Updated: Jorge Mario Bergoglio and Christopher Pierre: Certified Agents of Antichrist's Operation of Error

There are times when even I, who covered a few “bishops’” meetings in the 1990s and even organized a Rosary rally that prayed continuously every day from the morning until we saw the “hierarchs” leave the Hyatt Regency Hotel in Washington, District of Columbia, in November of 1997, can find my jaw dropping at some incredible statement made by apostates who are without credibility.

Such a jaw dropping moment occurred late Wednesday evening, November 15, 2023, the Feast of Saint Albert the Great, when I read the following report on LifeSite News about what Christophe Pierre, the conciliar sect’s nuncio to the United States of America, told “Bishop” Joseph Strickland three years ago the semi-annual meeting of the United States Conference of Catholic “Bishops” in Baltimore, Maryland:

(LifeSiteNews) — Terry Barber of Virgin Most Powerful Radio revealed on Sunday that Pope Francis’ apostolic nuncio to the United States, Cardinal Christophe Pierre, told Bishop Joseph Strickland three years ago that “there is no deposit of faith.”

Barber, who regularly speaks with the faithful and recently deposed prelate of Tyler, Texas, on his radio program The Bishop Strickland Hour, said that according to Bishop Strickland, Pierre made the “shocking” claim at a meeting of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops.

“Bishop Strickland communicated to me that … Pierre confronted [him] and said, ‘Look, the Holy Father is watching you. You need to stop talking about the deposit of faith. There is no deposit of faith.’”

“Well, you can imagine how shocking that is to hear a nuncio say there’s no deposit of faith, because if you don’t believe in the deposit of faith, you’re not Catholic,” continued Barber. “That’s not just my opinion. That’s the Church teaching.” (Terry Barber reveals US nuncio Cardinal Pierre told Bishop Strickland ‘there is no deposit of faith’.)

How can anyone, including “Bishop” Joseph Strickland, think that any official of the Catholic Church could utter such apostasy that is such a fantasy as to believe it would mean that the Third Person of the Most Blessed Trinity, God the Holy Ghost, either has misled our true popes and general councils until the dawning of the Age of Aquarius with fake, phony, fraud election of Angelo Roncalli as “Pope John XXIII” on October 28, 1958, the Feast of Saints Simon and Jude or was entirely absent in the work of these true popes and had nothing to do with the general councils that taught precisely the opposite of what has been taught by the conciliar revolutions for well over the past sixty years.

Gone are the days when Karol Josef Wojtyla/John Paul II and Joseph Alois Ratzinger/Benedict XVI’s stood on their heads as they recycled dogmatic evolutionism under the slogans of “living tradition” and the “hermeneutic of continuity.” Jorge Mario Bergoglio, Victor Manuel Fernandez, and Christophe Pierre are open dogmatic evolutionists and make no apologies for being such.

To be fair to the conciliar revolutionaries, however, it is important to point out that there are times when they do speak of the "deposit of faith" before deconstructing it of its actual Catholic meaning to pour into it their own "living deposit" into which they may add whatever it is their ideological predilections demand in light of "smelling the smell of the sheep" and responding to the "cries" of those who live in "imperfect" situations and feel "excluded" from the "body of believers. Jorge Mario Bergoglio himself has done this many times, including at the start of the 2015 "synod of bishops" that paved the way for Amoris Laetitia, March 19, 2016:

The Synod, as we know, is a journey undertaken together in the spirit of collegiality and synodality, on which participants bravely adopt parrhesia, pastoral zeal and doctrinal wisdom, frankness, and always keep before our eyes the good of the Church, of families and the suprema lex, the Salus animarum.

I should mention that the Synod is neither a convention, nor a parlor, nor a parliament or senate, where people make deals and reach compromises. The Synod is rather an Ecclesial expression, i.e., the  Church that journeys together to read reality with the eyes of faith and with the heart of God; it is the Church that interrogates herself with regard to her fidelity to the deposit of faith, which does not represent for the Church a museum to view, nor even something merely to safeguard, but is a living source from which the Church shall drink, to satisfy the thirst of, and illuminate, the deposit of life.

The Synod moves necessarily within the bosom of the Church and of the holy people of God, to which we belong in the quality of shepherds – which is to say, as servants. The Synod also is a protected space in which the Church experiences the action of the Holy Spirit. In the Synod, the Spirit speaks by means of every person’s tongue, who lets himself be guided by the God who always surprises, the God who reveals himself to little ones, who hides from the knowing and intelligent; the God who created the law and the Sabbath for man and not vice versa; by the God, who leaves the 99 sheep to look for the one lost sheep; the God who is always greater than our logic and our calculations.

Let us remember, however, that the Synod will be a space for the action of the Holy Spirit only if we participants vest ourselves with apostolic courage, evangelical humility and trusting prayer: with that apostolic courage, which refuses to be intimidated in the face of the temptations of the world – temptations that tend to extinguish the light of truth in the hearts of men, replacing it with small and temporary lights; nor even before the petrification of some hearts, which, despite good intentions, drive people away from God; apostolic courage to bring life and not to make of our Christian life a museum of memories; evangelical humility that knows how to empty itself of conventions and prejudices in order to listen to brother bishops and be filled with God – humility that leads neither to finger-pointing nor to judging others, but to hands outstretched to help people up without ever feeling oneself superior to them.

