The Blindness of the ‘Dubia Cardinals’ and their supporters!

In the last two months Catholics have heard a lot of talk about the Dubia [Doubts] – the letter sent by four ‘Cardinals’ to ‘Pope’ Francis asking for clarifications on ambiguous texts in the ‘Apostolic Exhortation’ Amoris laetitia (AL). The four ‘Cardinals’ are the American Raymond Burke, the Italian Carlo Cafarra, and the Germans Walter Brandmuller and Joachim Meisner. Burke is the only active Prelate; the three others are retired.

The Dubia are five questions addressed to Francis requesting a response. It is a tradition in the Church for Prelates to approach the Sacred Congregations of the Holy See, or even the Pope, with their questions, written very clearly and briefly. Normally they receive concise answers, a simple Yes or No.

These questions – whose full text and context we can read here – basically address this question: 

Is it possible for a civilly divorced and remarried Catholic who did not receive a Church annulment of his first marriage to receive 'Communion'? 

This question is motivated by the fact that some parts of Amoris laetitia strongly insinuate that this permission is granted. In other words, the basic question of the 'Cardinals' is this: 

Is it possible for a person in mortal sin to receive Communion?

The questions were first sent to Francis and the Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, but given that the 'Cardinals' did not receive an answer, they made their document public on November 14, 2016. 

Since then, various interviews and declarations of Burke and Brandmuller have fed the discussion.

I am not taking the 'cardinals' seriously, but we have to look carefully at how deceptive the Novus ordo religion is and how utterly blind its prelates are including those calling themselves 'traditional Catholics'. these so called 'traditional Catholics' are nothing but those who do not like the reign of anti pope Francis but are comfortable with the reign of the great Apostate, John Paul II. I am simply trying to show how blind these pretend cardinals are and how equally blind their supporters. 

Given this status quaestionis, what should we think about the Dubia?

To be objective and clear, let me distinguish three different perspectives interfused in this problem.

1. Logically speaking

If we consider the content of both Amoris laetitia and the 'Cardinals'’ document from the logical perspective, we see that the dissenting 'Prelates' seem to take a win-win position. It is obvious that a Pope cannot explicitly allow anyone to receive Communion if he is in state of mortal sin.

If the Pope were to explicitly permit this, he would point-blank commit sacrilege, induce the entire Church to do so and separate himself from the past Magisterium of the Church and consequently such a pope loses office. So, it is obvious that the 'Pope' will not blatantly say: “Yes, I am allowing a person in mortal sin to receive Communion.”

It is also obvious that he will not say clearly: “No, no one can receive Communion in the state of mortal sin.” For, in fact, he is insinuating as much as possible that divorced/remarried people can receive Communion.

So, if it is obvious that he cannot say Yes or No, why did the Cardinals write their letter? Since they knew that they would not receive an answer, they deliberately chose to put Francis in a very embarrassing situation. 

Why?

In the strategic analysis (below n. 3) I will analyze this doubt about the aim of the Dubia.

Still addressing the content, why did the 'Cardinals' ignore many other situations as grave as the one they focused on? Indeed, in Amoris laetitia Francis opened doors not only for divorced/remarried Catholics to receive Communion, but also for a whole slew of others in scandalous situations who are objectively in mortal sin, such as those who engage in pre-marital sex, cohabit regularly without being married, use artificial methods of birth control and practice homosexuality. These points were analyzed in a study of Amoris laetitia seen here.

This omission becomes still more suspicious when we consider that if the 'Cardinals' would have exposed the full specter of insinuations in Amoris laetitia, it would become clear that Francis uses insinuations as a method to open doors for abuses in doctrinal matters where he pretends he cannot do so explicitly. Why did the 'Cardinals' not speak about this method?

If this method of liberalizing the need to be in the state of grace to receive the 'Sacraments' would have been clearly exposed by the 'Cardinals', it would have reinforced the fact that the 'Pope' cannot answer their Dubia. 

Again, the question arises: Why did they write their letter when it was clear that Francis would not answer?

Further, why did they make no mention of the multitude of other writings, speeches, actions and gestures so frequently made by Francis during this false pontificate that directly and indirectly favor allowing people in the state of mortal sin – even the sin of heresy – to receive 'Communion'? The same doubts of letter B are reinforced by this omission.

