The “popes” of the counterfeit church of conciliarism have been consistent in their celebration and glorification of infidels, heretics and unbelievers. It is impossible for all but the willfully blind to see that this is so, and only those who do want to run the risk of sacrificing human respect, sometimes under the cover of a false sense of “obedience” to men who are clearly outside the pale of the Catholic Church, keep going along with each incremental and exponential increase in the amount of evil promoted by conciliar “popes” and “bishops.”
Jorge Mario Bergoglio is on a constant, unremitting effort to tear down the last bastions of recognizable Catholicism within his false religious sect while he goes out of his way to “canonize” forerunners of the conciliar heresies, especially apostate Catholics such as Jan Hus and Martin Luther, to demonstrate the validity of their “prophetic reforms” while being subjected to “unjust persecution” by the “authorities” of the Catholic Church.
Although many articles on this site in the past have demonstrated the affinity of Karol Josef Wojtyla/John Paul II, Joseph Alois Ratzinger/Benedict XVI and Jorge Mario Bergoglio/Francis for the “work” of Father Martin Luther, which is why is not necessary to repeat what has been stated so many times in the past, and for the work of the heretical and schismatic Anglican sect, which will be the subject of yet another commentary soon, a relatively little known fact is that each of these three false claimants of papal authority has praised the heretic Father Jan Hus. “Saint John Paul II” did so in 1999, Ratzinger/Benedict XVI did so in 2009, and Bergoglio has done so, if only by implication, within the past week when news was announced that he was sending a personal representative to commemorate the six hundredth anniversary of the “tragedy” of the burning of the heretic Hus at the stake following the condemnation issued against him by the Council of Constance:
(Vatican Radio) Pope Francis has appointed Cardinal Miloslav Vlk, Archbishop Emeritus of Prague, to be his special envoy to the July 5-6 events in Prague, marking the 600th anniversary of the death of John Hus (1369-1415).
In an address to the International Symposium on John Hus in 1999, St John Paul II said the Bohemian church reformer, who was condemned of heresy and burnt at the stake, was a "memorable figure," particularly for "his moral courage in the face of adversity and death."
"On the eve of the Great Jubilee, I feel obliged to express deep regret for the cruel death inflicted on John Hus and the resulting wound, a source of conflict and division which was thus opened in the minds and hearts of the Bohemian people,” said St John Paul II.
Hus was born in the Kingdom of Bohemia (now Czech Republic). He was ordained a priest in 1400, and preached reformation in the Church. He was a supporter of some of John Wycliffe’s teachings and was eventually excommunicated, condemned of heresy and killed. His followers came to be known as Hussites.
St John Paul II said "the effort that students can develop to reach a deeper and full understanding of historical truth” was of “crucial importance.”
“Faith has nothing to fear from the commitment of historical research, since the research is also, ultimately, reaching out to the truth that has its source in God," he continued.
"A figure like John Hus, who was a major point of contention in the past, can now become a subject of dialogue, discussion and common study" in the hope that decisive steps can "be made on the path of reconciliation and true unity in Christ," the late pope said.
Cardinal Vlk was the architect of a commission, established in 1993, to study the life, work and person of John Hus. (Pope appoints envoy for 600th anniversary of John Hus' Justified Execution for Remaining Obstinate in Heresy.)
Obviously, Miloslav Vlk (“vlk” is a Czech word for “wolf”) is not going to be commiserating with the members of the Moravian sect that traces its origins directly to Jan Hus over the “unjust execution” of their heretical founder. Vlk is going to be celebrating the life and work of a heretic, many of whose false propositions, including “justification by faith alone” and a rejection of the doctrine of Purgatory, paved the way for the diabolical work of Martin Luther himself a century later. The false doctrines of Hus and Luther serve as important building blocks that led to the emergence of Modernism in the late-Nineteenth and early-Twentieth Centuries, and it is those doctrines, combined with those of John Calvin and Ulrich Zwingli and Thomas Cranmer, et. al, that undergird the work of the “magisterium” of the conciliar “popes.”
It is no accident that Miloslav “Cardinal” Vlk, the now retired conciliar “archbishop” of Prague, Czech Republic, has been chosen by Jorge Mario Beroglio to represent him at the July 6, 2015, celebration of Jan Hus in the very city where the statue of the Infant of Prague is located in the Carmelite Church of Our Lady Victorious in Prague. The name of the church itself is a tribute to the triumphant strength of Catholicism in Prague, which was at the very heart of the Hussite Revolution, in the early-Seventeenth Century.
As a true exemplar of the conciliar revolution against the Catholic Faith, Miloslav Vlk has been a career-long religious syncretist, thanks principally to the fact that he received most of his “religious formation,” such as it was, from the syncretistic cult known as Focolare:
Focolare's rabidly interdenominational priest and bishop branches have been approved as "Catholic" by Pope John Paul. Each year the Bishop Friends of the Focolare Movement meets for Catholic and non-Catholic bishops to study how to apply Focolare's spirituality of unity or communion in their lives. Begun in 1977, the group became ecumenical in 1982 and received canonical approval in 1994. For many years, the meeting have been organized by Milsolav Cardinal Vlk of Prague, a focolarino since 1964, who was shaped "far more" by Focolare "than the seminary. Pope John Paul promoted this Lubich apostle through the ranks to Cardinal, and appointed him to head the Council of European Bishops' Conferences in 1993. Before his term expired in 2001, Cardinal Vlk, signed an Ecumenical Charter with the Conference of [non-Catholic] European Churches, which includes gnostic Old Catholic Churches. The Charter commits Catholic and non-Catholic bishops to work for a Europe united in government and religion and for all the usual leftist demands of the New World Order.
