Real Catholicism

©Lucio Mascarenhas. May 2nd., 2004.

On the Greenspun Community thread, Is there anything worse than war?,

Joe <[email protected]> wrote: The Pope has told no lies. What we have here is a failure of communication, of distinction, and of expectations. Those who claim he's not the vicar of Christ or who think the Church founded by Christ on the apostles - is not the Catholic Church, are not playing with a full deck. Disagreeing with someone's prudential decisions - such as about politics or geo-politics is one thing. Disagreeing about matters of faith and morals is entirely different. Eugene C. Chavez <[email protected]> wrote: Dear Moderator: Why is the coward from the east being allowed to blaspheme our holy faith and publish slurs against the Holy Father? EIGHTY-SIX; please-- The Old Heave- ho, right away. Goodbye Lucio; Ciao and don't go away mad. Just go away. "The Pope has told no lies" I did not allege that the Pope did. And, if my understanding of the Doctrine of the Papacy is correct, a Pope can sin, tell lies, and commit far worse sins, without losing his position as the Pope.

In case anybody wants it, I will freely certify that it is my faith that the Pope is the Vicar of Christ, that he possesses the Gift of Infallibility, according to the definitions of the Holy and Ecumenical Council of the Vatican, 1869-1870, that Christ founded His Church on His Apostles, and more especially upon St. Peter, that the Successors of Peter in the See of Rome possess direct and universal and supreme jurisdiction over all the faithful, and that this Church is the Catholic Church, and that it is indefectible - not that all who are or were Catholics possess thereby individual or communal indefectibility, for parts small and large can fall away, but in the whole, etc., etc.

I also affirm that the Doctrines of the Church are always to be accepted in the sense that the Church has once defined, and I deny and anathematise along with the Popes and the Councils the contrary error that the meaning of Doctrines evolve and change.

I affirm with Pope Boniface VIII, as he taught in his Constitution Unam Sanctam: "We declare, say, define, and pronounce that it is absolutely necessary for the salvation of every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff" I also affirm, with the Holy and Ecumenical Council of the Vatican, 1869-1870: For the Holy Ghost was promised to the successors of Peter not so that they might, by His revelation, make known some new doctrine, but that, by His assistance, they might religiously guard and faithfully expound the revelation or Deposit of Faith transmitted by the Apostles. The Holy and Ecumencial Council of the Vatican, 1869-1870, Pastor Aeternus, Constitutio Dogmatica Prima de Ecclesia Christi, capitulum 4, De Romani Pontificis Infallibili Magisterio Together with all the lawful popes and Councils, I anathemize all, even if that be a purported Pope, or a Council, or even an Angel from heaven, who should bring a gospel different than the one our Lord Christ Jesus gave us through His Apostles; I anathemaize all who pretend a New Advent and a New Pentecost, a New Gospel and a New Ecclesiology; all who pretend to add to or amend Holy Divine Public Revelation which is incorporated in the Apostolic Traditions, some of which have been put down in writing as the New Testament Scriptures.

But it is Catholic Law that a public, manifest and pertinacious heretic can never become Pope. When Pope Paul IV was confronted with the prospect of being succeeded by a Cardinal Moroni whose sympathies seemed to lay with the Protestant heretics, he took the precaution of issuing the Apostolic Constitution Cum ex Apostolatus Officio. In brief, a public, manifest and pertinacious heretic cannot become Pope, and if apparently elected Pope even despite this prohibition, the election remains null and void, and all the actions, decisions, works, etc., of this false pope are null and void.

The Catholic Church has progressed in faith over the last twenty centuries. But never has there been a revolution where the faith has been overturned and the meaning of doctrines so utterly reversed. Of course, there has always been such revolutions, and the Catholic Church always recognised that each of these revolutions meant a secession from the faith and the Church, to constitute a new, schismatic church.

The only new thing is that no schismatic sect has as yet, if we discount that of Hippolytus, had pretended to erect themselves a rival pope, a man who taught and enforced heresies but who pretended to be the Pope and the Successor of Peter. But that is exactly what we see today - in Roncalli, Montini, Luciani and in the present heresiarch of the Roman Modernist sect, Karol Wojtyla.

This man - Wojtyla - is a liar. He is the father of the great lie which he propagated in the "Vatican II Council" that Christ is united to all mankind, which is the basis of his version of the Universalist heresy: All men - absolutely all men - will be saved, in the final count.

But this is not the only lie that this Lying Pole has propagated.

(I am grateful to the Greenspun Community for the information that my dearly beloved Pope St. Pius X was the first actual Polish Pope.)

The very animus of the Bible is against idolatry - against the worship of false gods. God - Yahweh - strictly demands that these be abhored and contemned. No one who accepts these 'gods' can be saved. Idolatry is the greatest sin bar none. Even sodomism is a distant second.

The prohibition against false religions also covers the sects - the heretic and schismatic sects, the Protestants, the Byzantine Cacodox, the Jacobites, the Nestorians.

This prohibition also covers the rites and creeds of the infidels: the Jews, Mu'Ahmadan, Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, the Unitarians, Univeralists, etc.

These man-made religions frequently claim to worship the same God as we do, and often even to worship Christ Jesus. However, in reality, they are rejected by God for falsifying the truth, for fabricating caricatures of Himself and worshipping these Caricatures instead of Him - of worshipping the Devil and partaking of his rebellion thereby.

Now it is clear that one who claims to be a Christian cannot accept or participate in the religious rites of any of these non-Catholic religions.

God in the Bible is very vehement in His prohibition of the false 'gods', most typically, the Baals of the Semitic traditions.