2. Morally speaking

A. From the moral point of view, it appears very good for supposed Catholics to have four 'Cardinals' who reinforce the traditional teaching of the Church. We live in a horrible world, morally speaking, and for us it is most opportune to have the perennial truths of the Church reaffirmed by 'religious authorities'. We have a certain number of traditionalist priests and a few Bishops who still repeat the immutable doctrine of the Church. But it is very salutary to see four Cardinals taking a correct position.

B. A grave moral fault, that usually characterize Novus Ordo prelates that I observed in the explanatory letter following the Dubia is that the 'Cardinals' are proponents of love as the primary goal of marriage.

Taking this position, they adhere to the revolution made by the evil Vatican II, which inverted the goals of marriage. The traditional goals were: first, procreation and the education of the offspring; second, mutual support of the spouses. By presenting love as the first goal, the 'Cardinals' show that they do not want to return to the traditional Magisterium as they purport to do.

C. Another moral flaw that I see in their statement is that, despite some few mentions of the Commandments and one quote from the Gospel, almost the totality of their documentation is based on the teaching of John Paul II, the great Apostate.  The 'Cardinals' publicly affirm that they are repeating the traditional doctrine, but the documents they quote are only those of the post-Vatican II 'Pope' Wojtyla.

Now then, John Paul II was very far from being a master of sound morality. Although he sometimes repeated the traditional teaching of the Church, habitually his moral approach was a tributary of the Personalism of Max Scheler, which is opposed to the traditional philosophy of the Church. 

His theology of the body is clearly immoral; eulogies of nudism are not rare in his works, and in the World Youth Days he implicitly promoted free love among youth. If the 'Cardinals' wanted to defend the perennial morals of the Church, why did they base themselves on this contaminated source?

The 'Cardinals'’ failure to quote the immense ensemble of traditional documents of the Church on marriage and Communion is an omission showing clearly the idea that the Novus Ordo religion – to which the four 'Cardinals' belong – is different from the Magisterium prior to Vatican II and therefore not the Catholic Church. 


One could even say that the 'Cardinals' themselves are in practical schism regarding the past of the Church. However, this is the very accusation made by 'Bishop' Schneider and, more recently, 'Card'. Brandmuller, against those who do not accept the teachings of John Paul II. Why this contradictory position?

3. Strategically Speaking

With the increase of speed in the Bergoglian Revolution, which was set up by none other than Benedict XVI, the number of reactions against Francis is growing. Recently even a newspaper like The Wall Street Journal labeled him “the leader of the global left.”

To catalyze these reactions, nothing could be more convenient than the emergence of a religious false right that would draw together all the discontent conservatives in the Church and prevent them from seeking an authentic Catholic Church and leadership.

This is what seems to be the goal of the four 'Cardinals', principally of 'Card'. Burke, who is the most expressive and outspoken member of the group. His principal acolyte in the public arena is 'Bishop' Schneider, whose  decietful role in Novus Ordo religion is duly noted. 



If this is true, which I believe it is, then this would explain why the Dubia were written with the certainty that it would not have an answer. Its goal would be to apparently put Francis in an embarrassing position. But in reality the writers would be playing the same game, allowing Francis to advance with a controlled reaction.



How will all this end? It could end as suggested by the new General Superior of the Jesuits, Fr. Arturo Sosa: 

“In our language of the Jesuits, we say that it is necessary to know the opinion of all in order to make a true communal discernment.”

In other words, the Novus Ordo religion may utilize this reaction to increase “pluralism” in the 'Church', which means that we could well have two parties in apparent opposition living together in the Vatican. This would help the Novus Ordo religion to become a democracy, one of the main goals of Che Bergoglio.

Indeed, there is nothing short of blindness in these pretend cardinals and their followers. They simply want to appear catholic while in actual fact they want to promote the conservative side of their false religion hinging it on the great Apostate, John Paul II. those 'catholics' who praise Burke or Schneider and people like them are just so blind that they can barely see their noses.



Presented by Malachy Mary Igwilo, on the feast day of St. John Bosco, 31st January 2017

The Pretender Catholics and danger to Souls!

