to revealed truths and to the doctrines of Christ. He must reign in our wills, which should obey the laws and precepts of God. He must reign in our hearts, which should spurn natural desires and love God above all things, and cleave to him alone. He must reign in our bodies and in our members, which should serve as instruments for the interior sanctification of our souls, or to use the words of the Apostle Paul, as instruments of justice unto God.”
Micah 5:4 also says that the prophesied savior/ruler will “shepherd his flock”, and Jesus is “the good shepherd” (John 10:11). Micah 5:2’s statement that “His coming forth is from of old, from ancient days” also indicates that the coming ruler (the savior) would be divine as well as human, having existed from all eternity. This of course refers to Jesus being true God and true man, one divine person with two natures.
Bethlehem also means “the house of bread”, which was also providential; for Jesus is “the living bread who came down from Heaven” (John 6:51).
BRIEF HISTORY OF POPE JULIUS I AND ATHANASIUS
Pope Julius I’s Letter To The Bishops Assembled At Antioch (AD 341) is often cited as an important early example of papal supremacy. In that letter there are also statements that constitute further evidence for the absolute necessity of baptism. In AD 338-339 St. Athanasius (the Bishop of Alexandria) was unjustly condemned by a council in Antioch and replaced by an Arian named Gregory of Cappadocia. Gregory was installed in Alexandria in 339 with military support from Emperor Constantius II (an Arian sympathizer). Gregory remained in physical possession of the See of Alexandria until 345. This led St. Athanasius to flee to Rome and to the protection of Pope Julius I. The actions of Pope Julius and the Council of Sardica (AD 343) were instrumental in getting Athanasius restored to his see in 346.
EARLY CHURCH HISTORIANS ACKNOWLEDGE THE POPE’S UNIQUE AUTHORITY
In recounting these events, noted early Church historians Sozomen (who died c. AD 450) and Socrates Scholasticus (who died c. AD 440) both acknowledge the Bishop of Rome’s unique and supreme position of authority in the Church.
Sozomen, Ecclesiastical History, Book 3, Chap. 8 (AD 450): “The Roman bishop, on learning the accusation against each individual, and on finding that they held the same sentiments about the Nicaean dogmas, admitted them to communion as of like orthodoxy; and as the care for all was fitting to the dignity of his see, he restored them all to their own churches. He wrote to the bishops of the East, and rebuked them for having judged these bishops unjustly, and for harassing the Churches by abandoning the Nicaean doctrines. He summoned a few among them to appear before him on an appointed day, in order to account to him for the sentence they had passed, and threatened to bear with them no longer, unless they would cease to make innovations. This was the tenor of his letters. Athanasius and Paul were reinstated in their respective sees, and forwarded the letter of Julius to the bishops of the East.”
Sozomen, Ecclesiastical History, Book 3, Chap. 10 (AD 450): “Julius… alleged that there is a sacerdotal canon which declares that whatever is enacted contrary to the judgment of the bishop of Rome is null. He also reproached them for having deviated from justice in all their proceedings against Athanasius, both at Tyre and Mareotis, and stated that the decrees enacted at the former city had been annulled...”
Socrates Scholasticus, Ecclesiastical History, Book 2, Chap. 8 (AD 440): “Neither was Julius, bishop of the great Rome, there [at the Synod of Antioch – 338/339], nor had he sent a substitute, although an ecclesiastical canon commands that the churches shall not make any ordinances against the opinion of the bishop of Rome.”
Socrates Scholasticus, Ecclesiastical History, Book 2, Chap. 17 (AD 440): “Julius first replied to the bishops who had written to him from Antioch, complaining of the acrimonious feeling they had evinced in their letter, and charging them with a violation of the canons, because they had not requested his attendance at the council, seeing that the ecclesiastical law required that the churches should pass no decisions contrary to the views of the bishop of Rome: he then censured them with great severity for clandestinely attempting to pervert the faith…”
POPE JULIUS I ON THE BAPTIZED VS. THE CATECHUMENS
While referencing certain false charges made against St. Athanasius in the context of these events, Pope Julius I refers to the ancient liturgical tradition that dismissed unbaptized catechumens from the liturgy prior to the Mass of the Faithful. This is more evidence from the ancient Church that only the sacramentally baptized were considered part of the Body of Christ.