As a Catholic, I can understand this clearly enough. Here in India, I live among the Hindus, who have their own Baals, their demons - Rama, Krishna, Hanuman (the monkey 'god'), Ganpati (the elephant 'god'), etc.

The Ecumenist heresy teaches that the cults of these Baals, of these demons, is legitimate, and takes the votaries of these demons, via these cults, to salvation. They (the Ecumenists) teach that it is holy and profitable unto salvation to partake of these rites, and they seek to gradually bring the people around to accepting these new ideas.

Foremost in this monstrous crime is the Lying Pole - Karol Wojtyla.

My challenge is very plain and simple: IF the Bible and the Christian religion is true, then we must reject not only the Baalim of the Semites, but also the Baalim of the Hindus and of every other people. But if it is true that we can, must and ought to accept the legitimacy of these modern Baals, whether in India, of the Hindus, of the Shintos in Japan, of the Vodun in Africa and in the Caribbean, then the Bible and Christianity must necessarily be false.

I think: So many Christians, including Sts. Peter and Paul, were murdered because the Romans and other peoples demanded that they worship the Roman, etc. Baalim, and they refused. Ah! Only if they had "Vatican II" instead of Christ and the Pentecost, they would have learnt to their profit that there is nothing wrong in worshipping these Baalims! They would not have needed to die, to be murdered for Christ. They could have attained to salvation in peace and in full communion with every man that lives on the earth!

But if the Ecumenist heresy is correct, then we must contemn the Bible as foolish and even as evil. We must destroy and trample it underfeet!
We who have refused to join the majority in trashing the Catholic faith for the Modernist heresy, and for the attendant heresies of Ecumenism, Pentecostalism or the Charismatic Renewal, of Marxism or Communism or Liberation Theology, we have been contemned and slandered and mocked for long.

I have often been told that I am a pagan and a Protestant because I have refused to join the vast majority of those who had once been Catholic in trashing the Catholic faith in favour of Modernism, a form of Liberal Protestantism!

Now I am being described as being "playing without a full deck." Thanks for the compliment!
Wojtyla can go about and fornicate with all the heretics and pagans and all the other riffraff; he can take part in gatherings where women present themselves in leotards or swimsuits; even where a bare breasted woman reads scripture.

Wojtyla goes about assiduously cultivating spiritual fornication in his dupes: "Come let us fornicate in the temple of our Baal!" Things are so bad, that the very shrine of Our Lady of Fatima is to be shortly converted into a Inter-Religious Shrine, open to all the "faiths" of the world! [See Report by John Vennari. Also these relevant pages: Rebuttal of Zenit Report | More News | ]

He can kiss the Koran, call the perfidious pseudo-Jews (as opposed to the true Jews who were loyal to the Messias), the elder brother of Christianity - but none of these constitute blasphemy! Wojtyla a blasphemer? Perish the thought. He is genetically incapable of any such thing. And he is genetically programmed to be "Holy Father", blaspheme as mightily as he may!

But I, when I challenge and expose these blasphemies, what am I? Why, cross your heart: I am a "blasphemer"!

Ah, and so I am a "blasphemer" and Wojtyla is not! This is a topsyturvy religion for a topsyturvy world!

I am being called a "coward". Yes, I am a coward because I am not afraid to witness even among people who are puffed up in their own conceits, who badword others as a means of browbeating and of blackmailing and of terrorizing into flight those with whom they cannot agree...; because I will not be a "good boy" and run away and hide behind my mama's skirts. This is rich.

When I first found the Greenspun community, one of the treads I found was "Real" Traditionalists. And there there was this Protestant, UnFaith, who kept on beating up all her opponents, and, regretably, none of the participants there could really put up in opposition to her, a real convincing defence of the Catholic Faith.

Yet, despite going on and on, she was always tolerated, while here I am - with dear Eugene all in a slathering sweat to hustle me off the scene - even though I am a coward who cannot fight, and he is soooo very brave that he cannot stand up to me and fight me like a man!

Really Eugene, you are a real wit. I must acknowledge that I admire you - you are a real wit: "Don't go away mad. Just go away." I hope that your profound wit will be of benefit to you when you get to your final destination - but I rather fear: not.

No Eugene, I will not go away mad. I will also not go away - not by myself anyway. Let the moderator throw me out.

I will not go away mad: I merely pity you. You are so proud and obstinate and conceited in your errors, that I can only pity you.

It will be a pleasure for me if I am thrown away from this group - a real relief, for I am not fond of contradicting people and making myself unpleasant, but I will not go away by myself, unless I see the Catholic Faith insulted and contemned; which is when I must withdraw or be judged guilty by God, of being an accomplice. But I am aware of my obligations to the Catholic Faith - to ceaselessly witness to the Gospel of Christ Jesus - and that regardless of my own comfort, so that I will not go away of myself.

Please do me the favour of kicking me off this list with expedition.

By the way, I cannot resist the temptation of citing this invaluable text - The following was condemned by Pope Alexander VII: "Although it is evidently established by you that Peter is a heretic, you are not bound to denounce him . . ." Condemned. (Denzinger 1105.) And here I am, being set upon, not because I denounce Peter as a heretic, but because I denounce a blaspheming clown whose trip it is to masquerade as Peter even as he rabidly blasphemes the Living God!

O tempora! O mores!


Lucio Mascarenhas
©Lucio Mascarenhas. May 2nd., 2004. Disclaimer: Links incorporated into this webpage are not to be construed as the author's endorsement of their respective websites and their motivating ideologies!
Hosted by