The "spirituality of unity" or "collective spirituality," as it's termed, is based on changing Jesus' words, "Where two or three are gathered in My name..." (Matt. 18:20) to "Where two or three are united in My name." This is then interpreted to mean that "individualism is banned" in ideas, possessions, friendships and piety. This enforced conformity is called charity or love. In Focolare, "all differences vanished in the fire of charity." This spirituality is cultish and Communistic. It is also Jewish. Lubich says it is based on the Talmud, the Jewish body of man-made beliefs considered higher than the Bible. The Talmud contains occult teachings and has been condemned in many Papal Decrees. (As found in Cornelia Ferreira and John Vennari, World Youth Day: From Catholicism to Counterchurch, Canisius Press, 2005, pp. 109-114.)
Vlk the Focolarino championed the cause of a “re-examination” of the case of Jan Hus, meaning that the proceedings of the Council of Constance, most, although not all, of which were ratified and confirmed by Pope Martin V in the Bulls Inter Cunctas and In Eminentis, February 22, 1418, following the end of the Western Schism, were erroneous. Here is a 1996 report about Vlk’s effort’s in this regard:
Coming to terms with Hus. Cardinal Miloslav Vlk, Archbishop ofPrague, has been praised for his presence at an annual celebration — held at Husinca, birthplace of Jan Hus, who was burnt at the stake as a heretic in 1415. Jiri Otter, former secretary general of the Evangelical Church of Czech Brethren, said Mk's participation would "undoubtedly do a great deal to improve ecumenical ties between us".
Jan Hus, widely regarded as a reformer, churchman and architect of Czech culture, was summoned by the Council of Constance to explain his unorthodox teachings on biblical authority and church order. The decree condemning Hus spoke of his denying the primacy of St Peter, describing the Church as the assembly of the predestined, and arguing that personal holiness alone gave legitimate jurisdiction to the clergy, from priest to pope.
Cardinal Vlk said in a speech that Hus had fallen foul of "disordered and regrettable attitudes within the contemporary Church and papacy", and added that the Church could be expected shortly to re-examine his condemnation. Fr Tomas Hallik, a leading Catholic theologian who was until recently secretary of the Czech bishops' conference, said that unless the Catholic Church came to terms with Hus, "our Catholicism will always be foreign — Protestant in its own country". Hus, who was rector of Prague University and a Catholic priest, might have been mistaken, said Hallik. "But there is a difference between a person who makes mistakes and a heretic." (Coming to terms with Hus. Cardinal Miloslav Vlk.)
Miloslav Vlk’s sympathetic treatment of Jan Hus, of course, is in perfect accord with the official teaching of the “Second Vatican Council and the false ecumenism, both in theory and in practice, of the postconciliar “popes.” Conciliarism is all about “reexamining” everything about Catholicism to suit the needs of “the needs” according to a “pastoral” approach that deemphasizes doctrinal “differences” with heretics and schismatics, resulting always in a redefinition or jettisoning of the irreformable doctrine of the Catholic Church. Indeed, Vlk initiated an “interreligious meeting” in behalf of his syncretic mentor, Chiara Lubich, that took place in Istanbul, Turkey, under the auspices of Focolare, on December 2, 2004 (see Bishop-Friends of Focolare Promote Unity in Istanbul, Go to Istanbul Falafel House for Desert finding it just like Waffle House in the United States of America even though most Turks do not eat Falafel, a shining example of food syncretism to curry favor with Greek and Syrian syncretists.)
Karol Joseph Wojtyla/John Paul II was particularly intent on advancing false ecumenism, not that Giovanni Battista Enrico Antonio Maria Montini/Paul the Sick did not do so in his own twisted right as his “renewed liturgy” is based on Protestantism and Judeo-Masonry, and it is the Polish antipope who commissioned a Protestant “nun,” Minke de Vries, to compose the “meditations” he used for the Way of the Cross at the Coliseum in Rome on Good Friday, April 14, 1995. Although identified by news outlets at the time as a “Moravian nun,” Minke de Vries, a religious syncretist who was certainly sympathetic to the work of heretics such as Jan Hus as she, identified variously s a member of the Dutch Reformed Church and a “Augustinian nun,” belonged to the syncretic “Community of Grandchamp,” whose purposes are similar to those of the late Roger Schutz of the “Taize Community”:
ROME, April 15— Pope John Paul II ended the period of Christian mourning with an Easter vigil service tonight. It was the culmination of three days of religious observance in which the Pope, who is unusually aware of the opportunities the liturgy affords for symbolic messages, sought greater involvement for women in the church and for Christians outside the Roman Catholic fold.
On Good Friday evening, the Pope made an impassioned plea for Christian unity after praying through the Way of the Cross, Christ's path to crucifixion, with meditations composed by a Protestant nun.
"At this hour the people of God throughout the world gather together to keep watch," the Pope said in a sermon prepared for delivery at the vigil service in Saint Peter's Basilica. "And while they keep watch with their Lord, light begins to shine in the darkness."
The darkened church was gradually brought to light, bells rang, the organ sounded, and candles were lit to celebrate the mystery that is at the core of Christian belief: Christ's resurrection.
The service this evening was the highlight of Holy Week ceremonies, which moved the church from a period of mourning over Christ's death to the Easter season of celebration.
On Holy Thursday, following the example of Jesus in the Gospel, the Pope washed the feet of 12 priests.
Then on Good Friday, he broke with tradition and enlisted the help of lay people, including several women, to carry a cross through the flood-lit ruins of the Colosseum, where according to legend early Christians were put to death for their beliefs.
"Let us seek to continue the inheritance they have left us," the Pope told a crowd of several thousand huddled under umbrellas as freezing rain fell.
Walking with the help of a cane, the Pope stopped 12 times in the Colosseum to reflect on Christ's passion and death, listening to meditations composed for him by Sister Minke de Vries, the superior of a convent of reformed Protestant nuns in Grandchamp, Switzerland. Among those who briefly bore the light-weight wooden cross were a Protestant nun, identified only as Sister Maatje, of Grandchamp, and a Russian Orthodox priest, the Rev. Yoann Sviridov, the director of the Russian church's radio service and a longtime acquaintance of the Pope.
In her meditations, Sister de Vries singled out the mother of Christ, who she said had "lived all the suffering a woman can experience in the most tortured anguish."