Confident prayer that trusts in God is the action of the heart when it opens to God, when our humors are silenced in order to listen to the gentle voice of God, which speaks in silence. Without listening to God, all our words are only words that are meet no need and serve no end. Without letting ourselves be guided the Spirit, all our decisions will be but decorations that, instead of exalting the Gospel, cover it and hide it.

Dear brothers, as I have said, the Synod is not a parliament in which to reach a consensus or a common accord there is recourse to negotiation, to deal-making, or to compromise: indeed, the only method of the Synod is to open up to the Holy Spirit with apostolic courage, with evangelical humility and confident, trusting prayer, that it might be He, who guides us, enlightens us and makes us put before our eyes, with our personal opinions, but with faith in God, fidelity to the Magisterium, the good of the Church and the Salus animarum.

In fine, I would like to thank: His Eminence Cardinal Lorenzo Baldisseri, Secretary General of the Synod; His Excellency, Archbishop Fabio Fabene, Undersecretary; and with them I thank the Rapporteur, His Eminence Cardinal Peter Erdő and the Special Secretary, His Excellency Archbishop Bruno Forte; the Presidents-delegate, writers, consultors, translators and all those who worked with true fidelity and total dedication to the Church. Thank you so much! (full text of remarks at Synod opening.)

“Pope Francis” believes that the Sacred Deposit of Faith does not consist of a “museum of memories” that must be safeguarded by what he thinks is the Catholic Church. No, the Sacred Deposit of Faith is a starting point from which to “reference” the concrete situations in which people live today. One cannot contend that he intends to maintain the doctrine of the indissolubility of a ratified and consummated marriage by looking for ways to circumvent it as one blasphemously contends the effort to do so is the work of the “Holy Spirit” and is proof of the “God who surprises.” This is the work of evil spirits, not the Third Person of the Most Blessed Trinity. Jorge’s “god” is not the true God of Divine Revelation. He is immutable. So are His doctrines. Anyone who thinks that this kind of heretical, blasphemous denial of the very nature of God and His Revelation is going to “defend doctrine” is either insane or just completely intellectually dishonest. Jorge Mario Bergoglio is not a Catholic. He is not a member of the Catholic Church.

“Pope Francis” compounds his heresy on a daily basis, doing so this morning, Tuesday, October 6, 2015, the Feast of Saint Bruno, as he held his session of Ding Dong School at the Casa Santa Marta:

Drawing inspiration from the first reading of the Book of Jonah, the Pope pointed out that Jonah is initially resistant to God's will, but eventually learns that he must obey the Lord. 

Remarking on the fact that the city of Nineveh converts thanks to Jonah’s preaching, Pope Francis said “it really was a miracle, because in this case he abandons his stubbornness, his rigidity,  to obey the will of God, and he did what the Lord commanded him."

And afterwards, the Pope said, after the conversion of Nineveh, Jonah “who was not a man who was docile to the Spirit of God, was angry". The Pope said he even rebuked the Lord.

So, Pope Francis observed, the story of Jonah and Nineveh unfolds in three chapters:  the first "is Jonah’s resistance to the mission the Lord entrusts him with"; the second "is his obedience” and the ensuing miracle; in the third chapter, "there is resistance to God’s mercy".

The Pope went on to say that Jesus too was misunderstood because of his mercy. 

He recalled that Jesus lived with the Doctors of the Law who did not understand why he did not let the adulteress be stoned, they did not understand why he dined with publicans and sinners, “they did not understand. They did not understand mercy”.

Pope Francis said that the Psalm that we prayed today tells us to "wait for the Lord because with the Lord there is mercy, and redemption."

"Where the Lord is - Francis concluded - there is mercy”. And, he added, as Ambrose said: “Where his ministers are there is rigidity. The rigidity that defies mission, which challenges mercy ":

"As we approach the Year of Mercy, let us pray the Lord to help us understand his heart, to understand what 'mercy' means, what it means when He says: 'I want mercy, not sacrifice!'” he said. (God wants his ministers to be merciful.)

Bergoglio omitted any reference to penance and sorrow, didn’t he?

God’s mercy was extended to the people of the city of Nineve because they repented. Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s concept of “mercy” is predicated on nothing other than making people feel “included” and welcomed,” thus reaffirming them in their sins and leading them all headlong into hell with him. He can talk about the supreme law of the church is the salvation of souls all he wants. His actual beliefs are formed by the adversary’s supreme law of ruining souls for all eternity in hellfire and to realize the pain of being separated from their First Cause and Last End Who is the object of the adversary’s hatred.

[1] And the word of the Lord came to Jonas the second time, saying: [2] Arise, and go to Ninive the great city: and preach in it the preaching that I bid thee. [3] And Jonas arose, and went to Ninive, according to the word of the Lord: now Ninive was a great city of three days' journey. [4] And Jonas began to enter into the city one day' s journey: and he cried, and said: Yet forty days, and Ninive shall be destroyed. [5] And the men of Ninive believed in God: and they proclaimed a fast, and put on sackcloth from the greatest to the least.