As the Novus Ordo religion progresses, producing countless errors and heresies, scandalizing the whole world, many people calling themselves ‘Traditional Catholics’ remain within the wall of this false religion insisting that they cannot leave the Church as if Novus Ordo religion is ‘the Church’.

These so called ‘Traditional Catholics’ are NOT Catholics at all because they remain within the walls of Novus Ordo religion, recognizing the false Novus Ordo hierarchy (despite invalidity of Holy Order in Novus Ordo religion), and its head anti Pope Francis,  while having attachment to Traditional Latin Mass. We must note that 99 percent of their Masses are invalid as these are usually celebrated by invalid clergy.

They continue to propagate various heresies, mixing them with true Catholic teaching. This shows who they are! We look at these heresies they propagate

Pope Pius XII declared in Mystici Corporis Christi:

“Actually only those are to be included as members of the Church who have been baptized and profess the true faith, and who have not been so unfortunate as to separate themselves from the unity of the Body, or been excluded by legitimate authority for grave faults committed.”

According to Theologian and priest, Father Adolph Tanquerey taught:

 “For there to be pertinacity, it is not necessary that the person should be admonished several times and persevere for a long time in his obstinacy, but it is sufficient that consciously and willingly he refused a truth proposed in a sufficient manner, be it through pride or delight in contradiction or for any other reason.” (Syn. Th. Mor. et Past, pg.473.)

Those who are baptized and profess heresy are not professing the true faith. It only takes one heresy to be completely severed from membership in the Church, but the more heresies one professes, the farther from the true faith he strays. The following are the top 10 absolute blasphemous heresies and errors professed by those who call themselves traditional Catholics.

1.     Contend that without sin and with no loss of Catholic profession, one can withhold assent and obedience to those judgments and decrees of the Apostolic See, whose object is declared to relate to the general good of the Church and its right and discipline, provided it does not touch dogmas of faith or morals. [1]

2.     Contend that in the Apostolic See the Catholic religion has NOT always been kept unsullied, and its teaching kept holy, and that the See of St. Peter DOES NOT always remain unimpaired by any error, according to the divine promise of our Lord and Savior made to the prince of his disciples. [2]

3.     Popes need not profess the Catholic Faith. Popes can and have publicly rejected the Catholic Faith and remained popes. [3]

4.     Popes can be and are judged, ignored, and/or rejected by inferiors. Submission for pseudo-traditionalists just means praying for and acknowledging one as pope. [4]

5.     The Catholic Church is formally divided in doctrine. [5]

6.     The Catholic Church can and has promulgated heresy by Law and Decree. [6]

7.     The Catholic Church can and has promulgated unholy liturgies, laws, disciplines, and decrees, which implies the Catholic Church is unholy. [7]

8.     It’s permissible to actively pray and worship with public heretics and/or be united in faith to them. [8]

9.     The minority opinion of a past theologian outweighs the Church’s present law and/or teaching. [9]

10.                        The gates of hell and the gates of the Catholic Church are one and the same, which could imply that the Church is hell or that Christ allows the gates of hell to be in charge of the Catholic Church. Take your pick. [10]

Footnotes:

[1] Pope Pius IX declared those who make this contention that: “There is no one who does not see and understand clearly and openly how opposed this is to the Catholic dogma of the plenary power divinely bestowed on the Roman Pontiff by Christ the Lord Himself of feeding, ruling, and governing the universal Church. In such great perversity of evil opinions, therefore, We, truly mindful of Our Apostolic duty, and especially solicitous about our most holy religion, about sound doctrine and the salvation of souls divinely entrusted to Us, and about the good of human society itself, have decided to lift Our Apostolic voice again. And so all and each evil opinion and doctrine individually mentioned in this letter, by Our Apostolic authority We reject, proscribe, and condemn; and We wish and command that they be considered as absolutely rejected, proscribed, and condemned by all the sons of the Catholic Church.” (Quanta Cura)

[2] Pseudo-traditionalists claim that the apostolic see is sullied by unholy Vatican 2 teaching with a Vatican 2 pope contaminated with error. They complain, ridicule, and mock their pope for it. However, Vatican I infallibly declared the very opposite to the pseudo-traditionalist position.

[3] Pseudo-traditionalists readily admit that Francis I is a total apostate. Of course, they say that it’s only their private judgment which carries no weight.