"She attended, impotent, the torture of her son," she said.
Earlier, Sister de Vries described the invitation to compose the meditations as a "indisputable sign of a great opening to women." In a published interview, she pointed out that music to accompany Gospel texts of the Passion by composers like Johann Sebastian Bach, a Protestant, illustrated the intensity with which the Passion is experienced in the Protestant tradition.
The Pope bore the cross briefly at the beginning and end of the service. But the decision to enlist the aid of others, most notably women, arose more out of a desire to emphasize the universality of the ceremony, rather than out of concerns for the health of the Pope, who turns 75 in May, said the Vatican spokesman, Joaquin Navarro-Valls. John Paul, who donned a red papal cape over white vestments for the Good Friday service, walked with a noticeable limp, the result of hip replacement surgery he underwent a year ago. (John Paul Reaches Out In Holy Rites.)
Yes, "breaking with tradition. "Saint John Paul II" was pretty good at that, wasn't he?
Minke de Vries, who died on October 19, 2013, the age of eighty-four (see Sr Minke has entered the peace and light of God), had been invited previously by Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II, ever eager to “learn” from those outside of the pale of the Catholic Church, to speak about consecrated religious life at the conciliar “Synod of Bishops” in 1994. It was in his “apostolic exhortation,” Vita Consecrata, March 25, 1996, that Wojtyla the Ecumenist, instructed all communities of consecrated religious to be committed to conciliarism’s false ecumenism up to and including “shared prayer,” something that was doubtless the work of the “insights” that had been given by Minke de Vries in October of 1995:
100. Christ's prayer to the Father before his Passion, that his disciples may be one (cf. Jn 17: 21-23), lives on in the Church's prayer and activity. How can those called to the consecrated life not feel themselves involved? The wound of disunity still existing between believers in Christ and the urgent need to pray and work for the promotion of Christian unity were deeply felt at the Synod. The ecumenical sensitivity of consecrated persons is heightened also by the awareness that in other Churches and Ecclesial Communities monasticism has been preserved and is flourishing, as is the case in the Eastern Churches, and that there is a renewal of the profession of the evangelical counsels, as in the Anglican Communion and in the Communities of the Reformation.
The Synod emphasized the close connection between the consecrated life and the cause of ecumenism, and the urgent need for a more intense witness in this area. Since the soul of ecumenism is prayer and conversion, Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life certainly have a special duty to foster this commitment. There is an urgent need for consecrated persons to give more space in their lives to ecumenical prayer and genuine evangelical witness, so that by the power of the Holy Spirit the walls of division and prejudice between Christians can be broken down.
Forms of ecumenical dialogue
101. Sharing of the lectio divina in the search for the truth, a participation in common prayer, in which the Lord assures us of his presence (cf. Mt 18:20), the dialogue of friendship and charity which makes us feel how pleasant it is when brothers dwell in unity (cf. Ps 133), cordial hospitality shown to brothers and sisters of the various Christian confessions, mutual knowledge and the exchange of gifts, cooperation in common undertakings of service and of witness: these are among the many forms of ecumenical dialogue. They are actions pleasing to our common Father, which show the will to journey together towards perfect unity along the path of truth and love. Likewise, the knowledge of the history, doctrine, liturgy, and charitable and apostolic activity of other Christians cannot but help to make ecumenical activity ever more fruitful. I wish to encourage those Institutes which, either because they were founded for this purpose or because of a later calling, are dedicated to promoting Christian unity and therefore foster initiatives of study and concrete action. Indeed, no Institute of Consecrated Life should feel itself dispensed from working for this cause. My thoughts likewise turn to the Eastern Catholic Churches with the hope that also through the monastic life of both men and women — the flourishing of which is a grace to be constantly prayed for — they may help to bring about unity with the Orthodox Churches, through the dialogue of charity and the sharing of a common spirituality, itself the heritage of the undivided Church of the first millennium. In a special way, I entrust to the monasteries of contemplative life the spiritual ecumenism of prayer, conversion of heart, and charity. To this end I encourage their presence wherever Christian communities of different confessions live side by side, so that their total devotion to the "one thing needful" (cf. Lk 10:42) — to the worship of God and to intercession for the salvation of the world, together with their witness of evangelical life according to their special charisms — will inspire everyone to abide, after the image of the Trinity, in that unity which Jesus willed and asked of the Father for all his disciples. (Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II, Vita Consecrata, March 25, 1996.)
Miloslav “Cardinal” Vlk was a participating “bishop” at the 1994 “Synod of Bishops,” and he used his presence there to promote the false ecumenism that he had learned well thirty years before from Chiara Lubich and Focolare. It was a just a brief two years afterward that he attended the ceremonies in honor of a proto-Protestant “martyr,” Jan Hus, and it was three years after his presence there that he helped to organize an “international symposium on Jan Hus” that concluded with the following set of remarks offered by the false “pontiff,” Wojtyla/John Paul II, since raised to the Conciliar Pantheon of False Idols:
Distinguished Members of the Government,
Dear Cardinal and Brother Bishops,
Distinguished Scholars,
Ladies and Gentlemen,
1. It gives me great pleasure to greet you on the occasion of your Symposium on John Hus, which has been another important step towards a deeper understanding of the life and work of the renowned Bohemian preacher, one of the most famous of the many great scholars to come from the University of Prague. Hus is a memorable figure for many reasons. But it is particularly his moral courage in the face of adversity and death that has made him a figure of special significance to the Czech people, who have themselves suffered much through the centuries. I am particularly grateful to all of you who have contributed to the work of the ecumenical Commission “Husovská”, established some years ago by Cardinal Miloslav Vlk in order to identify more precisely the place that Jan Hus occupies among those who sought a reform of the Church.
