Do you know of a Benedictine ‘monastery’ in New Mexico?

Yes, we are familiar with them. Unfortunately, they do not hold the dogma Outside the Church There is No Salvation, but agree with the SSPX that souls can be saved without baptism and in false religions. They also hold that John Paul II is the Pope. They are basically an SSPX Monastery. Certain SSPX priests go from the SSPX into the Monastery and then back into the SSPX, although they would “officially” claim that the Monastery is not strictly affiliated with the SSPX. I also believe that Bishop Williamson has gone there to perform ordinations, although I’m not 100% certain about this. Thus, their positions would be in line with the SSPX.

What about the Hindu abomination at Fatima?

Celso, We addressed that issue in the Heresy of the Week from 5/28/04.  You will find it in the Heresy of the Week Archive on our website.

Hindus Worship the devil at Shrine of Our Lady of Fatima

“I have a question on EENS”

It is possible for a person who has been baptized, and believes in the essential mysteries of the Catholic Faith, to be saved without having set foot in a Catholic church. For instance, some of the heathen whom St. Isaac Jogues converted were instructed in the essential mysteries of the Catholic Faith (the Trinity and the Incarnation) and were baptized just before they were tortured and killed. They were Catholics even though they never set foot in a Catholic church. In order to be a Catholic and a member of the Church, one must at least be baptized and, if above reason, know at least the essential mysteries of the Catholic Faith (the Trinity and the Incarnation) – and not reject any teaching of the Church. Persons such as those described above (baptized just before death by St. Isaac Jogues) are also subject to the Roman Pontiff, just like infants, by virtue of their baptism. Such persons would not be exceptions to the dogma at all, since those persons are Catholics and are within the bosom and unity of the Church; they are also part of the visible Church, by virtue of their baptism and acceptance of the essential mysteries of Catholicism.

What about “Pope” Michael?

Frank, “Pope” Michael has no credibility, nor does any person who claims to be Pope today. One cannot just elect himself Pope, as he has done. If I recall correctly, “Pope” Michael was “elected” by a conclave consisting of his mother and two of his relatives! The true Catholic Church still exists with that remnant of Catholics which maintains the deposit of Faith whole and inviolate, just like it did during the Arian crisis, although today’s crisis is even worse because it is the Great Apostasy.

Could “Sister” Lucia be drugged?

No, this “Sister” Lucia is not on drugs. We saw the “beatification” ceremony as well, and “Sister” Lucia was so enthusiastic about meeting John Paul II that she grabbed John Paul II’s hand and kissed it immediately after receiving the Novus Ordo cookie. Supposing that John Paul II were a Pope and the Novus Ordo Mass valid (neither of which is true), the real Sister Lucia would never do this; she wouldn’t interrupt her concentration immediately after receiving Our Lord to grab the hand of the Pope. She would wait until after Mass to pay her respects. But the fake “Lucia” was so intent on showing everyone her devotion to Antipope John Paul II that she couldn’t even wait until the end of the Novus Ordo and the consummation of the cookie to kiss his hand.

Where are the Catholic priests and is it a sin to support the SSPX?

The sad fact of the matter is that there are only a few priests in the country that are fully Catholic. To answer your question about donating to the SSPX after one has been made aware of their heresies, the answer is yes it is a mortal sin for one to obstinately contribute to the SSPX, and by doing so one is showing Jesus Christ that he endorses the idea that Buddhists, Hindus, Muslims and Jews can be saved without the Catholic Faith, which they promote in their books. 

Pope Innocent III, Fourth Lateran Council, 1215: "Moreover, we determine to subject to excommunication believers who receive, defend, or support heretics."

Can one sing in a Christmas concert that will be held in a Protestant “church”?

Barbara, no, a Catholic should not sing in the Choir if the concert is going to be held in the heretical Protestant "church," even if the choir is non-religious.

How to pray the 15 Decade Rosary?

Gene, I'm glad that you received the material.  The answer to your question is yes, you can go straight to the next Our Father for the first Sorrowful Mystery.  And, actually, you don't have to say the Hail Holy Queen, etc. until you are finished with the Glorious Mysteries (i.e., if you are going to say all 15 mysteries).