[4] Canon 1556 specifically declares, “The first or primatial see is subject to no ones judgment.”

[5] The Church’s unity is the first article of the Catholic Faith, yet pseudo-traditionalists believe that Church is divided in faith with those who hold fast and promote Vatican 2 and the Novus Ordo Mass and those who completely reject it all.

[6] Pseudo-traditionalists actually believe the Church is heretical which makes it no different from any other religion in that respect. Even some sedevacantists, who believe Baptism of desire is heretical even though it is taught in the Catechism of Trent and Canon law, are guilty of this blasphemous heresy.

[7] The holiness of the Church is the second article of Faith. This holiness encompasses the liturgy, laws, disciplines, and decrees as taught by numerous popes over the centuries.

[8] Pseudo-traditionalists hold that many cardinals, bishops, priests, and their pope are heretics, yet have no problem praying and worshiping with them and calling them their fathers in faith. The Church has condemned this evil a hundred times in history including this condemnation in Canon law.

[9] Cajetan, John of St. Thomas, and a few others are often cited as proof that a heretic remains in office and retains jurisdiction. However, canon 188.4 declares: “There are certain causes which effect the tacit (silent) resignation of an office, which resignation is accepted in advance by operation of the law, and hence is effective without any declaration. These causes are… (4) publicly defects from the Catholic faith.” Canonist Very Rev. H. A. Ayrinhac taught in his commentary that resignation of ecclesiastical offices in canons 185-191, “applies to all offices, the lowest and the highest, not excepting the Supreme Pontificate. (d) Public defection from the faith, by formal heresy or apostasy, with or without affiliation with another religious society. The offense must be public, that is, generally known or liable to become so before long.”

[10] The Catholic Church twice declared that the gates of hell are heretics and their heresies. Pope Benedict XV declared that the Gates of the Church is the papacy. Even if you privately believed your pope was a heretic, then you necessarily privately believe the gates of hell and the gates of the Church are one and the same. It’s the ultimate absurdity and blasphemy against Christ.

 Presented by Malachy Igwilo with the octave of Epiphany, 12^th January 2017.

The Vatican: From Heresy to Madness!

As I Have said many times, it is impossible to view the Vatican as Catholic! Impossible! Some people will suggest that to say such a thing is to be mad. They will say, the Vatican is Catholic to booth. But surely anyone suggesting that the Vatican is Catholic does not have any Catholicism in him or her.

Since 1958, the false popes at the Vatican including John XXIII, Paul VI, John Paul I, John Paul II, Benedict XVI and Francis have been showing the world that they are of the Devil but people have totally ignored these signs and have continued to sell their soul to the devil through the religion of these false popes.

The religion of these false popes is called Novus Ordo religion. A simple glance at what they believe will reveal it all. It is a heretical and apostate religion designed by the international freemasonry to deceive the world and ensure that millions are lost. No wonder Christ Himself said that ‘on;y a few will be saved’.

Anyone who claims to be Catholic will at least know that Martin Luther is the Chief heretic! He is the source of the evils spreading all over the place masquerading as Christianity. He broke with the true Church, the Catholic Church and today, his offspring are in their thousands. All pretending to be Christian. We know the truth. These thousands of religions are NOT Christian. They are of the Devil and people are taking in by them such that even governments recognize them.

In Nigeria, the government recognize the group called Christian association of Nigeria as being a Christian body. We know it is not. Thousands of heresies arise from them and believing in heresy leads to hell!

These heresies all came from martin Luther!

Now the Vatican has said that Mating Luther is NOT a heretic! The said he is to be seen as a ‘Witness to the Gospel’!

Yes. You read right. Martin Luther is a saint, a witness to the gospel according to Francis, the pretender Pope at the Vatican!

This is total Madness. Those who are not able to see the hundreds of heresies coming from the Vatican should at least recognize that the Vatican has gone mad in proclaiming a heretic and apostate ‘witness to the Gospel’!

Needless to say, this is an insult against Our Lord Jesus Christ and all the saints and Martyrs that died for the Gospel.

Despite this bombshell, there is silence among those who claim to be Catholic! There is even a new video where Francis continue to promote the evil called ecumenism. In a recent video, Francis is promoting ONLY wellbeing in this world and neglecting life after death!