2. It is significant that scholars not only from the Czech Republic but also from neighbouring countries have taken part in this Symposium. No less significant is the fact that, despite the tensions that have marred relations between Czech Christians in the past, scholars from different Confessions have come together to share their knowledge. Now that you have brought together the best and latest scholarly work on Jan Hus and the events in which he was involved, the next step will be to publish the results of the Symposium, so that as many people as possible will have an insight not only into a remarkable man but also into an important and complex period of Christian and European history.
Today, on the eve of the Great Jubilee, I feel the need to express deep regret for the cruel death inflicted on John Hus, and for the consequent wound of conflict and division which was thus imposed on the minds and hearts of the Bohemian people. It was during my first visit to Prague that I declared my hope that precisely in your land decisive steps could be taken on the path of reconciliation and true unity in Christ. The wounds of past centuries must be healed through a new attitude and completely renewed relationships. May our Lord Jesus Christ, “who is our peace... and has broken down the dividing wall of hostility” (Eph 2:14), guide the path of your people’s history towards the rediscovered unity of all Christians, which we ardently hope for in the millennium that is about to begin.
3. Scholarly endeavours to reach a more profound and complete grasp of historical truth are crucial to this cause. Faith has nothing to fear from the work of historical research, for, in the final analysis, research too is directed towards the truth which has in God its source. Therefore, I give thanks to our Father in Heaven for your work as it reaches its end, just as I was keen to encourage you as you began.
The writing of history is sometimes beset by ideological, political or economic pressures, so that the truth is obscured and history itself becomes a prisoner of the powerful. Genuinely scientific study is our best defence against such pressures and the distortions they can bring. It is true that it is very difficult to attain an absolutely objective account of history, since personal convictions, values and experiences inevitably impinge upon historical study. Yet this does not mean that we cannot offer an account of history which is in a very real sense impartial and therefore true and liberating. Your own work is a proof that this is possible.
4. The truth can also prove uncomfortable when it asks us to abandon long-held prejudices and stereotypes. This is as true of Churches, ecclesial communities and religions as it is of nations and individuals. Yet the truth which sets us free from error is also the truth which sets us free for love; and it is Christian love which has been the horizon of what your Commission has sought to do. Your work means that a figure like Jan Hus, who has been such a point of contention in the past, has now become a subject of dialogue, of comparison and shared investigation.
At a time when many are working to create a new kind of unity in Europe, studies such as yours can help to inspire people to go beyond narrow ethnic and national confines to genuine openness and solidarity. It can help Europeans to understand that the continent will advance more assuredly to a new and enduring unity if it draws in fresh and creative ways upon its shared Christian roots and upon the specific identity which derived from them.
5. It is clear, then, that your work is an important service not only to the historical figure of Jan Hus but also to Christians and European society more generally. This is because, in the end, it is a service to the truth about man; and it is this truth above all which the human family needs to recover at the dawn of the Third Millennium of the Christian era.
In contemplating the truth about man, we turn inevitably to the figure of the Risen Christ. He alone teaches and embodies completely the truth of man created in the image and likeness of God (cf. Gen 1:26). I pray most fervently that he who is “the same... for ever” (Heb 13:8) will send his light into your hearts. As a pledge of grace and peace in him, I invoke upon you, your loved ones, and upon the whole Czech nation the abundant blessings of Almighty God, to whom be “glory and wisdom and thanksgiving for ever and ever! Amen” (Rev 7:12). (Address to a symposium on John Hus.)
A “new relationship.”
“Cruel death.”
With great “regret.”
Regret for what?
Regret for the condemnation of heretic?
Our true popes of the era of Christendom understood that heretics were far more dangerous to the civil order than those who committed crimes against property and persons. Without for a moment minimizing the gravity of crimes against property and persons, crimes against Christ the King and His Divine Revelation, which has been entrusted exclusively to the Catholic Church for Its eternal safekeeping and infallible explication, are more grave in the hierarchical evils as to mislead a single soul about the tenets of the Holy Faith is to place that soul, no less others, into peril of eternal loss and as social order, which is premised upon the right ordering of souls, into imminent peril of decay and collapse.
A manifest heretic such as the late “Saint John Paul II” had great sympathy for others condemned as heretics. Like his three immediate predecessors in the conciliar “Petrine Ministry” (Angelo Roncalli/John XXIII, Giovanni Battista Enrico Antonio Maria Montini/Paul the Sick and Albino Luciani/John Paul I, who was consecrated a bishop by Roncalli/John XXIII himself less than two months after his own “election” on October 28, 1958, the Feast of Saints Simon and Jude), Wojtyla/John Paul II did not believe himself bound by the work of those general councils of the Catholic Church that could not be reconciled with his Modernist precepts. Thus it is that doctrines associated with the “past” that are not deemed “relevant” to the needs of the mythical entity called “modern man” must be said to have been but the products of the historical circumstances in which they were formulated, making a “reevaluation” of them in light of alleged “changed circumstances” a necessity.
Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II labeled this repackaging as “living tradition” and Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI coined his “hermeneutic of continuity. No matter the label, though, the fourth and fifth in the current line of antipopes espoused the concept of the “evolution of dogma” that had been condemned by the [First] Vatican Council on April 24, 1870, and by Pope Saint Pius X in Pascendi Dominici Gregis, September 8, 1907. Pope Pius XII used Humani Generis, August 12, 1950, to condemn the “new theology’s” effort to resurrect the “evolution of dogma.” For his part, of course, Jorge Mario Bergoglio, though he will give lip service now and again to the “hermeneutic of continuity,” eschews even the remotest hint of Catholic doctrine altogether, believing in a pagan “religion of the heart” that is nothing than a projection onto Divine Revelation of his own random, truly disjointed and twisted notions that are inspired directly the devil himself.