Is it necessary to bash John Paul II?

First of all, John Paul II is not a Pope because he is not a Catholic. He does not believe in the Council of Trent, but holds that Justification by faith alone is acceptable; he does not believe in Vatican I, but holds that Eastern Schismatics should not be converted to a belief in the Papacy; he does not believe in Jesus Christ, but holds that Jews can reject Him and be saved because their covenant with God is still valid. He holds that Islam and Animism are good religions; and he holds that all men are saved. Why is it necessary to expose him? One really shouldn’t have to answer this question, but the answer is that there are countless reasons. He is the head of the phony Vatican II sect which is deceiving millions of those who profess to be Catholic; he is the main enemy of Jesus Christ and Our Lady in the world by far. Since he claims to be the Pope, people are following his program of apostasy and accepting it because they think he is the official teacher in the Church. Further, basically all of the abominations, sacrileges, scandals and heresies of the Novus Ordo sect with which one is bound to battle ultimately emanate from, or have their origin in, his activity or that of his phony predecessors, Paul VI and John XXIII. One good example is the recent Hindu abomination at Fatima. How was this able to occur? It was able to occur because they were just following John Paul II’s lead in Assisi. He did the same thing at Assisi: he turned the sacred convent over to false religions for them to worship the devil. Thus, to attempt to expose the Hindu outrage at Fatima without exposing Antipope John Paul II is foolish and futile. That is why those who think they are opposing the evil of the Vatican II revolution by simply exposing the Bishops or the radical theologians without getting to the heart of the problem (John Paul II) are swatting gnats when there is a big bird right in their faces, Antipope John Paul II. Those who fail to understand what Antipope John Paul II is or what he is all about are deceived and will be deceived about what is happening to the Catholic Church in the last days.

Is Racism a sin?

Racism is a sin, which is a result of pride and hatred of neighbor. Racists are infatuated with themselves; they think that they are so great that they despise those of a different race or nationality. But while they are filled with how great they think they are, they are a disgrace in God’s sight. God doesn’t care what race or nationality you are; He cares if you love Him and hold the true Faith. The Catholic Church is universal, i.e., it embraces equally all men of whatever race or nationality.

Pope Pius XI, Rerum Ecclesia (#26), Feb. 28, 1926: “Anyone who looks upon these natives as members of an inferior race or as men of low mentality makes a grievous mistake.”

Understanding God’s Justice and His hatred of the wicked?

Jason, thank you for your question. God’s mercy is for those who fear Him (Luke 1:50). When His mercy is mentioned in Scripture, it is given to those who fear, obey and cooperate with His grace. Those who begin by fearing Him and obeying Him then come to see His love. That is why Scripture teaches that the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom (Psalm 110:10). But those who spurn Him, deny Him and disobey Him get His wrath. And it is an awful thing to fall into the hands of the living God, as St. Paul says (Heb. 10:31). What I think is important to take from your e-mail is that God’s truth is a serious thing. He casts the wicked into Hell for all eternity; and He tortures them day and night for ever and ever, as the Apocalypse says. This is important for us to understand because there are many people we hear from all the time, especially among the “traditionalists,” who reject the truth because they are too liberal. They refuse to believe that this many people could be condemned by God and could be going to Hell. They need to re-read the words of Jacinta of Fatima: “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, and of so many people who are going to die and go to Hell.’” (William Thomas Walsh, Our Lady of Fatima, p. 94) And it must be repeated that God is not unreasonable, of course. The people who go to Hell deserve it because they obstinately refuse to see the truth. God’s yoke is sweet and His burden is light (Mt. 11:30) for those who believe the truth, as people should – and for those who want to do the right thing with a pure intention. But for those who deny the truth or refuse to see things God’s way or refuse to obey Him, it is an awful thing.

Concerning home-schooling and singing for non-Catholic services

S. P., thanks for the questions. To answer your questions,

1. Unfortunately, you should not send your child to the Vatican II school, and we believe that it would be a mortal sin, as her soul would be placed in grave peril by the pagan influence of the Novus Ordo "Catholics," not to mention the apostasy of the school itself.  Her chances of saving her soul in such an environment would be very, very slim. So, she is without question better off not going and you should not send her.  You should continue to home-school her.