In the current video seen here, Bergoglio uses Ecumenism as the vehicle to promote this end, and by doing so, he reveals once more that he and his fellow Vatican II Modernists do not believe that the Catholic Church is the only true Church of Jesus Christ, outside of which no one can attain eternal salvation. If they believed this, they would constantly promote, in the most charitable and effective ways possible, the conversion of all non-Catholics to Catholicism. Instead, what they do is, they tell us that converting others is a “great sin against ecumenism”, that it is “not right to convince others of your faith”; they assert that all “Christians” are already united in the true Church, saying that heretics and schismatics are “members of the One Body of Christ”; and they act as though Catholics and other “Christians” only have some internal disagreements to work out still (hence the talk not about conversion but about “partial communion” and “restoring full ecclesial communion”) — as though the true Church could be divided or exist in parts or elements.

If people are not outraged by the ‘canonization of Martin Luther’, how can they be outraged by the latest video from the Vatican? Or anything coming from the Vatican? The Devil has driven millions of people to madness, truly!

As a refresher, we need to look at what the Catholic Church said about Martin Luther and ALL his works.

‘Moreover, because the preceding errors and many others are contained in the books or writings of Martin Luther, we likewise condemn, reprobate, and reject completely the books and all the writings and sermons of the said Martin, whether in Latin or any other language, containing the said errors or any one of them; and we wish them to be regarded as utterly condemned, reprobated, and rejected. We forbid each and every one of the faithful of either sex, in virtue of holy obedience and under the above penalties to be incurred automatically, to read, assert, preach, praise, print, publish, or defend them. They will incur these penalties if they presume to uphold them in any way, personally or through another or others, directly or indirectly, tacitly or explicitly, publicly or occultly, either in their own homes or in other public or private places. Indeed immediately after the publication of this letter these works, wherever they may be, shall be sought out carefully by the ordinaries and others [ecclesiastics and regulars], and under each and every one of the above penalties shall be burned publicly and solemnly in the presence of the clerics and people.

As far as Martin himself is concerned, O good God, what have we overlooked or not done? What fatherly charity have we omitted that we might call him back from such errors? For after we had cited him, wishing to deal more kindly with him, we urged him through various conferences with our legate and through our personal letters to abandon these errors. We have even offered him safe conduct and the money necessary for the journey urging him to come without fear or any misgivings, which perfect charity should cast out, and to talk not secretly but openly and face to face after the example of our Savior and the Apostle Paul. If he had done this, we are certain he would have changed in heart, and he would have recognized his errors. He would not have found all these errors in the Roman Curia which he attacks so viciously, ascribing to it more than he should because of the empty rumors of wicked men. We would have shown him clearer than the light of day that the Roman pontiffs, our predecessors, whom he injuriously attacks beyond all decency, never erred in their canons or constitutions which he tries to assail. For, according to the prophet, neither is healing oil nor the doctor lacking in Galaad.

But he always refused to listen and, despising the previous citation and each and every one of the above overtures, disdained to come. To the present day he has been contumacious. With a hardened spirit he has continued under censure over a year. What is worse, adding evil to evil, and on learning of the citation, he broke forth in a rash appeal to a future council. This to be sure was contrary to the constitution of Pius II and Julius II our predecessors that all appealing in this way are to be punished with the penalties of heretics. In vain does he implore the help of a council, since he openly admits that he does not believe in a council.

Therefore we can, without any further citation or delay, proceed against him to his condemnation and damnation as one whose faith is notoriously suspect and in fact a true heretic with the full severity of each and all of the above penalties and censures. Yet, with the advice of our brothers, imitating the mercy of almighty God who does not wish the death of a sinner but rather that he be converted and live, and forgetting all the injuries inflicted on us and the Apostolic See, we have decided to use all the compassion we are capable of. It is our hope, so far as in us lies, that he will experience a change of heart by taking the road of mildness we have proposed, return, and turn away from his errors. We will receive him kindly as the prodigal son returning to the embrace of the Church.