[6] And the word came to the king of Ninive; and he rose up out of his throne, and cast away his robe from him, and was clothed with sackcloth, and sat in ashes. [7] And he caused it to be proclaimed and published in Ninive from the mouth of the king and of his princes, saying: Let neither men nor beasts, oxen nor sheep, taste any thing: let them not feed, nor drink water. [8] And let men and beasts be covered with sackcloth, and cry to the Lord with all their strength, and let them turn every one from his evil way, and from the iniquity that is in their hands. [9] Who can tell if God will turn, and forgive: and will turn away from his fierce anger, and we shall not perish? [10] And God saw their works, that they were turned from their evil way: and God had mercy with regard to the evil which he had said that he would do to them, and he did it not. (Jonas 3: 1-10.)

Bergoglio omitted any reference to penance and sorrow, didn’t he?

God’s mercy was extended to the people of the city of Nineve because they repented. Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s concept of “mercy” is predicated on nothing other than making people feel “included” and welcomed,” thus reaffirming them in their sins and leading them all headlong into hell with him. He can talk about the supreme law of the church is the salvation of souls all he wants. His actual beliefs are formed by the adversary’s supreme law of ruining souls for all eternity in hellfire and to realize the pain of being separated from their First Cause and Last End Who is the object of the adversary’s hatred.

It is furthermore the case that “Pope Francis” once again distorted the compassion that Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ extended to his friend Saint Mary Magdalene when she was caught in the act of adultery, omitting Our Lord’s injunction to “go, and sin no more”:

[1] And Jesus went unto mount Olivet. [2] And early in the morning he came again into the temple, and all the people came to him, and sitting down he taught them. [3] And the scribes and the Pharisees bring unto him a woman taken in adultery: and they set her in the midst, [4] And said to him: Master, this woman was even now taken in adultery. [5] Now Moses in the law commanded us to stone such a one. But what sayest thou?

[6] And this they said tempting him, that they might accuse him. But Jesus bowing himself down, wrote with his finger on the ground. [7] When therefore they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said to them: He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her. [8] And again stooping down, he wrote on the ground. [9] But they hearing this, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest. And Jesus alone remained, and the woman standing in the midst. [10] Then Jesus lifting up himself, said to her: Woman, where are they that accused thee? Hath no man condemned thee?

[11] Who said: No man, Lord. And Jesus said: Neither will I condemn thee. Go, and now sin no more. [12]

Modernists always twist and otherwise distort the meaning of Sacred Scripture while consigning Sacred Tradition to a “relic” in a “museum” that be made “living” so as to suit the alleged “needs of the times.

Writing in Pascendi Dominci Gregis, Pope Saint Pius X noted:

38. It remains for Us now to say a few words about the Modernist as reformer. From all that has preceded, it is abundantly clear how great and how eager is the passion of such men for innovation. In all Catholicism there is absolutely nothing on which it does not fasten. They wish philosophy to be reformed, especially in the ecclesiastical seminaries. They wish the scholastic philosophy to be relegated to the history of philosophy and to be classed among absolute systems, and the young men to be taught modern philosophy which alone is true and suited to the times in which we live. They desire the reform of theology: rational theology is to have modern philosophy for its foundation, and positive theology is to be founded on the history of dogma. As for history, it must be written and taught only according to their methods and modern principles. Dogmas and their evolution, they affirm, are to be harmonized with science and history. In the Catechism no dogmas are to be inserted except those that have been reformed and are within the capacity of the people. Regarding worship, they say, the number of external devotions is to he reduced, and steps must be taken to prevent their further increase, though, indeed, some of the admirers of symbolism are disposed to be more indulgent on this head. They cry out that ecclesiastical government requires to be reformed in all its branches, but especially in its disciplinary and dogmatic departments They insist that both outwardly and inwardly it must be brought into harmony with the modern conscience which now wholly tends towards democracy; a share in ecclesiastical government should therefore be given to the lower ranks of the clergy and even to the laity and authority which is too much concentrated should be decentralized. The Roman Congregations and especially the index and the Holy Office, must be likewise modified The ecclesiastical authority must alter its line of conduct in the social and political world; while keeping outside political organizations it must adapt itself to them in order to penetrate them with its spirit. With regard to morals, they adopt the principle of the Americanists, that the active virtues are more important than the passive, and are to be more encouraged in practice. They ask that the clergy should return to their primitive humility and poverty, and that in their ideas and action they should admit the principles of Modernism; and there are some who, gladly listening to the teaching of their Protestant masters, would desire the suppression of the celibacy of the clergy. What is there left in the Church which is not to be reformed by them and according to their principles?

39. It may, perhaps, seem to some, Venerable Brethren, that We have dealt at too great length on this exposition of the doctrines of the Modernists. But it was necessary that We should do so, both in order to meet their customary charge that We do not understand their ideas, and to show that their system does not consist in scattered and unconnected theories, but, as it were, in a closely connected whole, so that it is not possible to admit one without admitting all. For this reason, too, We have had to give to this exposition a somewhat didactic form, and not to shrink from employing certain unwonted terms which the Modernists have brought into use. And now with Our eyes fixed upon the whole system, no one will be surprised that We should define it to be the synthesis of all heresies. Undoubtedly, were anyone to attempt the task of collecting together all the errors that have been broached against the faith and to concentrate into one the sap and substance of them all, he could not succeed in doing so better than the Modernists have done. Nay, they have gone farther than this, for, as We have already intimated, their system means the destruction not of the Catholic religion alone, but of all religion. Hence the rationalists are not wanting in their applause, and the most frank and sincere among them congratulate themselves on having found in the Modernists the most valuable of all allies. (Pope Saint Pius X, Pascendi Dominici Gregis, September 8, 1907.)

