Friday, May 29, 2009

Benedict XV was an antipope

The Case against Benedict XV

Antipope Benedict XV, in addition to having subjected himself to the heretical antipopes Leo XIII and Pius X, revealed in his very first ‘encyclical’ as ‘pope’, his true colours to the world. In the entire 'encyclical' there is ambiguity and outright heresy, revealing what certainly appears to be a Masonic bent, and the 'legacy' he left in his wake would confirm this without a doubt. Take for instance the following excerpt from the very first paragraph in his very first ‘encyclical’:

Antipope Benedict XV, Ad Beatissimi Apostolorum, Nov. 1, 1914: “For the whole of mankind was freed from the slavery of sin by the shedding of the blood of Jesus Christ as their ransom, and there is no one who is excluded from the benefit of this Redemption”

Here we have a denial of the Catholic understanding of the Redemption (no individual person is freed from the slavery of sin or redeemed until baptism, even though all are offered this freedom):

Catholic Encyclopedia, Redemption: "The restoration of man from the bondage of sin to the liberty of the children of God through the satisfactions and merits of Christ".

St. Augustine, On Marriage and Concupiscence, Book 1, Chapter 22: "Now the Christian faith unfalteringly declares, what our new heretics have begun to deny, both that they who are cleansed in the laver of regeneration are redeemed from the power of the devil, and that those who have not yet been redeemed by such regeneration are still captive in the power of the devil, even if they be infant children of the redeemed, unless they be themselves redeemed by the self-same grace of Christ."

Pope Julius III, Council of Trent, Session 14, Chapter 1: “If such, in all the regenerate, were their gratitude towards God, as that they constantly preserved the justice received in baptism by His bounty and grace; there would not have been need for another sacrament, besides that of baptism itself, to be instituted for the remission of sins. But because God, rich in mercy, knows our frame, He hath bestowed a remedy of life even on those who may, after baptism, have delivered themselves up to the servitude of sin and the power of the devil, the sacrament to wit of Penance, by which the benefit of the death of Christ is applied to those who have fallen after baptism.”

As the above dogmatic definition of the Council of Trent says, the benefit of Christ’s death is the REMISSION of sins. No sins are remitted without baptism.

Pope St. Zosimus, Epistle Tractatoria ad Orientalis Ecclesias, AD 418: "The Lord [is] faithful in his words [ Ps. 144:13] and His baptism holds the same plenitude in deed and words, that is in work, confession, and true remission of sins in every sex, age, and condition of the human race. For no one except him who is the servant of sin is made free, nor can he be said to be redeemed unless he has previously truly been a captive through sin, as it is written: "If the Son liberates you, you will be truly free [John 8:36]. For through Him we are reborn spiritually, through Him we are crucified to the world. By His death that bond of death introduced into all of us by Adam and transmitted to every soul, that bond contracted by propagation is broken, in which no one of our children is held not guilty until he is freed through baptism."

And finally it is a word for word contradiction of the solemn teaching of the Ecumenical Council of Trent, which tells us that indeed there are those who are excluded:

Pope Paul III, Council of Trent, Chapter 3, Who are justified through Christ, Jan. 13, 1547: But, though He died for all, yet do not all receive the benefit of His death, but those only unto whom the merit of His passion is communicated. For as in truth men, if they were not born propagated of the seed of Adam, would not be born unjust,-seeing that, by that propagation, they contract through him, when they are conceived, injustice as their own,-so, if they were not born again in Christ, they never would be justified; seeing that, in that new birth, there is bestowed upon them, through the merit of His passion, the grace whereby they are made just.”

Certainly the virtue of Christ's passion extends to the generality of all men, it's power is sufficient for all, and from the beginning of the creation God did not exclude anyone from the virtue of the Redemption. Did Christ die for the souls of those in Hell, for Judas and for Cain? Yes! But THEY EXCLUDED THEMSELVES from the BENEFIT of the Redemption, even though God did not exclude them from beginning. They made their choice, just as so many pagans and idolaters make the choice to exclude themselves and their children.

Christ indeed died for all men, but according to Benedict XV, all men, including those in the state of original sin, are freed from the slavery of sin by His death. What else could be meant by the 'slavery of sin' if not original sin, into which all men are born? This teaching of Antipope Benedict XV also contradicts the Council of Florence, which tells us that the only remedy to snatch away children from the dominion of the devil is baptism. How could original sin, slavery of sin and the dominion of the devil be anything but one and the same?

Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, Session 11, February 4, 1442, ex cathedra: "With regard to children, since the danger of death is often present and the only remedy available to them is the sacrament of baptism by which they are snatched away from the dominion of the devil and adopted as children of God..."

Antipope Benedict XV, Ad Beatissimi Apostolorum, Nov. 1, 1914: "He [Jesus Christ] teaches all men, without distinction of nationality or of language, or of ideas, [...] as He was hanging from the cross, He poured out His blood over us all, whence being as it were compacted and fitly joined together in one body ..."

This particular passage serves to provide a context for his statement that "For the whole of mankind was freed from the slavery of sin by the shedding of the blood of Jesus Christ as their ransom,"

So if Jesus Christ poured His Blood out over us all (all men, without distinction of nationality, or of language, or of ideas), then he must mean that the Spirit of Sanctification and the water of baptism have also been received by all men without distinction as well, at least in a spiritual sense, since this is what necessarily follows when we receive the Blood of Redemption, the Blood of Jesus Christ, according to Pope St. Leo the Great:

Pope St. Leo the Great, Council of Chalcedon, ex cathedra: "For there are three who give testimony—Spirit and water and blood. And the three are one. In other words, the Spirit of sanctification and the Blood of Redemption and the water of baptism. These three are one and remain indivisible. None of them is separable from its link with the others."