Therefore let Martin himself and all those adhering to him, and those who shelter and support him, through the merciful heart of our God and the sprinkling of the blood of our Lord Jesus Christ by which and through whom the redemption of the human race and the upbuilding of holy mother Church was accomplished, know that from our heart we exhort and beseech that he cease to disturb the peace, unity, and truth of the Church for which the Savior prayed so earnestly to the Father. Let him abstain from his pernicious errors that he may come back to us. If they really will obey, and certify to us by legal documents that they have obeyed, they will find in us the affection of a father's love, the opening of the font of the effects of paternal charity, and opening of the font of mercy and clemency.

We enjoin, however, on Martin that in the meantime he cease from all preaching or the office of preacher’.

(from Exsurge Domine Bull of Pope Leo X issued June 15, 1520)

This is a clear rebuke of the arch heretic, Martin Luther who Francis and his cohorts expect us to call ‘witness to the Gospel’.

Now imagine reading the above condemnation this way:

  

Moreover, because the preceding errors and many others are contained in the books or writings of Martin Luther this Witness to the Gospel, we likewise condemn, reprobate, and reject completely the books and all the writings and sermons of the said Martin Witness to the Gospel, whether in Latin or any other language, containing the said errors or any one of them; and we wish them to be regarded as utterly condemned, reprobated, and rejected….

As far as Martin this Witness to the Gospel himself is concerned, O good God, what have we overlooked or not done? What fatherly charity have we omitted that we might call him back from such errors? For after we had cited him, wishing to deal more kindly with him, we urged him through various conferences with our legate and through our personal letters to abandon these errors. We have even offered him safe conduct and the money necessary for the journey urging him to come without fear or any misgivings, which perfect charity should cast out, and to talk not secretly but openly and face to face after the example of our Savior and the Apostle Paul. If he the Witness to the Gospel had done this, we are certain he would have changed in heart, and he would have recognized his errors. He would not have found all these errors in the Roman Curia which he attacks so viciously, ascribing to it more than he should because of the empty rumors of wicked men. We would have shown him clearer than the light of day that the Roman pontiffs, our predecessors, whom he injuriously attacks beyond all decency, never erred in their canons or constitutions which he tries to assail. For, according to the prophet, neither is healing oil nor the doctor lacking in Galaad.

But he the Witness to the Gospel always refused to listen and, despising the previous citation and each and every one of the above overtures, disdained to come. To the present day he has been contumacious. With a hardened spirit he has continued under censure over a year. What is worse, adding evil to evil, and on learning of the citation, he broke forth in a rash appeal to a future council. This to be sure was contrary to the constitution of Pius II and Julius II our predecessors that all appealing in this way are to be punished with the penalties of heretics. In vain does he the Witness to the Gospel implore the help of a council, since he openly admits that he does not believe in a council.

Therefore we can, without any further citation or delay, proceed against him this Witness to the Gospel to his condemnation and damnation as one whose faith is notoriously suspect and in fact a true heretic with the full severity of each and all of the above penalties and censures. Yet, with the advice of our brothers, imitating the mercy of almighty God who does not wish the death of a sinner but rather that he be converted and live, and forgetting all the injuries inflicted on us and the Apostolic See, we have decided to use all the compassion we are capable of. It is our hope, so far as in us lies, that he will experience a change of heart by taking the road of mildness we have proposed, return, and turn away from his errors. We will receive him kindly as the prodigal son returning to the embrace of the Church.

Therefore let Martin this Witness to the Gospel himself and all those adhering to him, and those who shelter and support him, through the merciful heart of our God and the sprinkling of the blood of our Lord Jesus Christ by which and through whom the redemption of the human race and the upbuilding of holy mother Church was accomplished, know that from our heart we exhort and beseech that he cease to disturb the peace, unity, and truth of the Church for which the Savior prayed so earnestly to the Father. Let him this Witness to the Gospel abstain from his pernicious errors that he may come back to us. If they really will obey, and certify to us by legal documents that they have obeyed, they will find in us the affection of a father’s love, the opening of the font of the effects of paternal charity, and opening of the font of mercy and clemency.

We enjoin, however, on Martin the Witness to the Gospel that in the meantime he cease from all preaching or the office of preacher.

From the above, we see that it will not work! Martin Luther remains a heretic and apostate! To remind yourself about who Martin Luther taught read here and here.

To fail to see Vatican pronouncement on Luther as total Madness is madness itself!

By Malachy Igwilo, in the Octave of Epiphany, 10^th January 2017