Despite all of the complexity that they use to make it appear that they alone have the ability to understand the “hidden meaning” of the Gospel, the method of Modernists is really quite simple to understand. Modernists simply project onto God and His Divine Revelation their own false beliefs. As unfettered by their heretical ancestors in Orthodoxy and Protestantism, Modernists claim that they are “stripping away” a version of the Gospel that had been “corrupted” by Scholasticism and by the Church’s general councils of the Second Millennium, especially the Councils of  Florence and Trent and the [First] Vatican Council.

In other words, everything about Divine Revelation is reduced to a supposedly “pure” reading of the Gospels that just happens that is able to be reinterpreted according to the “needs” of the times. Open contradictions of the defined teaching of the Catholic Church are called “legitimate developments of doctrine” even though such an exercise defies logic and the anathemas of Holy Mother Church. (From Circus Jorge, part one, October 7, 2015.)

There is no need to belabor this point except to point out that Popes Pius IX, Saint Pius X, and Pius XII have already prepared a “memorandum,” shall we say, to put this homosexual-friendly apostate from France in his place as a man who shares with his superior, Jorge Mario Bergoglio, a seething hatred for the certitudes of Catholicism and a firm determination to make it appear that the Third Person of the Most Blessed Trinity responds to the refusal of hardened sinners to reform their lives in cooperation with the graces for us all by Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ during His Passion and Death on the wood of the Holy Cross on Good Friday and that flow into our hearts and souls through the loving hands of Our Lady, she who is the Mediatrix of All Graces:

For the doctrine of the faith which God has revealed is put forward not as some philosophical discovery capable of being perfected by human intelligence, but as a divine deposit committed to the spouse of Christ to be faithfully protected and infallibly promulgated.

Hence, too, that meaning of the sacred dogmas is ever to be maintained which has once been declared by holy mother church, and there must never be any abandonment of this sense under the pretext or in the name of a more profound understanding.

God cannot deny himself, nor can truth ever be in opposition to truth.

The appearance of this kind of specious contradiction is chiefly due to the fact that either: the dogmas of faith are not understood and explained in accordance with the mind of the church, or unsound views are mistaken for the conclusions of reason.

Therefore we define that every assertion contrary to the truth of enlightened faith is totally false. . . .

3. If anyone says that it is possible that at some time, given the advancement of knowledge, a sense may be assigned to the dogmas propounded by the church which is different from that which the church has understood and understands: let him be anathema.

And so in the performance of our supreme pastoral office, we beseech for the love of Jesus Christ and we command, by the authority of him who is also our God and saviour, all faithful Christians, especially those in authority or who have the duty of teaching, that they contribute their zeal and labour to the warding off and elimination of these errors from the church and to the spreading of the light of the pure faith.

But since it is not enough to avoid the contamination of heresy unless those errors are carefully shunned which approach it in greater or less degree, we warn all of their duty to observe the constitutions and decrees in which such wrong opinions, though not expressly mentioned in this document, have been banned and forbidden by this holy see. (Pope Pius IX, Vatican Council, Session III, Dogmatic Constitution on the Catholic Faith, Chapter 4, On Faith and Reason, April 24, 1870. SESSION 3 : 24 April 1870.)

Wherefore, from the very earliest times the fathers and doctors of the Church have been accustomed to follow and, with one accord to defend this rule. Origen writes: “As often as the heretics allege the possession of the canonical scriptures, to which all Christians give unanimous assent, they seem to say: ‘Behold the word of truth is in the houses.’ But we should believe them not and abandon not the primary and ecclesiastical tradition. We should believe not otherwise than has been handed down by the tradition of the Church of God” (Vetus Interpretatio Commentariorum in Matt. n. 46). Irenaeus too says: “The doctrine of the Apostles is the true faith…which is known to us through the Episcopal succession…which has reached even unto our age by the very fact that the Scriptures have been zealously guarded and fully interpreted” (Contra Haereses, lib. iv., cap. 33, n. 8). And Tertullian: “It is therefore clear that all doctrine which agrees with that of the Apostolic churches – the matrices and original centres of the faith, must be looked upon as the truth, holding without hesitation that the Church received it from the Apostles, the Apostles from Christ and Christ from God….We are in communion with the Apostolic churches, and by the very fact that they agree amongst themselves we have a testimony of the truth” (De Praescrip., cap. xxxi). And so Hilary: “Christ teaching from the ship signifies that those who are outside the Church can never grasp the divine teaching; for the ship typifies the Church where the word of life is deposited and preached. Those who are outside are like sterile and worthless sand: they cannot comprehend” (Comment. in Matt. xiii., n. 1). Rufinus praises Gregory of Nazianzum and Basil because “they studied the text of Holy Scripture alone, and took the interpretation of its meaning not from their own inner consciousness, but from the writings and on the authority of the ancients, who in their turn, as it is clear, took their rule for understanding the meaning from the Apostolic succession” (Hist. Eccl., lib. ii., cap. 9).