2. A Catholic cannot sing for non-Catholic services or the Novus Ordo churches.  Seek first the Kingdom of God and His justice and all will be added on to you (Mt. 6:33).  The only response a Catholic can give is that to sing for these services would be a compromise of the Faith, a participation in non-Catholic worship, and a grave sin.

What is a good book for potential converts from Protestantism to read?

Davy, there are many good books, but the one I would recommend off the top of my head for a potential convert from Protestantism is The Catholic Controversy by St. Francis De Sales (available from TAN Books). 21 Reasons to Reject Sola Scriptura (also available from TAN) is also very good.

Get our book for only $5.00 (price includes shipping): The Bible Proves the Teachings of the Catholic Church (click here to order or to read more about the book)

Are Novus Ordo Confessions valid?

A Confession to a validly ordained Novus Ordo priest (i.e., a priest ordained in the Old Rite) would be valid if the Novus Ordo priest says "I absolve you from you sins in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost."  But the person you mentioned persists in going to the invalid Novus Ordo "Mass," and therefore that person is sinning gravely.  Thus, he does not approach Confession with the proper resolution to avoid this grave sin and therefore his Confession is sacrilegious.

Can a Catholic pray for the deceased Fr. Paul Wickens?

We are sorry to hear about the death of Fr. Wickens, but the sad fact is that Catholics cannot pray for him, because there is no evidence that he died a faithful Catholic, and there is much evidence to indicate that he died adhering to and accepting various heresies. Without question he will be praised as a hero by many of the false traditionalists.  Any time any priest dies who celebrated the Latin Mass they honor him as if he were a Saint, no matter what he believed.  All that matters to them is that he said the Latin Mass – and he’s going straight to heaven.  Whereas Martin Luther cried “Faith Alone,” the false traditionalist heretics hold to Salvation by the Latin “Mass Alone.”  They could care less what the priest actually believed. (more…)

What about “material/formal pope sedevacantism” (Cassiciacum Thesis)?

THE ABOVE VIDEO IS VERY IMPORTANT AND REFUTES THE CASSICIACUM THESIS

Steven, you are referring to the Cassiciacum Thesis or the “material/formal pope” idea.  It is not actual sedevacantism.  It's the theory that the Vatican II claimants to the Papacy have valid elections, but not jurisdiction over the Church.  Adherents of this idea also hold that the Vatican II Sect is not an entity different from the true Church and that all members of the Novus Ordo (who have not been declared heretics) are Catholics!  They make many anti-sedevacantist arguments to defend their false position.

The thesis also holds that the Vatican II antipopes receive jurisdiction to appoint cardinals, and that the apostate 'cardinals' of the Vatican II Sect are true cardinals.  The thesis is false, and amounts to a position half-way between the position of the SSPX and actual sedevacantism.  If a man is a pope, he has full and supreme jurisdiction over the Church.  If not, then he lacks jurisdiction proper to the office.  Also, heretics cannot be validly elected pope.

Pope Pius IX, Vatican I, 1870, Sess. 4, Chap. 3, ex cathedra: “If anyone thus speaks, that the Roman Pontiff has only the office of inspection or direction, but not the full and supreme power of jurisdiction over the universal Church… let him be anathema.” (Denz. 1831)

The proposition anathematized above, especially the bolded portion, is what many 'recognize and resist' false traditionalists have fallen into.  A true pope cannot be separated from his authority.  But if a man is not a true pope, then he does not have jurisdiction proper to the papal office.  The Vatican II claimants to the Papacy are heretics.  Since they are outside the Church, they have no jurisdiction.  The Cassiciacum Thesis must be rejected.  The main adherents of the Cassiciacum Thesis in our day are the members of Bishop Donald Sanborn's group, who also deny the Catholic faith by professing that members of false religions can be saved without the Catholic faith.

(more…)

Am I going to lose my soul going to the Novus Ordo?