Pope Julius I, Letter To The Bishops Assembled At Antioch, AD 341: “In light of this testimony, we are trying to make out how a man lying sick behind the door was able to stand up, conduct the liturgy, and offer the sacrament. Or how could it be that the offering was on the altar with catechumens still present? If the catechumens were still inside, it was not yet time for the offering.” (Glen L. Thompson, The Correspondence Of Pope Julius I, p. 63)
Pope Julius I, Letter To The Bishops Assembled At Antioch, AD 341, speaking about the unjust trial: “At first we could not believe this, but the proof was in the official reports. We were astonished at this, and I think, beloved, you must also be astonished! Although priests entrusted with the celebration of the sacrament are not permitted to be present, an inquiry about the body and blood of Christ takes place in front of a secular judge with catechumens in attendance, and, even worse, in the presence of heathen and Jews, the slanderers of Christianity! If some offense had been committed, the investigation ought to have been conducted within the Church and, as usual, by clergymen, not by heathen who detest the Logos and know nothing of the truth. I trust that you, like everyone else, are aware of the enormity of this sin. This, then, is all I have to say concerning Athanasius.” (Glen L. Thompson, The Correspondence Of Pope Julius I, pp. 69-71)
POPE JULIUS I REFERS TO HIS UNIQUE AUTHORITY FROM ST. PETER
At the end of his letter to the Bishops of Antioch, Pope Julius I asserts the Apostolic Tradition that the Bishop of Rome has supreme authority
Pope Julius I, Letter To The Bishops Assembled At Antioch, AD 341: “Why were we not informed especially in the case of the church of Alexandria? Certainly, you cannot be unaware that, according to custom, we must be informed in writing before a just verdict can be determined. If there was some suspicion in regard to the bishop there, this church should have been contacted by letter. But those who have neglected to inform us and acted according to their own wishes now desire us to cast our vote with them against men whom we have not condemned! This is not the rule received from Paul or the practice handed down from the fathers; this follows a different pattern and a novel procedure. I beg of you, accept this patiently; what I write is for the common good. I am setting forth for you the tradition we have received from the blessed Apostle Peter. As I imagined this was evident to everybody, I would not have written if we had not been so troubled by the events...” (Glen L. Thompson, The Correspondence Of Pope Julius I, pp. 79-81)
Hence, in this noteworthy early papal document we see that both the Papacy (the unique authority of the Bishop of Rome) and the necessity of baptism are important and prominent aspects of the Christian faith.
Many Protestants argue that the parable of the Pharisee and the tax collector in Luke 18 supports justification by faith alone.
Luke 18:9-14- “Two men went up into the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector. The Pharisee, standing by himself, prayed thus: ‘God, I thank you that I am not like other men, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even like this tax collector. I fast twice a week; I give tithes of all that I get.’ But the tax collector, standing far off, would not even lift up his eyes to heaven, but beat his breast, saying, ‘God, be merciful to me, a sinner!’ I tell you, this man went down to his house justified, rather than the other. For everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, but the one who humbles himself will be exalted.”
They claim that the story condemns any consideration of (or emphasis on) good works in connection to one’s righteousness. But they are wrong, of course. They misunderstand and misuse the passage. First, as anyone should be able to recognize, the tax collector whom Jesus says departed the temple justified did not rely on faith alone. He actually made a humble confession to God (before New Testament confession had been instituted). He was forgiven by his sincere act of confession to God, which includes a true intention to change his life. Thus, he was not justified by faith alone but by a humble and sincere confession.