Wherefore, as appears from what has been said, Christ instituted in the Church a living, authoritative and permanent Magisterium, which by His own power He strengthened, by the Spirit of truth He taught, and by miracles confirmed. He willed and ordered, under the gravest penalties, that its teachings should be received as if they were His own. As often, therefore, as it is declared on the authority of this teaching that this or that is contained in the deposit of divine revelation, it must be believed by every one as true. If it could in any way be false, an evident contradiction follows; for then God Himself would be the author of error in man. “Lord, if we be in error, we are being deceived by Thee” (Richardus de S. Victore, De Trin., lib. i., cap. 2). In this wise, all cause for doubting being removed, can it be lawful for anyone to reject any one of those truths without by the very fact falling into heresy? without separating himself from the Church? – without repudiating in one sweeping act the whole of Christian teaching? For such is the nature of faith that nothing can be more absurd than to accept some things and reject others. Faith, as the Church teaches, is “that supernatural virtue by which, through the help of God and through the assistance of His grace, we believe what he has revealed to be true, not on account of the intrinsic truth perceived by the natural light of reason, but because of the authority of God Himself, the Revealer, who can neither deceive nor be deceived” (Conc. Vat., Sess. iii., cap. 3). If then it be certain that anything is revealed by God, and this is not believed, then nothing whatever is believed by divine Faith: for what the Apostle St. James judges to be the effect of a moral delinquency, the same is to be said of an erroneous opinion in the matter of faith. “Whosoever shall offend in one point, is become guilty of all” (Ep. James ii., 10). Nay, it applies with greater force to an erroneous opinion. For it can be said with less truth that every law is violated by one who commits a single sin, since it may be that he only virtually despises the majesty of God the Legislator. But he who dissents even in one point from divinely revealed truth absolutely rejects all faith, since he thereby refuses to honour God as the supreme truth and the formal motive of faith. “In many things they are with me, in a few things not with me; but in those few things in which they are not with me the many things in which they are will not profit them” (S. Augustinus in Psal. liv., n. 19). And this indeed most deservedly; for they, who take from Christian doctrine what they please, lean on their own judgments, not on faith; and not “bringing into captivity every understanding unto the obedience of Christ” (2 Cor. x., 5), they more truly obey themselves than God. “You, who believe what you like, believe yourselves rather than the gospel” (S. Augustinus, lib. xvii., Contra Faustum Manichaeum, cap. 3).

For this reason the Fathers of the Vatican Council laid down nothing new, but followed divine revelation and the acknowledged and invariable teaching of the Church as to the very nature of faith, when they decreed as follows: “All those things are to be believed by divine and Catholic faith which are contained in the written or unwritten word of God, and which are proposed by the Church as divinely revealed, either by a solemn definition or in the exercise of its ordinary and universal Magisterium” (Sess. iii., cap. 3). Hence, as it is clear that God absolutely willed that there should be unity in His Church, and as it is evident what kind of unity He willed, and by means of what principle He ordained that this unity should be maintained, we may address the following words of St. Augustine to all who have not deliberately closed their minds to the truth: “When we see the great help of God, such manifest progress and such abundant fruit, shall we hesitate to take refuge in the bosom of that Church, which, as is evident to all, possesses the supreme authority of the Apostolic See through the Episcopal succession? In vain do heretics rage round it; they are condemned partly by the judgment of the people themselves, partly by the weight of councils, partly by the splendid evidence of miracles. To refuse to the Church the primacy is most impious and above measure arrogant. And if all learning, no matter how easy and common it may be, in order to be fully understood requires a teacher and master, what can be greater evidence of pride and rashness than to be unwilling to learn about the books of the divine mysteries from the proper interpreter, and to wish to condemn them unknown?” (De Unitate Credendi, cap. xvii., n. 35).

It is then undoubtedly the office of the church to guard Christian doctrine and to propagate it in its integrity and purity. But this is not all: the object for which the Church has been instituted is not wholly attained by the performance of this duty. For, since Jesus Christ delivered Himself up for the salvation of the human race, and to this end directed all His teaching and commands, so He ordered the Church to strive, by the truth of its doctrine, to sanctify and to save mankind. But faith alone cannot compass so great, excellent, and important an end. There must needs be also the fitting and devout worship of God, which is to be found chiefly in the divine Sacrifice and in the dispensation of the Sacraments, as well as salutary laws and discipline. All these must be found in the Church, since it continues the mission of the Saviour for ever. The Church alone offers to the human race that religion – that state of absolute perfection – which He wished, as it were, to be incorporated in it. And it alone supplies those means of salvation which accord with the ordinary counsels of Providence. (Pope Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum, June 29, 1896.)

1. One of the primary obligations assigned by Christ to the office divinely committed to Us of feeding the Lord’s flock is that of guarding with the greatest vigilance the deposit of the faith delivered to the saints, rejecting the profane novelties of words and the gainsaying of knowledge falsely so called. There has never been a time when this watchfulness of the supreme pastor was not necessary to the Catholic body, for owing to the efforts of the enemy of the human race, there have never been lacking “men speaking perverse things,” “vain talkers and seducers,” “erring and driving into error. It must, however, be confessed that these latter days have witnessed a notable increase in the number of the enemies of the Cross of Christ, who, by arts entirely new and full of deceit, are striving to destroy the vital energy of the Church, and, as far as in them lies, utterly to subvert the very Kingdom of Christ. Wherefore We may no longer keep silence, lest We should seem to fail in Our most sacred duty, and lest the kindness that, in the hope of wiser counsels, We have hitherto shown them, should be set down to lack of diligence in the discharge of Our office.