Yes, Wayne, in charity we must tell you that if you continue to go to the invalid Novus Ordo you will be doomed to Hell. You are not receiving Our Lord Jesus Christ, but a piece of bread. You are not going to a Catholic Mass, but a Protestant service. You can still save your soul, but not if you continue to go to the Novus Ordo. If you cannot get to a traditional Mass that is acceptable, you must stay home on Sunday. The third Commandment of God is to keep holy the Sabbath. It is a Church law to attend Mass on Sunday. This only obliges if there is a true Mass available, with a true Catholic priest celebrating it. The English Martyrs in the 16th century were tortured horribly simply because they would not countenance or participate in a service just like the Novus Ordo, which had been imposed upon them.

“What did you think of Malachi Martin?”

I spoke with Malachi Martin on the telephone a few times when Martin was living.

I know the following information will upset some people, but the truth must be told. The fact is that Malachi Martin held to and publicly spread numerous heresies, as well as the most pernicious and misleading errors regarding the current apostasy. For instance, when he was on the Art Bell radio program he stated that pagan, American Indian religions glorify Jesus. These are pagan, false religions of the devil; yet Martin says they glorify Jesus. Martin's statement was completely heretical and a denial of the Faith.

Malachi Martin also publicly stated in an interview with Bernard Janzen that Buddhists can be saved and that John Paul II has never taught heresy! Only one who was completely unfamiliar with Antipope John Paul II (which Martin was not) or a conspirator or an apostate would ever dare to utter such an outrageous statement. Malachi Martin also promoted the false and evil notion that John Paul II is just a weak man surrounded by much worse men who are the real problem, thereby exonerating John Paul II from guilt in the process. This is exactly what the devil wants people to believe, and it has been imbibed all over the “traditional” and false “conservative” movement. We've seen firsthand how his books, especially Windswept House, have falsely influenced many traditionalists (especially in the SSPX, among whom his views are rampant) to exonerate John Paul II from the Vatican II apostasy, and shift the focus to other people - other people who, in reality, are just following his program of apostasy. This has given many a false hope in the false Vatican II sect.

Malachi Martin would occasionally reveal some very interesting facts, and then mix them in with all kinds of falsehoods. He was a mass of confusion. For instance, he stated publicly on the Art Bell program that the validity of the Novus Ordo is questionable (which means that it must be considered invalid), and then when he was asked where one could go to a Seminary he would just say, "find a good one"! Why didn't he tell the poor person asking the question that he couldn't go to any Novus Ordo Seminaries since they are celebrating "Masses" that cannot be considered valid? Martin would speak about Paul VI being the choice for the “Anti-Church,” while at the same time he defended the Anti-Church of which Paul VI was the head.

The fact is that he was a man who misled countless souls into error and a false explanation of the Vatican II Apostasy - his false explanation being all the more deceptive because of the conservatism and the truths with which it was mixed. And he may have been far worse than we can even imagine. We have seen a serious expose of Malachi Martin which brings forward evidence that he was an agent of international Judaism. One must ask: why were his books published by major Jewish Publishing houses? There is also a book written about him called Clerical Error, in which the author (a prominent man) claims that Martin carried on an affair with his wife. Some may say that this is all meant to discredit him, but we have an acquaintance who met Malachi Martin and saw him give a woman a deep kiss on the lips. This only lends credence to the claims of the author of Clerical Error. We also know a Biblical Scholar who was going to co-author a book with Malachi Martin. This Biblical Scholar knew Martin well and was not convinced that he was not working for some secret Society.

Many don’t know that Malachi Martin’s first book was called Jesus Now. This book denies the Second Coming of Christ and is filled with blasphemies against Our Lord Jesus Christ. Martin never publicly renounced this most disgusting work. These are the facts about Malachi Martin, as disquieting as they may be to some.

Fall 2004

More corroborating info on the apostate Malachi Martin from a reader

Thank you, Ed, for that very interesting information, which is perfectly consistent with the activity of Malachi Martin as seen by others, as well as his repeated and public denials of the Catholic Faith. There is an interesting story which corroborates this, which we would like to share with our readers. We had a friend who is a Biblical Scholar, who presently lives in New York City. He knew Martin very well. At lunch one day, he, Martin and others got into a conversation about Lazarus and the Rich Man in the Gospel (Luke 16). During the conversation, Martin said he believed that the Rich Man was in Hell, and someone at the table disagreed with him and gave the reasons why. The person who disagreed apparently didn’t think that the Rich Man could be in Hell, since the Rich Man showed compassion on his brothers by asking that God warn them of the fires – activity inconsistent with a damned soul, according to this man. So, when this man said that he disagreed with Martin, Martin alleged responded: “Who do you think you are a [bleeping] Saint,” bleeping used to denote the use of profanity.