Further, the Pharisee was not condemned for acknowledging a connection between good works and righteousness. Rather, he was condemned because he despised others, was full of pride, and trusted in his own righteousness to such an extent that he did not ask for anything to be forgiven him or added to him. Indeed, the very next chapter of Luke’s gospel (Luke 19) shows that an acknowledgment of one’s obedience or good works is not incompatible with righteousness. In Luke 19:8-9 Zacchaeus, another tax collector, tells the Lord that he has given half of his goods to the poor and not defrauded anyone.
Luke 19:8-9- “And Zacchaeus stood and said to the Lord, ‘Behold, Lord, the half of my goods I give to the poor. And if I have defrauded anyone of anything, I restore it fourfold.’ And Jesus said to him, ‘Today salvation has come to this house, since he also is a son of Abraham.’”
Zacchaeus recounts his good works to Jesus. Jesus responds by telling him that salvation has come to this house. The Lord would not have responded in this way if the Protestant understanding of salvation were correct.
Further, in Isaiah 38, King Hezekiah, who was near death, sincerely asked the Lord to remember his faithfulness and obedience.
Isaiah 38:2-5- “Then Hezekiah turned his face to the wall and prayed to the Lord, and said, ‘Please, O Lord, remember how I have walked before you in faithfulness and with a whole heart, and have done what is good in your sight.’ And Hezekiah wept bitterly. Then the word of the Lord came to Isaiah: ‘Go and say to Hezekiah, Thus says the Lord, the God of David your father: I have heard your prayer; I have seen your tears. Behold, I will add fifteen years to your life.’”
God accepts the prayer of Hezekiah and grants him 15 more years of life in response.
The very same chapter of Luke’s Gospel (Luke 18) also proves that the Protestants are wrong. In Luke 18:18-25, Jesus tells the ruler that he must keep the commandments and follow Him to attain eternal life. That is of course incompatible with the idea of salvation by faith alone.
Luke 18:18-25- “And a ruler asked him, ‘Good Teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?’ And Jesus said to him, ‘Why do you call me good? No one is good except God alone. You know the commandments: ‘Do not commit adultery, Do not murder, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Honor your father and mother.’ And he said, ‘All these I have kept from my youth.’ When Jesus heard this, he said to him, ‘One thing you still lack. Sell all that you have and distribute to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow me.’ But when he heard these things, he became very sad, for he was extremely rich. Jesus, seeing that he had become sad, said, ‘How difficult it is for those who have wealth to enter the kingdom of God! For it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich person to enter the kingdom of God.”
In Luke 12 Jesus also speaks of a “faithful and wise manager, whom his master will set over his household” (Luke 12:42) who then acts immorally and the Master will “put him with the unfaithful” (Luke 12:46). That clearly indicates that someone who at one time is faithful and justified can cease to be faithful and lose justification as a result of immorality. In that context Jesus also says “you must be ready” (Luke 12:40) and “Blessed is that servant whom his master will find so doing” (Luke 12:43). In Luke 8:13 we also see that some people “believe for a while, and in the time of testing fall away.”
Those verses completely contradict the idea of faith alone and once justified always justified. These facts demonstrate that the Protestants are not only wrong about the parable of the Pharisee and the tax collector but that their false understanding of salvation is refuted by the entire New Testament.
In 2 Timothy 1:6 St. Paul tells Timothy that the gift of God (τὸ χάρισμα τοῦ Θεοῦ) is in him through the imposition of my hands (διὰ τῆς ἐπιθέσεως τῶν χειρῶν μου). This refers to ordination. Since Scripture clearly says that a gift of the Spirit is transmitted through such an action, why is it hard for many non-Catholics to accept that the grace of God is bestowed through other actions such as baptism?
2 Timothy 1:6: “For this reason I remind you to stir up the gift of God, which is in you through the imposition of my hands.”