2. That We should act without delay in this matter is made imperative especially by the fact that the partisans of error are to be sought not only among the Church’s open enemies; but, what is to be most dreaded and deplored, in her very bosom, and are the more mischievous the less they keep in the open. We allude, Venerable Brethren, to many who belong to the Catholic laity, and, what is much more sad, to the ranks of the priesthood itself, who, animated by a false zeal for the Church, lacking the solid safeguards of philosophy and theology, nay more, thoroughly imbued with the poisonous doctrines taught by the enemies of the Church, and lost to all sense of modesty, put themselves forward as reformers of the Church; and, forming more boldly into line of attack, assail all that is most sacred in the work of Christ, not sparing even the Person of the Divine Redeemer, whom, with sacrilegious audacity, they degrade to the condition of a simple and ordinary man. (Pope Saint Pius X, Pascendi Dominici Gregis, September 8, 1907.)

Hence it is quite impossible to maintain that they absolutely contain the truth: for, in so far as they are symbols, they are the images of truth, and so must be adapted to the religious sense in its relation to man; and as instruments, they are the vehicles of truth, and must therefore in their turn be adapted to man in his relation to the religious sense. But the object of the religious sense, as something contained in the absolute, possesses an infinite variety of aspects, of which now one, now another, may present itself. In like manner he who believes can avail himself of varying conditions. Consequently, the formulas which we call dogma must be subject to these vicissitudes, and are, therefore, liable to change. Thus the way is open to the intrinsic evolution of dogma. Here we have an immense structure of sophisms which ruin and wreck all religion.

Dogma is not only able, but ought to evolve and to be changed. This is strongly affirmed by the Modernists, and clearly flows from their principles. For among the chief points of their teaching is the following, which they deduce from the principle of vital immanence, namely, that religious formulas if they are to be really religious and not merely intellectual speculations, ought to be living and to live the life of the religious sense. This is not to be understood to mean that these formulas, especially if merely imaginative, were to be invented for the religious sense. Their origin matters nothing, any more than their number or quality. What is necessary is that the religious sense -- with some modification when needful -- should vitally assimilate them. In other words, it is necessary that the primitive formula be accepted and sanctioned by the heart; and similarly the subsequent work from which are brought forth the secondary formulas must proceed under the guidance of the heart.

Hence it comes that these formulas, in order to be living, should be, and should remain, adapted to the faith and to him who believes. Wherefore, if for any reason this adaptation should cease to exist, they lose their first meaning and accordingly need to be changed. In view of the fact that the character and lot of dogmatic formulas are so unstable, it is no wonder that Modernists should regard them so lightly and in such open disrespect, and have no consideration or praise for anything but the religious sense and for the religious life. In this way, with consummate audacity, they criticize the Church, as having strayed from the true path by failing to distinguish between the religious and moral sense of formulas and their surface meaning, and by clinging vainly and tenaciously to meaningless formulas, while religion itself is allowed to go to ruin. "Blind'- they are, and "leaders of the blind" puffed up with the proud name of science, they have reached that pitch of folly at which they pervert the eternal concept of truth and the true meaning of religion; in introducing a new system in which "they are seen to be under the sway of a blind and unchecked passion for novelty, thinking not at all of finding some solid foundation of truth, but despising the holy and apostolic traditions, they embrace other and vain, futile, uncertain doctrines, unapproved by the Church, on which, in the height of their vanity, they think they can base and maintain truth itself." (Pope Saint Pius X, Pascendi Domici Gregis, September 8, 1907.)

Unfortunately these advocates of novelty easily pass from despising scholastic theology to the neglect of and even contempt for the Teaching Authority of the Church itself, which gives such authoritative approval to scholastic theology. This Teaching Authority is represented by them as a hindrance to progress and an obstacle in the way of science. Some non-Catholics consider it as an unjust restraint preventing some more qualified theologians from reforming their subject. And although this sacred Office of Teacher in matters of faith and morals must be the proximate and universal criterion of truth for all theologians, since to it has been entrusted by Christ Our Lord the whole deposit of faith - Sacred Scripture and divine Tradition - to be preserved, guarded and interpreted, still the duty that is incumbent on the faithful to flee also those errors which more or less approach heresy, and accordingly "to keep also the constitutions and decrees by which such evil opinions are proscribed and forbidden by the Holy See,"[2] is sometimes as little known as if it did not exist. What is expounded in the Encyclical Letters of the Roman Pontiffs concerning the nature and constitution of the Church, is deliberately and habitually neglected by some with the idea of giving force to a certain vague notion which they profess to have found in the ancient Fathers, especially the Greeks. The Popes, they assert, do not wish to pass judgment on what is a matter of dispute among theologians, so recourse must be had to the early sources, and the recent constitutions and decrees of the Teaching Church must be explained from the writings of the ancients. (Pope Pius XII, Humani Generis, August 12, 1950.)

This is just a sampling of papal references of the existence of the Sacred Deposit of Faith and the need for Holy Mother Church, guided infallibly as she is by God the Holy Ghost, to safeguard the Holy Faith in all its holy purity and integrity.

Neither Jorge Mario Bergoglio nor Christophe Pierre believe this, once again demonstrating that neither is a Catholic. To deny the existence of the Sacred Deposit of Faith, no less one that must be defended against Modernists such as the lavender friendly Argentine Apostate and the French Faux Catholic, is to show oneself to be outside the pale of Holy Mother Church and to be the enemy of God, His Divine Revelation, and the sanctification and salvation of souls.