But your e-mail sheds light on a reality that few can see because their faith is too weak, that men who present themselves as strong Catholics can actually be this wicked and evil inside. So many souls have been misled by this phony apostate; he has effectively neutralized a large part of the traditionalists by his false thesis that John Paul II is not the real problem, and the damage and the evil he has done in falsely shaping the view of people is difficult to put into words, especially among many of the shallow SSPX supporters, who fawn over people when they appear to have knowledge and erudition, while missing the important thing – what is the substance of their message? Are they saying anything of value? People are so deceived by this heretical apostate, that “Catholic Treasures” was even selling a tract commemorating him.

Fall 2004

A Defense of Malachi Martin

If the only evidence against Malachi Martin were personal accounts against his character, then perhaps one could scrutinize each of those accounts and, by slim chance, determine that they were all false (which I don't believe). But Malachi Martin is on record with public heresy: stating that Buddhists can be saved and thereby denying Catholic dogma; stating that pagan religions glorify Jesus, which is apostasy; stating that John Paul II has never denied the Faith, which is heresy; and for years feeding people a misleading and heretical explanation of the Vatican II apostasy. This demonstrates that Malachi Martin was not of God and did not possess the true Faith.

Fall 2004

A Defense of Malachi Martin Part 2

It is a common tactic of liberals to attribute to the person with whom they disagree a position that he doesn't hold to avoid addressing his facts which they find so disquieting. This is precisely what you have done multiple times. You have implied that I am advocating "burnings at the stake"; drawings and quarterings; sending everyone else in my path to Hell; and condemning the world in toto. None of those things did I espouse or suggest, but you bring up these emotionally charged ideas to skirt away from the fact that you refuse to admit that Malachi Martin's statements that Buddhists can be saved and that pagan religions glorify Jesus are heretical and denials of Catholic Faith. If you cannot say that those statements are denials of Catholic Faith then I'm sorry to say that you don't possess it. It is not my fault that Malachi Martin believed these things.

Frankly, it is not charitable to do what you did above: to attribute to someone something which he didn't advocate but which seems bad in order to cover up the weakness of your position. It is also very cowardly, because it demonstrates that a man cannot deal with the facts. The two facts that I cited above are not based on flimsy second-hand information, but public statements Martin made.

I'm sad to say that if your attitude in this regard is "I cannot judge," then you would have said the same thing in the 4th century during the Arian crisis when they quarreled over that "little" matter - only a word in Greek - whether Jesus was of one substance with the Father or merely of a similar substance. Many I'm sure said the same thing as you, "I'm just a sinful layman and I won't judge or condemn the Arians, let alone the Semi-Arians," and they wound up denying the Divinity of Christ. To be unable to denounce Malachi Martin’s statements that Buddhists can be saved; that pagan religions glorify Jesus; and that John Paul II has not taught heresy, is to be unable to profess the Faith of Christ.

I hope you realize that you are not looking at this matter fairly.

What do you think of Anne Catherine Emmerich?

The visions of Anne Catherine Emmerich are not trustworthy.  Catholics should not read them.  The vision that you quoted is heretical because it says that there are pagans in Purgatory.  That is contrary to Catholic Faith. The fact is that there are no pagans in Purgatory.  All who die as pagans go to the fires of hell (de fide, Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence).  To be saved it is necessary to have the Catholic faith.

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 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 productive of 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.”

The vision you quote is not the only vision of Anne Emmerich that is heretical.  There are other visions of Anne Emmerich that are contrary to Catholic dogma, such as when she supposedly saw a Jew and Protestants in Purgatory.  All of those visions must be rejected.  They are contrary to dogma.  The “visions” of Anne Emmerich are a prime example why Catholics must be very careful when reading private revelation.  It can come from the devil.  A Catholic should not read Anne Catherine Emmerich, except perhaps to expose her false visions, for one's faith will be attacked and possibly corrupted.  It is true that Anne Emmerich did not write down her own visions, but had an editor doing it for her.  Thus, it's possible that the editor is responsible for some of the false statements they contain.  However, it is more likely that she simply received a number of false visions from the Devil.