Ratzinger/Benedict himself mentioned Jan Hus, however briefly (some would argue even gratuitously, although I do not), when he addressed an “ecumenical” meeting in Prague, Czech Republic, on September 26, 2009, in the presence of none other than Miloslav Vlk, three years after he had denounced Michael Semin, a layman associated with the Society of Saint Pius X, for a conference he was holding that featured allegedly "anti-Semitic" speakers (see Czech Out That Wolf Yet Again, which was written in September of 2006 as I was nearing a firm conclusion about the true state of the Church Militant on earth in this time of apostasy and betrayal), who was less than a year away from entering into retirement at age seventy-eight:
Dear Cardinals,
Your Excellencies,
Brothers and Sisters in Christ,
I am grateful to Almighty God for the opportunity to meet with you who are here representing the various Christian communities of this land. I thank Doctor Černý, President of the Ecumenical Council of Churches in the Czech Republic, for the kind words of welcome which he has addressed to me on your behalf.
My dear friends, Europe continues to undergo many changes. It is hard to believe that only two decades have passed since the collapse of former regimes gave way to a difficult but productive transition towards more participatory political structures. During this period, Christians joined together with others of good will in helping to rebuild a just political order, and they continue to engage in dialogue today in order to pave new ways towards mutual understanding, cooperation for peace and the advancement of the common good.
Nevertheless, attempts to marginalize the influence of Christianity upon public life – sometimes under the pretext that its teachings are detrimental to the well-being of society – are emerging in new forms. This phenomenon gives us pause to reflect. As I suggested in my Encyclical on Christian hope, the artificial separation of the Gospel from intellectual and public life should prompt us to engage in a mutual “self-critique of modernity” and “self-critique of modern Christianity,” specifically with regard to the hope each of them can offer mankind (cf. Spe Salvi, 22). We may ask ourselves, what does the Gospel have to say to the Czech Republic and indeed all of Europe today in a period marked by proliferating world views?
Christianity has much to offer on the practical and ethical level, for the Gospel never ceases to inspire men and women to place themselves at the service of their brothers and sisters. Few would dispute this. Yet those who fix their gaze upon Jesus of Nazareth with eyes of faith know that God offers a deeper reality which is nonetheless inseparable from the “economy” of charity at work in this world (cf. Caritas in Veritate, 2): He offers salvation.
The term is replete with connotations, yet it expresses something fundamental and universal about the human yearning for well-being and wholeness. It alludes to the ardent desire for reconciliation and communion that wells up spontaneously in the depths of the human spirit. It is the central truth of the Gospel and the goal to which every effort of evangelization and pastoral care is directed. And it is the criterion to which Christians constantly redirect their focus as they endeavour to heal the wounds of past divisions. To this end – as Doctor Černý has noted – the Holy See was pleased to host an International Symposium in 1999 on Jan Hus to facilitate a discussion of the complex and turbulent religious history in this country and in Europe more generally (cf. Pope John Paul II, Address to the International Symposium on John Hus, 1999). I pray that such ecumenical initiatives will yield fruit not only in the pursuit of Christian unity, but for the good of all European society. (Ecumenical Meeting at the Throne Hall of the Archbishop's House of Prague (September 27, 2009)
As noted at the beginning of this commentary, Jorge Mario Bergoglio, acting in complete conformity predecessors in his religious sect of apostasy, has appointed none other than the conciliar “archbishop”-emeritus of Prague, Miloslav “Cardinal” Vlk, to represent him at the sixth hundredth anniversary of Jan Hus’s justified execution, ordered by the Council of Constance itself, for being an obstinate heretic. Somehow, though, I do not think that the "papal message" that Vlk will delivered to the assembled Moravians and other scattered Hussites will reiterate the following propositions of Hus that were condemned by the Council of Constance, a condemnation that was ratified and confirmed by Pope Martin V in the Bulls Inter Cunctas and In Eminentis, February 22, 1418:
atican Radio) Pope Francis has appointed Cardinal Miloslav Vlk, Archbishop Emeritus of Prague, to be his special envoy to the July 5-6 events in Prague, marking the 600th anniversary of the death of John Hus (1369-1415).
In an address to the International Symposium on John Hus in 1999, St John Paul II said the Bohemian church reformer, who was condemned of heresy and burnt at the stake, was a "memorable figure," particularly for "his moral courage in the face of adversity and death."
"On the eve of the Great Jubilee, I feel obliged to express deep regret for the cruel death inflicted on John Hus and the resulting wound, a source of conflict and division which was thus opened in the minds and hearts of the Bohemian people,” said St John Paul II.
Hus was born in the Kingdom of Bohemia (now Czech Republic). He was ordained a priest in 1400, and preached reformation in the Church. He was a supporter of some of John Wycliffe’s teachings and was eventually excommunicated, condemned of heresy and killed. His followers came to be known as Hussites.
St John Paul II said "the effort that students can develop to reach a deeper and full understanding of historical truth” was of “crucial importance.”
“Faith has nothing to fear from the commitment of historical research, since the research is also, ultimately, reaching out to the truth that has its source in God," he continued.
"A figure like John Hus, who was a major point of contention in the past, can now become a subject of dialogue, discussion and common study" in the hope that decisive steps can "be made on the path of reconciliation and true unity in Christ," the late pope said.
Cardinal Vlk was the architect of a commission, established in 1993, to study the life, work and person of John Hus.
(from Vatican Radio) - See more at: http://www.news.va/en/news/pope-appoints-envoy-for-600th-anniversary-of-...
atican Radio) Pope Francis has appointed Cardinal Miloslav Vlk, Archbishop Emeritus of Prague, to be his special envoy to the July 5-6 events in Prague, marking the 600th anniversary of the death of John Hus (1369-1415).
In an address to the International Symposium on John Hus in 1999, St John Paul II said the Bohemian church reformer, who was condemned of heresy and burnt at the stake, was a "memorable figure," particularly for "his moral courage in the face of adversity and death."
"On the eve of the Great Jubilee, I feel obliged to express deep regret for the cruel death inflicted on John Hus and the resulting wound, a source of conflict and division which was thus opened in the minds and hearts of the Bohemian people,” said St John Paul II.
Hus was born in the Kingdom of Bohemia (now Czech Republic). He was ordained a priest in 1400, and preached reformation in the Church. He was a supporter of some of John Wycliffe’s teachings and was eventually excommunicated, condemned of heresy and killed. His followers came to be known as Hussites.