“Bishop” Joseph Strickland has said that what he thinks is the Catholic Church is leading souls astray as it is not being faithful to the Gospel of the Divine Redeemer. This is as impossible as it is blasphemous.

There is no need to belabor points made in  Jorge Sure Knows How to Lower the Boom Fast When He Wants to Do So, Nota Bene: "Bishop" Joseph Strickland: "Whoever is Holy Does Not Dissent from the Pope" (Pope Saint Pius X), and A Perpetual Truth in the Midst of the Perpetual Reiteration of Error: A True Pope Is Never in Need of Correction except to note the following:

First, a heretical pope is an ontological impossibility.

Second, there has never been a heretical pope.

Third, Holy Mother Church is infallible. She cannot err.

Fourth, a true pope has the authority from Christ the King to govern Holy Mother Church, which means that he can discipline whomever he desires when circumstances warrant it.

Fifth, it is never necessary for one who believes himself to be a Catholic bishop to place himself in a position to oppose a man he believes to be and accepts as a true and legitimate Successor of Saint Peter.

Sixth, a true pope is the guarantor of doctrinal orthodoxy who is be reverenced and obeyed, not disparaged and defied.

Seventh, a putative bishop who believes that it is his duty to oppose a man he believes is a true pope because his teaching is at variance with the Sacred Deposit of Faith must face the fact that such a “pope” is no pope at all and that the entity he heads has not been, is not now nor can ever be synonymous with the Catholic Church.

The counterfeit church of conciliarism is making “nice nice” with hardened sinners now after having first made “nice nice” with every Modernist presupposition condemned by Pope Saint Pius X in Pascsendi Dominici Gregis and by whispering sweet nothings into the ears of non-Catholics, including abject pagans, that directly contradicts the entire life’s work of the wonder worker whose feast is celebrated today, Saint Gregory Thaumaturgus:

Moses instructed in all the wisdom of the Egyptians, mighty in his words and in his deeds, retired into the desert: Gregory, adorned with the best gifts of birth and nature, brilliant in rhetoric, rich in every science, hid himself from men in the flower of his youth, and hastened to offer to God in solitude the holocaust best pleasing to the Lord. Each was the hope of his race; yet each turned away to lose himself in the contemplation of heavenly mysteries. Meanwhile, the yoke of Pharaoh lay heavy upon Israel; meanwhile, souls were perishing, whom one of Gregory’s burning words might have snatched from the empire of idolatry: was not such flight, then, desertion?

Is it for man to proclaim himself a saviour, when Jesus did not arrogate that title to himself? And when evil was rife all around, did the Carpenter of Nazareth do wrong to remain in the shade for thirty years previous to his short period of ministry? O ye teachers of our excited, fevered times, who dream of a new hierarchy among the virtues, and understand divine charity far otherwise than our fathers: not those are of the race of Israel’s saviours whose ideas concerning social good differ from those of the world’s Redeemer.

Gregory, like Moses, was of that blessed race. His friends and enemies agreed in saying that he resembled the Hebrew legislator in the excellence of his virtue, and in the splendour of the prodigies wrought by his word.  Both were actuated by the desire of knowing God, and manifesting him to the men they were called to lead: the fullness of doctrine is the gift most necessary to the guides of the people, and their want of it the greatest penury. I am who am was the answer to Moses’ enquiry; and this sublime formula, confided to him from the midst of the burning bush, authenticated the mission which called him forth from the desert. When Gregory was commanded by God to go out into the world, the blessed Virgin, of whom the burning bush was a figure, appeared before his dazzled eyes in the dark night when he was praying for light. And St. John, following the Mother of God, let fall from his lips this other formula completing the former for the disciples of the Law of love

One only God, Father of the living Word, of that substantial and mighty Wisdom who is the eternal expression of himself; the perfect principle of the only and perfect Son begotten by him. One only Lord, sole-begotten of the Only one; God of God, efficacious Word, Wisdom embracing and containing the world, creative power of all creation, true Son of a true Father. One only Holy Spirit, holding of God his divine existence, revealed to men by the Son of whom he is the perfect likeness, life and life-giving, holy and imparting holiness. The perfect Trinity, immutable, inseparable in glory, in eternity, in dominion.

This was the message our Saint was to communicate to his country, the creed that was to bear his name in the Church. By his faith in the most holy Trinity he was to remove mountains, and set limits to the waves, to drive out Satan, and eradicate infidelity from Pontus. When, towards the year 240, Gregory, then bishop, was on his way to Neocaesarea, he saw on all sides the temples of idols, and stopped for the night at a famous sanctuary. In the morning all the gods had taken to flight and refused to come back; but the Saint gave to the priest of the oracle a note thus worded: Gregory to Satan: return. A more bitter defeat awaited the demons; forced to stay their precipitate retreat, they were compelled to witness the ruin of their empire over the souls they had abused. The priest was the first to give himself up to the Bishop, and became his deacon; and soon upon the ruins of the temples everywhere overthrown arose the Church of Christ, the only God. Happy was that Church, so firmly founded that heresy was powerless against it in the following century, when so many others bowed before the storm of Arianism. On the testimony of St. Basil, the successors of St. Gregory, themselves eminent men, were as an adornment of precious stones, a crown of stars, to the Church of Neocaesarea. Now all these illustrious Pontiffs, says he, considered it an honour to keep up the memory of their great predecessor; they would never suffer that any act, word, or movement other than his, in performing the sacred rites, should prevail over the traditions he had left.