Where is the Church in the world today?

The answer to your first question is that the Church exists with those traditional Catholics who maintain the faith whole and inviolate and do not compromise with heresy or the apostate Bishops.

St. Athanasius: “Even if Catholics faithful to Tradition are reduced to a handful, they would be the true Church.” Fr. William Jurgens: “At one point in the Church’s history, only a few years before Gregory’s [Nazianz] present preaching (+380 A.D.), perhaps the number of Catholic bishops in possession of sees, as opposed to Arian bishops in possession of sees, was no greater than something between 1% and 3% of the total. Had doctrine been determined by popularity, today we should all be deniers of Christ and opponents of the Spirit.” Fr. William Jurgens: “In the time of the Emperor Valens (4th century), Basil was virtually the only orthodox Bishop in all the East who succeeded in retaining charge of his see… If it has no other importance for modern man, a knowledge of the history of Arianism should demonstrate at least that the Catholic Church takes no account of popularity and numbers in shaping and maintaining doctrine: else, we should long since have had to abandon Basil and Hilary and Athanasius and Liberius and Ossius and call ourselves after Arius.”

Can one gain a Plenary Indulgence if there is no Pope?

We believe that if one prayed the three Hail Marys for the intentions of the Papacy or the Church it would be sufficient to gain the Plenary indulgence, but I’m not aware of any specific decree or writing on the topic. In any case, this question would not be particular to our own time, but would apply in any Papal Interregnum (any period when we have no Pope, due to the death of the Pope, etc.)

What about sanctification prior to Baptism?

We’re glad that you liked the article. Sanctification from sin is not possible without water baptism. You may be referring to the position of the St. Benedict Center, which holds that sanctification is possible without water baptism but that salvation is not possible without water baptism. There is a section refuting this position in the book. To sum up the problems with their position simply: they correctly hold that unbaptized catechumens are outside the Catholic Church, but at the same time they hold that these catechumens (whom they admit are outside the Church) can have their sins remitted. This contradicts the solemn teaching of Pope Boniface VIII, which teaches that there is no remission of sins outside the Church.

Pope Boniface VIII, Unam Sanctam, Nov. 18, 1302, ex cathedra: “With Faith urging us we are forced to believe and to hold the one, holy, Catholic Church and that, apostolic, and we firmly believe and simply confess this Church outside of which there is no salvation nor remission of sin.” (Denz. 468-469)

What does Jesus mean by “the Kingdom of God is within you”?

Scott, Jesus says this in response to a question about when the Kingdom of God will come. The Jews expected that when God’s Kingdom and the Messiah would come to fruition it would be a temporal kingdom that would physically subjugate all peoples to the Jews. Jesus was refuting this notion, by pointing out that the Kingdom of God is spiritual, it concerns the soul, and is therefore “within you.” Regarding your second question, I would first share with a Protestant the clear teaching of Christ and the New Testament on the Necessity of Baptism (John 3:5; Mark 16:16, etc.), the Institution of the Papacy (Mt. 16), the Institution of Confession (John 20:23) and the Eucharist (John 6), and the condemnation of the idea of faith alone (James 2:24), to begin with. If they cannot accept these things, then they are simply not honest people.

Is your community affiliated with Rome and the “Benedictine” Order under John Paul II?

No, our community is not affiliated with Antipope John Paul II or the “Benedictine” order under him, simply because they are not real Catholics as they do not accept the Catholic Church’s teaching on many issues, such as, for instance, the Catholic dogma that there is no salvation outside the Church – to name just a few. They can claim to be Catholic just as John Kerry does, and hold the buildings of the Church, but they are no more Catholic than he is.

What are some good Morning Prayers?

The answer to your question about morning prayers is that, after the morning offering, it is good to say the following prayer to the Holy Trinity - the prayer given at Fatima.