St John Paul II said "the effort that students can develop to reach a deeper and full understanding of historical truth” was of “crucial importance.”
“Faith has nothing to fear from the commitment of historical research, since the research is also, ultimately, reaching out to the truth that has its source in God," he continued.
"A figure like John Hus, who was a major point of contention in the past, can now become a subject of dialogue, discussion and common study" in the hope that decisive steps can "be made on the path of reconciliation and true unity in Christ," the late pope said.
Cardinal Vlk was the architect of a commission, established in 1993, to study the life, work and person of John Hus.
(from Vatican Radio) - See more at: http://www.news.va/en/news/pope-appoints-envoy-for-600th-anniversary-of-...
1. One and only is the holy universal Church which is the aggregate of the predestined.
2. Paul never was a member of the devil, although he did certain acts similar to the acts of those who malign the Church.
3. The foreknown are not parts of the Church, since no part of it finally will fall away from it, because the charity of predestination which binds it will not fall away.
4. Two natures, divinity and humanity, are one Christ.
5. The foreknown, although at one time he is in grace according to the present justice, yet is never a part of the holy Church; and the predestined always remains a member of the Church, although at times he may fall away from additional grace, but not from the grace of predestination.
6. Assuming the Church as the convocation of the predestinated, whether they were in grace or not according to the present justice, in that way the Church is an article of faith.
7. Peter is not nor ever was the head of the Holy Catholic Church.
8. Priests living criminally in any manner whatsoever, defile the power of the priesthood, and as unfaithful sons they think unfaithfully regarding the seven sacraments of the Church, the keys, the duties, the censures, customs, ceremonies, and sacred affairs of the Church, its veneration of relics, indulgences, and orders.
9. The papal dignity has sprung up from Caesar, and the perfection and institution of the pope have emanated from the power of Caesar.
10. No one without revelation would have asserted reasonably regarding himself or anyone else that he was the head of a particular church, nor is the Roman Pontiff the head of a particular Roman Church.
11. It is not necessary to believe that the one whosoever is the Roman Pontiff, is the head of any particular holy church, unless God has predestined him.
12. No one takes the place of Christ or of Peter unless he follows him in character, since no other succession is more important, and not otherwise does he receive from God the procuratorial power, because for that office of vicar are required both conformity in character and the authority of Him who institutes it.
13. The pope is not the true and manifest successor of Peter, the first of the apostles, if he lives in a manner contrary to Peter; and if he be avaricious, then he is the vicar of Judas Iscariot. And with like evidence the cardinals are not the true and manifest successors of the college of the other apostles of Christ, unless they live in the manner of the apostles, keeping the commandments and counsels of our Lord Jesus Christ.
14. Doctors holding that anyone to be emended by ecclesiastical censure, if he is unwilling to be corrected, must be handed over to secular judgment, certainly are following in this the priests, scribes, and pharisees, who saying that "it is not permissible for us to kill anyone" (John 18:31), handed over to secular judgment Christ Himself, who did not wish to be obedient to them in all things, and such are homicides worse than Pilate.
15. Ecclesiastical obedience is obedience according to the invention of the priest of the Church, without the expressed authority of scripture.
16. The immediate division of human works is: that they are either virtuous or vicious, because, if a man is vicious and does anything, then he acts viciously; and if he is virtuous and does anything, then he acts virtuously; because as vice, which is called a crime or mortal sin, renders the acts of man universally vicious, so virtue vivifies all the acts of the virtuous man.
17. Priests of Christ, living according to His law and having a knowledge of Scripture and a desire to instruct the people, ought to preach without the impediment of a pretended excommunication. But if the pope or some other prelate orders a priest so disposed not to preach, the subject is not obliged to obey.
18. Anyone who approaches the priesthood receives the duty of a preacher by command, and that command he must execute, without the impediment of a pretended excommunication.
19. By ecclesiastical censures of excommunication, suspension, and interdict, the clergy for its own exaltation supplies for itself the lay populace, it multiplies avarice, protects wickedness, and prepares the way for the Antichrist. Moreover, the sign is evident that from the Antichrist such censures proceed, which in their processes they call fulminations, by which the clergy principally proceed against those who uncover the wickedness of the Antichrist, who will make use of the clergy especially for himself.
20. If the Pope is wicked and especially if he is foreknown, then as Judas, the Apostle, he is of the devil, a thief, and a son of perdition, and he is not the head of the holy militant Church, since he is not a member of it.
21. The grace of predestination is a chain by which the body of the Church and any member of it are joined insolubly to Christ the Head.
22. The pope or prelate, wicked and foreknown, is equivocally pastor and truly a thief and robber.
23. The pope should not be called "most holy" even according to his office, because otherwise the king ought also to be called "most holy" according to his office, and torturers and heralds should be called holy, indeed even the devil ought to be called holy, since he is an official of God.
24. If the pope lives in a manner contrary to Christ, even if he should ascend through legal and legitimate election according to the common human constitution, yet he would ascend from another place than through Christ, even though it be granted that he entered by an election made principally by God; for Judas Iscariot rightly and legitimately was elected by God, Jesus Christ, to the episcopacy, and yet he ascended from another place to the sheepfold of the sheep.
25. The condemnation of the forty-five articles of John Wycliffe made by the doctors is irrational and wicked and badly made; the cause alleged by them has been feigned, namely, for the reason that "no one of them is a Catholic but anyone of them is either heretical, erroneous, or scandalous."
26. Not for this reason, that the electors, or a greater par of them, agreed by acclamation according to the observance of men upon some person, is that person legitimately elected; nor for this reason is he the true and manifest successor or vicar of the Apostle Peter, or in the ecclesiastical office of another apostle. Therefore, whether electors have chosen well or badly, we ought to believe in the works of the one elected; for, by the very reason that anyone who operates for the advancement of the Church in a manner more fully meritorious, has from God more fully the faculty for this.