Very Informative
The “Catholic” Charismatic Movement Exposed
Very informative…
Serenetofu
Important Points
Eastern “Orthodoxy” Debunked On St. Peter’s Authority By St. John Of Damascus
Very good points…
S S C
Reports indicate that Antipope Leo XIV will be replacing “Cardinal” Timothy Dolan as “Archbishop” of New York City. He will appoint Ronald Hicks, another liberal apostate who was very close to the notorious Blasé Cupich of Chicago. Hicks served as “auxiliary bishop” under Cupich, and he is considered to have been his protégé and close ally. For a video that exposes the outrageous apostasy of Cupich, see this: “Cardinal” Cupich & The Counter Church In Chicago.
The reaction to this report by ‘conservatives’ in the Vatican II Sect is a revealing example of their bad will. Many of them don’t care at all that Hicks is a total heretic. Rather, they are simply excited because they think or hope that he might allow more ‘Latin Masses’ in NYC. As long as the Counter Church gives them a side altar in the ecumenical sect of apostasy, they are satisfied. They are deceived and rejected by God. Without the true faith it’s impossible to please God. Since they don’t adhere to God’s truth and the Catholic faith without compromise, their attempts at worship are in vain.
For a revealing video on the apostasy of “Cardinal” Timothy Dolan, see this: “Cardinal” Dolan & The Counter Church In New York City (NYC).
It’s interesting to note that in discussing Luther’s view that souls in Purgatory could sin and merit, St. Robert Bellarmine described Luther’s position as manifestly heretical. This is noteworthy because certain defenders of the Vatican II Sect have wrongly claimed that only persons, not positions, can be described as “manifestly heretical”. We refuted that false claim here. But this passage provides additional support for our point.
St. Robert Bellarmine, De Purgatorio, Book 2, Chap. 2: “Indeed that this position of Luther is also manifestly heretical is proven by the testimonies of Scripture and the fathers.”
St. Robert Bellarmine also stated that Luther could not be called a Christian in any way.
St. Robert Bellarmine, De Purgatorio, Book 2, Chap. 2: “Note that Luther cannot be called a Christian in any way according to the position of Augustine, but plainly a heathen since he doubts concerning a matter about which Augustine says that no Christian can doubt.”
St. Robert Bellarmine, De Justificatione, Book 1, Chap. 7: “It is established, therefore, that faith is not knowledge but assent. For in the first place Isaiah chapter 7 openly proclaims: Unless you believe, you will not understand. There we see that faith is not understanding but the way and step to understand… Likewise in 1 Cor. 13 the Apostle distinguishes the knowledge of mysteries from faith as two diverse gifts. ‘If I shall have’, he says, ‘all knowledge and I should know all mysteries, and all faith’ [1 Cor. 13:2].”
Ephesians 4:26 says: “Be angry and sin not”. It’s a quotation from Psalm 4. Below are some passages from St. Thomas Aquinas’ commentary on the verse.
St. Thomas Aquinas, Commentary on Ephesians 4:26: “He gives his warning when he says ‘Be angry, and sin not’ [Eph. 4:26]. This is susceptible of two interpretations; for there are two types of anger, a good one and an evil one. Anger is evil when, contrary to justice, it strives inordinately for revenge. It is good when it seeks a just vindication, namely, when the person is vexed at the time, with whom, and to the degree that, he should be… If it is interpreted concerning righteous anger it is not simply permitted, like the first, but imperative…
Now, some are doubtless of the opinion that a man can be mad at himself for his own sins safely, but that this does not hold true concerning his neighbors and their sins. This is false; a man can be mad at himself for his own sins, and at his fellow man because of his sins. Therefore, zealously be angry at other people’s offenses. ‘Phinees hath turned away my wrath from the children of Israel because he was moved with my zeal against them’ (Num. 25:11). And Elias said: ‘With zeal have I been zealous for the Lord God of Hosts: for the children of Israel have forsaken thy covenant’ (3 Kg. 19:10). By following the dictates of reason, rather than acting before [reason has had time to reflect], you sin not. ‘Let every man be swift to hear, but slow to speak, and slow to anger’ (Jas. 1:19).”