When Clement XII., as we have seen, established in the entire Church the feast of St. Gertrude the Great, he at first decreed that it should be kept on this day, on which it is still celebrated by the Order of St. Benedict. But as the 17th November had been for long centuries assigned to St. Gregory Thaumaturgus, it seemed unfitting, said Benedict XIV, that he who moved mountains should himself be moved from his place by the holy virgin. Accordingly in 1739, the year following its institution, the feast of St. Gertrude was fixed on the fifteenth of this month.

Let us read the brief account of the great Thaumaturgus given in the holy Liturgy

Gregory, bishop of Neocaesarea in Pontus, was illustrious for his holiness and learning, but still more for his miracles, which were so startling and so numerous that he was called the Thaumaturgus; and, according to St. Basil, he was considered comparable to Moses, the Prophets, and the Apostles. By his prayer he removed a mountain, which was an obstacle to the building of a church. He also dried up a lake which was a cause of dissension between brothers. The river Lycus, which was inundating and devastating the fields, he restrained by fixing in the bank his stick which immediately grew into a green tree, and served as a limit which the river henceforth never overpassed.

He frequently expelled the devils from idols and from men’s bodies, and worked many other miracles, by means of which he led multitudes to the faith of Christ. He also foretold future events by the spirit of prophecy. When he was dying, he asked how many infidels remained in the city of Neocaesarea; and on being informed that there were only seventeen, he gave thanks to God, and said: When I was made bishop, there were but seventeen believers. He wrote several works, by which, as well as by his miracles, he adorned the Church of God.

O holy Pontiff, thy faith, removing mountains and commanding the waves, was a justification of our Lord’s promise. Teach us in our turn to do honour to the Gospel, by never doubting of our Lord’s word and of the help he promises us against Satan, whom the Church points out to us to-day as the proud mountain that is to be cast into the sea; and also against the overflowing tide of our passions, and the enticements of the world, of which thy writings teach us the vanity. After the victory let us not forget that the succour came to us from heaven; preserve us from ingratitude, which thou didst so detest. We still possess the touching eulogy dictated by thy gratitude towards the illustrious master, to whose teachings, under God, thou didst owe the glorious strength and splendour of thy faith. Here is a precious and practical lesson for all: while praising divine Providence in the man who was his predestined instrument in thy regard, thou didst not forget the homage due to the Angel of God, who had preserved thee from falling into the abyss, during the darkness of infidelity in which thy first years were spent; that heavenly Guardian who, ever watchful in his active, enlightened, persevering devotedness, supplies for our insufficiencies, nourishes and instructs us, leads us by the hand, and secretly arranges for our souls those blessed circumstances and occasions, which transform our life and secure eternal happiness. (Dom Prosper Gueranger, O.S.B., The Liturgical Year, Feast of Saint Gregory Thaumaturgus, November 17.)

Holy Mother Church’s saints worked against error. They safeguarded the Sacred Deposit of Faith. They worked assiduously to drive the demons out of the temples of error, which abound aplenty in our own day (one Protestant sect’s place of false worship that is hideous in the sight of the Most Blessed Trinity after another), and to convert the pagans who were at the beck and call of those demons.

The lords of conciliarism work to promote error. They are now denying that there is a Sacred Deposit of Faith, no less one that needs to be safeguarded, and they have entered temples of error, praised their false rites, and esteemed their idols with their own hands.

May Our Lady, whom we honor as Queen of All Saints in this month of November, help us to persevere in the truth and to keep praying her Most Holy Rosary with increased fervor daily, remembering to ask her to help men such as Joseph Strickland and Father Carlo Maria Vigano to come to the realization that the See of Peter has been vacant since the death of Pope Pius XII on October 9, 1958, and that the entity they think is the Catholic Church is her counterfeit ape as we call to mind these words of Saint Paul the Apostle in his Second Epistle to the Thessalonians:

6 And now you know what withholdeth, that he may be revealed in his time.  7 For the mystery of iniquity already worketh; only that he who now holdeth, do hold, until he be taken out of the way.  8 And then that wicked one shall be revealed whom the Lord Jesus shall kill with the spirit of his mouth; and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming, him,  9 Whose coming is according to the working of Satan, in all power, and signs, and lying wonders,  10 And in all seduction of iniquity to them that perish; because they receive not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. Therefore God shall send them the operation of error, to believe lying:

11 That all may be judged who have not believed the truth, but have consented to iniquity.  12 But we ought to give thanks to God always for you, brethren, beloved of God, for that God hath chosen you firstfruits unto salvation, in sanctification of the spirit, and faith of the truth:  13 Whereunto also he hath called you by our gospel, unto the purchasing of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ.  14 Therefore, brethren, stand fast; and hold the traditions which you have learned, whether by word, or by our epistle.  15 Now our Lord Jesus Christ himself, and God and our Father, who hath loved us, and hath given us everlasting consolation, and good hope in grace, 16 Exhort your hearts, and confirm you in every good work and word. (2 Thessalonians 2: 6-16.)

May we hold fast to our traditions with the help of Our Lady as we beg her protection from liars such as Jorge Mario Bergoglio and Christophe Pierre and the operation of error into which they have plunged themselves as agents of Antichrist himself.

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.

Saints Caspar, Melchior, and Balthasar, pray for us. 

Saint Gregory Thaumaturgus, pray for us.