27. For there is not a spark of evidence that there should be one head ruling the Church in spiritual affairs, which head always lives and is preserved with the Church militant herself.
28. Christ through His true disciples scattered through the world would rule His Church better without such monstrous heads.
29. The apostles and faithful priests of the Lord strenuously in necessities ruled the Church unto salvation, before the office of the pope was introduced; thus they would be doing even to the day of judgment, were the pope utterly lacking.
30. No one is a civil master, no one is a prelate, no one is a bishop while he is in mortal sin. (As found in Henry Denzinger, Enchirdion Symbolorum, thirteenth edition, translated into English by Roy Deferrari and published in 1955 as The Sources of Catholic Dogma--referred to as "Denziger," by B. Herder Book Company of St. Louis, Missouri, and London, England, no. 148, pp. 212-215.)
It should go without saying that many of these propositions, especially the ones concerning the nature of the “universal church” and the denial of the temporal authority of the Catholic Church. Modernism is as Pope Saint Pius X noted in Pascendi Dominci Gregis, “the synthesis of all heresies,” owing much to a wide variety of heresies that have plagued Holy Mother Church from the First Century A.D. to the present.
An ultimate “solution” to the condemnation of Jan Hus by the Council of Constance might be for Jorge Mario Bergoglio to use Joseph “Cardinal” Ratzinger’s “rehabilitation” of the Father Antonio Rosmini-Serbati on July 1, 2001, even though forty of his propositions had been condemned posthumously by the Holy Office with the approval of Pope Leo XIII on December 14, 1887. “Cardinal” Ratzinger himself was a follower of some of Rosmini-Serbati’s propositions, which he justified by, in effect, saying that poor Pope Leo XIII was a prisoner of the historical circumstances in which he lived. The conciliar revolutionaries simply do not believe in the immutable nature of truth, something that has been documented on this site repeatedly and in the text of No Space Between Ratzinger and Bergoglio: So Close in Apostasy, So Far From Catholic Truth. It was as “Pope Benedict XVI” that Rosmini-Serbati’s “rehabilitator” issued a decree on June 3, 2007, for his “beatification,” which took place in Novara, Italy, on November 18, 2007.
Another possible “solution” to Jan Hus’s condemnation by the Council of Constance would be for the conciliar revolutionaries to claim that the council’s proceedings concerning the condemnations of John Wycliffe in England and of Jan Hus in Bohemia are not binding because the Western Schism, which had begun in 1317, had not ended and there was no claimant to the Papal Throne to preside over the condemnations. Pope Martin V’s subsequent ratification of the condemnations could be claimed to be invalid as no pope has authority over the proceedings of a council that preceded his election.
Both sets of possible “solutions” to the conundrum caused by the Council of Constance’s condemnation of Wycliffe and Hus are erroneous, of course, and they would represent a desperate effort to make inconvenient, “un-ecumenical” pronouncements seem to be invalid when they remain forever valid as heretical propositions cannot be “true” a later date. This sort of desperate effort is exactly what the conciliar revolutionaries use repeatedly as they follow “Saint John Paul II” and “Pope Benedict XVI” in believing that every doctrinal formulation is capable of “refinement” given the alleged “impossibility” of expressing truth adequately by means of human language given the vagaries of fallen human nature and the historical circumstances that gave rise to “controversies” not well understood by those who had been involved in them.
The Council of Constance, of course, arranged for the election of pope to end the Western Schism as the legitimate pope, Pope Gregory XII, voluntarily abdicated in order to facilitate peace within the Church and as the council fathers condemned Antipope Benedict XIII as “rebellious and contumacious,” declaring him to be “incorrigible” and a “notorious schismatic heretic.” The Council of Constance also deposed the first Antipope John XXIII on May 29, 1415, ordering him to be imprisoned at Heidelberg castle. This made it possible for election of Pope Martin V by the College of Cardinals, which at Constance, on November 8, 1417, and it was Pope Martin V who confirmed most, although not all of the proceedings of the Council of Constance, including the condemnations of John Wycliffe and Jan Hus. The Council of Constance’s condemnation of Jan Hus on July 6, 1415, a specific and categorical condemnation of the obstinate heretic’s major theological propositions.
Pope Martin V did not, however, confirm proclamations made by the Council of Constance in 1415 that taught that a true pope was fallible in Faith and Morals and that is power is not superior to that of a general council, which had the authority to depose a true pope. The name “conciliarism,” which arose from Gallicanism in France, was given to such a view, and it is interesting that Pope Martin V did not confirm a teaching that was contrary to the nature of the papacy and that Pope Eugene IV re-confirmed the condemnations of Wycliffe and Hus while excluding the Gallican propositions about the papacy:
“No papal approbation of it was ever meant to confirm its anti-papal acts; thus Eugene IV (22 July, 1446) approved the council, with due reserve of the rights, dignity, and supremacy of the Apostolic See (absque tamen præjudicio juris dignitatis et præeminentiæ Sedis Apostolicæ). See Bouix, "De papa, ubi et de concilio oecumenico" (Paris, 1869), and Salembier (below), 313-23.” (See Council of Constance.)
In other words, both Pope Martin V and Pope Eugene IV specifically chose not to confirm the Council of Florence’s teaching on the “limited” nature of papal authority that is the very foundation of the “resist while recognize” movement popularized by the Society of Saint Pius X. Herewith follows a description of the conciliarism wrought by Gallicanism as found in Fathers Dominic and Francisco Radecki’s Tumultuous Times:
The writings of the men who had lived years earlier began to have a profound effect on the clergy and laity alike. William of Ockham (1280-1349) who opposed the abuses and worldliness of the Avignon popes advocated theories that destroyed the concept of the papacy as a divine institution. Ockham befriended the avowed enemies of the Avignon popes, Louis of Bavaria, Marsilius of Padua and Michael of Cesena.