"Most Holy Trinity, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, I adore thee profoundly, and I offer You the most precious Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Jesus Christ, present in all the tabernacles of the earth, in reparation for the outrages, sacrileges, and indifference with which He Himself is offended.  And through the infinite merits of His Most Sacred Heart and of the immaculate heart of Mary, I beg of You the conversion of poor sinners."

Sub Tuum Praesidium

We fly to thy patronage, O holy Mother of God! despise not our petitions in our necessities, but deliver us from all dangers, O ever glorious and blessed Virgin.

Dedication to the Blessed Virgin Mary

My Queen, my Mother.  I give myself entirely to thee; and to show my devotion to thee, I consecrate to thee this day my eyes, my ears, my mouth, my heart, my whole being, without reserve.  Wherefore, good Mother, as I am thine own, keep me, guard me, as thy property and possession.

Short Prayers to the Virgin

Sweet heart of Mary, be my salvation. My Mother, preserve me this day from mortal sin. Mother of love, of sorrow, and of mercy, pray for us. My mother, my trust. Mary, Virgin Mother of God, pray to Jesus for me. In thy conception, O Virgin Mary, thou wast immaculate, pray for us to the Father, whose Son Jesus Christ conceived of the Holy Ghost thou didst bring forth. To thee, O Virgin Mother, who wast never defiled with the slightest stain of original or actual sin, I commend and entrust the purity of my heart. O Mary, conceived without sin, pray for us who have recourse to thee.

Can one support the building fund of the SSPX, etc.?

B., good to hear from you. The answer to your first question is no, you absolutely cannot donate any money to the SSPX for any reason, including the building fund, since they are a heretical and schismatic group.

Pope Innocent III, Fourth Lateran Council, 1215: "Moreover, we determine to subject to excommunication believers who receive, defend, or support heretics."

Is the National Cathedral in Washington supposed to be “Catholic”?

We’re not sure what that ritual in the Novus Ordo was, but it was something bizarre and evil. The “National Cathedral” in Washington, D.C. is actually a Cathedral of the Episcopal sect, but the Novus Ordo apostate bishops sometimes go there for ecumenical events, including after 9/11, if I recall correctly.

Is John Paul II’s cross a satanic symbol?

Doris, You are absolutely correct. Paul VI and John Paul II have both carried a symbol which few have understood - the sinister bent or broken cross on which the body of Christ is displayed as a repulsive or distorted figure. Satanists in the fifth and sixth centuries, as well as black magicians and sorcerers in the Middle Ages, used such figurines to represent their hatred for Christianity. The Museum of Witchcraft in Bayonne, France has woodcuts of symbols used in the black mass and witch Sabbath of the Middle Ages in which the broken cross was used as the symbol of the Antichrist. (source: The Broken Cross by Piers Compton)

Are the infant children of Protestant families and Novus Ordo families validly baptized and made members of the true Church?

Rene, the Church teaches that anyone can baptize, provided he uses the matter and form and intends to do what the Church does - i.e., pronounce the words and pour the water. So, as long as water is used, and the infant child of Novus Ordo parents is baptized in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost, the baptism would be valid and those infants would therefore be validly baptized into the Catholic Church and would go to heaven if they died in infancy, just like the baptized infants of Protestant families who die in infancy would also go straight to heaven. The baptized infants who have Protestant or Novus Ordo parents don't become heretics until they knowingly embrace the Protestant or Novus Ordo heresy.

Pope Innocent IV, Council of Lyons I, 1254: "Moreover, if anyone without repentance dies in mortal sin, without a doubt he is tortured forever by the flames of eternal hell. But the souls of children after the cleansing of baptism, and of adults also who depart in charity and who are bound neither by sin nor unto any satisfaction for sin itself, at once pass quickly to their eternal fatherland." (Denz. 457)

What does being born again mean and what do I do to be saved?

Tommy, the meaning of Jesus about the necessity to be born again is found in John 3:5.  He says, "Unless a man is born again of water and the Holy Ghost he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God."  This refers to water baptism.  It means that no one can enter heaven without water baptism. But getting baptized is not the only thing one must do to be saved.  One must belong to the one Church Christ established (the Catholic Church), for he who refuses to hear the Church is like the heathen and publican (Matthew 18:17).  We can tell you in more detail what you must do to belong to this Church if you contact us. (more…)