The Protestant heresy of faith alone is not just refuted by the New Testament but it’s contradicted throughout the Old Testament. Ecclesiastes, a book accepted by Protestants, sums up the essence of its entire teaching about life by stating:
Ecclesiastes 12:13-14: “Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man. For God shall bring every work into judgment, with every secret thing, whether it be good, or whether it be evil.”
Canada
Canada Euthanized A Record 16,499 Patients In 2024
This is very heartbreaking. If only people simply recognized that nothing is beyond God's grace and to turn to Him for all their problems…
Daniel
Comment
“Magicians” Prove A Spiritual World Exists
This is an amazing video… I used to watch David Blaine when he first came out... I always thought there was something else going. on. I had NO IDEA of all the others, except Copperfield. It makes me wonder what these clowns are planning when the devil comes to collect his contract. I sure hope they have enjoyed their life in this world, because it sure won't be the same in the next. The thought also popped into my head that forget the magicians...what about the other humans possessed by demons...running the world… There are plenty of demons to go around and plenty of folks willing to sell their souls.
I remember the story in the Old Testament about Aaron's rod and Pharaoh's magicians and Simon Magus in the New Testament. These clowns have been around for a while.
Great work! Thanks!
John
Simon Magus is mentioned in Acts 8:9-24. The term simony comes from him because he tried to purchase spiritual power with money.
Acts 8:20-21: “But Peter said to him, ‘May your silver perish with you, because you thought you could obtain the gift of God with money! You have neither part nor lot in this matter, for your heart is not right before God.’”
According to the testimony of the ancient Church, Simon persisted in his false views and was damned. He is considered to be the “father of heretics”.
A widespread tradition holds that Simon Magus persuaded many at Rome by his magical arts. He was even able to fly by the power of demons. Yet, under Nero his evil ministry was defeated by St. Peter during an encounter between the two. The historical reality of this encounter, including Simon’s ability to fly by the power of demons, was accepted by many saints and early Christian writers. See, for example, St. Robert Bellarmine’s comments in De Romano Pontifice, Book 1, Chap. 23. The event is also related by 4th century Christian apologist Arnobius.
Arnobius, Contra Gentes, Book 2, 4th century: “For they had seen the chariot of Simon Magus, and his fiery car, blown into pieces by the mouth of Peter, and vanish when Christ was named. They had seen him, I say, trusting in false gods, and abandoned by them in their terror, borne down headlong by his own weight, lie prostrate with his legs broken; and then, when he had been carried to Brunda, worn out with anguish and shame, again cast himself down from the roof of a very lofty house.”
St. Bede the Venerable (d. 735) held the view that Simon Magus was damned. St. Robert Bellarmine endorses the same position in De Justificatione, Book 3, Chap. 14.
St. Bede the Venerable, Expositio Supra Acta Apostolorum, 8:20-40: “Thus this Simon, who received the curse from Peter, died in eternal damnation.” (J.P. Migne, Patrologia Latina, 92:961)
Apologetics’ Value
It’s not only good to share our most recent video (A Prophet Explains The Vatican II Apostasy From Catholicism) with people in the Novus Ordo, but also with interested Protestants, Eastern ‘Orthodox’, etc. It has a lot of apologetics’ value in explaining to people in general (not just those who claim to be Catholic) how this situation could have happened in Rome.
Comment
A Prophet Explains The Vatican II Apostasy From Catholicism
Another Catholic masterpiece from MHFM…
Htg
Comment
A Prophet Explains The Vatican II Apostasy From Catholicism
… brilliantly explained.
Christine
Great Apostasy
A Prophet Explains The Vatican II Apostasy From Catholicism
This great apostasy is what the third secret of fatima was all about, the vatican 2 council…
Michelle
This video provides biblical support for the Immaculate Conception and it shows how the truth taught in Ephesians 1 is connected to it.
The words of the king to Esther in chapter 15 of that book are applicable to, and a type of, Our Lady’s preservation from original sin.
Esther 15:12-13- “What is the matter, Esther? I am thy brother, fear not. Thou shalt not die: for this law is not made for thee, but for all others.”
^
" />
" />
" />
" />
" />