The University of Paris was the catalyst for novel, erroneous concepts that were championed by clergy and laity alike during this period. The superiority of a general council over the pope and the fallibility of the pope were taught at the universal and the Cardinal Bishop of Cambrai, Peter d’Ailly, echosed these erroneous concepts at the Council of Constance.
Gallicanism may be defined in general as the tendency, while accepting the Papacy as a divine institution, to oppose or minimize papal claims as they have been made in history. It has been of two kinds: political and theological. Political Gallicanism contested the claims to authority in the temporal order as asserted and exercised by Gregory VII, Innocent III and Boniface VIII; theological Gallicanism contested certain claims of the Papacy in the spiritual and religious order. These tendencies of course manifested themselves in other countries than France; they have received the name ‘Gallican’ because all through history it has been in France that they have found their chief expression. (Dom Cuthbert Butler, The Vatican Council 1869-1870, Vol. I, p. 23, as cited in Fathers Francisco Radecki, CMRI, and Dominic Radecki, CMRI, Tumultuous Times, Saint Joseph’s Media, pp. 151-152.)
Gallicanism, also called Conciliarism, taught that a general council is superior to the pope must pay obeisance to a general council. Marilius of Padua, the rector of the University of Paris from December 1312-March 1313, claimed that authority ultimately resided in the people and that the pope received his jurisdiction from the State. This erroneous teaching destroys the concept that the pope receives his authority from Christ and the clergy thereby become representatives of the State.
The main point of conciliarism was that power was not located in the papal monarch but in the Church itself as represented by a general council. In this system the pope was merely a representative of the general council and eventually of the Church. It was the latter from which he received power and to which he consequently remained responsible. Hitherto the master of the church, he was not turned into its servant. The pope became an officer, an organ of the Church which could restrict, modify and take away the power conferred on him by the general council. Conciliarism was the exact opposite of the papal monarch. (Walter Ullmann, A Short History of the Papacy in the Middle Ages, p. 299, as cited in Fathers Francisco Radecki, CMRI, and Dominic Radecki, CMRI, Tumultuous Times, Saint Joseph’s Media, p. 152.)
Ironically, there are elements of conciliarism as embraced by the Council of Constance that have been used by the Society of Saint Pius X to justify their “resistance” to a true and legitimate Successor of Saint Peter and by the conciliar revolutionaries themselves to justify the heresy of “episcopal collegiality” and a “democratic” “Petrine Ministry” that could be exercised in a manner acceptable to the Protestants and the Orthodox. Just as liberalism and conservatism in the political realm are two sides of the same Lockean coin, so is it the case that “resistance” to modern-day conciliarism and the promotion of its false tenets are just two sides of the same Gallican coin.
Enough. You get the idea. I hope that you also get the idea why I had to take much time in the composition of this commentary.
Jorge Mario Bergoglio goes about his work of putting the final touches on the “SS One World Ecumenical Church” that is so near and dear to his apostate heart. He does find time, however, to fool around a lot, which is what he did three days ago meeting with the Harlem Globetrotters. You read that right: the Harlem Globetrotters. See for yourselves: Bergoglio meets the Harlem Globetrotters:
Jorge Joins the Harlem Globetrotters
Hey, Jorge might initiate a pastoral “outreach” to professional football quarterbacks who deflate footballs prior to a postseason championship game as part of his “Jubilee Year of Mercy,” absurdity being the rule of the day as Bergoglio takes the conciliar revolution against the Catholic to its logical conclusion of a sort of pantheism that has even the likes of the pro-abortion, pro-perversity former United States Vice President and Albert Arnold Gore, Jr., the environmental wacko of all environmental wackos who has a former advising helping to draft Jorge’s upcoming “encyclical letter” on “man-made climate change,” into believing that that he could become a “Catholic” because of this pope”:
“Um, I think that Pope Francis is, uh, uh, quite an inspiring figure, really a phenomena,” Al Gore said, seemingly in awe. “I’ve been startled with the clarity of the moral force that he embodies, and you know he kind of raises, in a new context, the old question: Is the pope Catholic? And um.”
“That’s a joke by the way,” teased Al Gore.
“But for many Catholics that might be true,” suggested the interviewer.
“Well, I’ve said publicly in the last year – I was raised in the Southern Baptist tradition – I could become a Catholic because of this pope,” said Al Gore. “He is that inspiring to me, and I know, you know, the vast majority of my Catholic friends are just thrilled to the marrow of their bones that he is providing this kind of spiritual leadership.” (Al Gore: ‘ I Could Become a Catholic Because of This Pope.'.)
What more can be said?
Not much, especially after working on this commentary for all day yesterday into the early hours of this morning, Saturday, May 9, 2015, the Feast of Saint Gregory Nazianzen.
Keep close to Our Lady, especially through her Most Holy Rosary in this month of May, and offer up to her Divine Son through her own Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart all of the sufferings of the present moment, seeking, as always, to make reparation for our own sins and for those of the whole world. We do so without looking for results or any kind of consolation. We must simply keep our hands on the plough and continue praying and working until end, praying especially that we do not succumb to human respect of any kind for any reason, including the fear of “offending” some conciliar “presbyter” or losing contact with one’s grown children and/or grandchildren, as our fidelity to the truths of the Catholic Faith will not go without its reward if we, by relying ever upon the graces sent to us by Our Lady through her loving hands as the Mediatrix of All Graces, persist until the end in a state of Sanctifying Grace.
Vivat Christus Rex! Viva Cristo Rey!
Isn't it time to pray a Rosary now?
Our Lady of the Rosary, pray for us.
Saint Joseph, pray for us.
Saints Peter and Paul, pray for us.
Saint John the Baptist, pray for us.
Saint John the Evangelist, pray for us.
Saint Michael the Archangel, pray for us.
Saint Gabriel the Archangel, pray for us.
Saint Raphael the Archangel, pray for us.
Saints Joachim and Anne, pray for us.
Saint Benedict Joseph Labre, pray for us.
Saints Caspar, Melchior, and Balthasar, pray for us.
Saint Gregory Nazianzen, pray for us.