Antipope Benedict XV stated that no one is excluded from the benefit of Christ’s redemption, but as Trent makes clear in more than just this passage, all who remain unbaptized exclude themselves from receiving these great benefits. How can they exclude themselves from the benefit of Christ's passion, yet somehow not be excluded? He states that the whole world was freed from the slavery of sin - he did not say "has the opportunity" he said "was"! This unpardonable heresy alone is sufficient to show that Benedict XV was an antipope.

Furthermore, what could Antipope Benedict XV possibly mean by ideas, in the above quotation? This ambiguous choice of words can quite easily be taken to mean RELIGION. And it fits with the rest of his teachings, including that there is Christianity outside the Catholic Church.

Antipopoe Benedict XV, Spiritus Paraclitus, 1920: "The voice of Jerome summons those Christian nations which have unhappily fallen away from Mother Church to turn once more to her in whom lies all hope of eternal salvation."

He deceptively speaks out of both sides of his mouth, in one breath saying that men who have fallen away from the Holy Catholic faith are still Christian, while in the next saying that their is only salvation in the Catholic Church. Don't be fooled by this. The man would have know that he had to tread lightly with his inculcations of Freemasonic doctrines.

Worse still, he subtly undermines the dogmatic truth that men cannot be saved except in the Church, from yet another angle:

Benedict XV, Spiritus Paraclitus, Sept. 15, 1920: "... he [St. Jerome] said only what the Christians of the East thought in his time when he declared that 'If anyone is outside the Ark of Noe he will perish in the overwhelming flood."

No, it's not just what they thought at that time, it is the dogmatic truth. Period.

Antipope Benedict XV has stated at the beginning of his so-called encyclical, Ad Beatissimi Apostolorum, that "there is no one who is excluded from the benefit of this Redemption", The ultimate benefit of the redemption of Jesus Christ is salvation, and eternal state of forgiveness from sin and perseverence in sanctity, and below we see that Benedict XV teaching the possibility that whole human race may attain salvation:

Antipope Benedict XV, Paterno Iam Diu (#2), Nov. 24, 1919: "No other circumstance could be more opportune than this to induce Us to solicit for innocent children the charity and pity of Christians and of all who do not despair of the salvation of the human race."

Wait a minute here. We know that the human race (all men) is not going to be saved, but only the elect. While it is not permissible to despair of salvation, without falling into mortal sin, it is certainly not lawful to hope for the salvation of the whole human race, as Antipope Benedict XV suggests! We already know, based on the testimony of God Himself, of many people who are in hell: Judas Iscariot, the Israelites who "went down alive into hell", etc.

Benedict XV did not stop at universal salvation (not just saying that all have the potential to be redeemed, but that nobody has been excluded from the benefit of the redemption, despite that every person who dies unbaptized IS excluded eternally from the benefit). He went on further to distort the role in redemption of the Blessed Virgin Mary, falling into heresy yet again:

Antipope Benedict XV, Inter Sodalicia, March 22, 1918: "As she suffered and almost died together with her suffering and dying Son, so she surrendered her mother's rights over her Son for the salvation of the human race. And to satisfy the justice of God she sacrificed her Son, as well as she could, so that it may justly be said that she together with Christ has redeemed the human race."

But our Blessed Mother, as worthy of honour and veneration as she is, above all creation, did NOT redeem the human race at all. She participated in the redemption by providing the human flesh, which nature Christ took from her, but she did not redeem the human race with Him.

Pope Pius IV, Council of Trent, Session 25, On Invocation, Veneration and Relics of Saints, and on Sacred Images, ex cathedra: "...God, through His Son, Jesus Christ our Lord, who alone is our Redeemer..."

The remainder of the anti-pontificate of Benedict XV was filled with other such proof that the man was not a Catholic pope, but an enemy of the Church and a soul damning liar. His writings reek of Freemasonic propaganda. Here is a sample:

Antipope Benedict XV, Ad Beatissimi Apostolorum, #11, 1914: "... let them consider whether it is a prudent and safe idea for government or for states to separate themselves from the holy religion of Jesus Christ ... Let them consider again and again, whether it is a measure of political wisdom to seek to divorce the teaching of the Gospel and of the Church from the ruling of a country and from the public education of the young."

Benedict XV, if he was a Catholic pope, would be condemning this proposition, not encouraging people to consider it.

Antipope Benedict XV, Principi Apostolorum Petro, #23, 1920: "Would that by the grace of God and the aid of St. Ephrem those obstacles might collapse which separate so large a part of the Christian flock from the mystical rock upon which Christ founded his Church."

There is one shepherd, Christ, and one flock, the Holy Catholic Church. There is no Christian flock outside of the Church, but only fallen away Christians who belong to satan.

Antipope Benedict XV, Pacem, Dei Munus Pulcherrimum, #17, 1920: "... all States, putting aside mutual suspicion, should unite in one league, or rather a sort of family of peoples ..."

No! They shouldn't! This is New World Order nonsense! The only true familial unity to be had is that found in the Holy Catholic Church! You cannot be a family with God as your father while claiming brotherhood or familial ties with the children of the devil, non-Catholics.

If this is not the Freemasonic agenda then I don't know what is.

Does the fact that he quoted the Athanasian Creed in his first encyclical exonerate him?

Antipope Benedict XV, Ad Beatissimi Apostolorum, #24: "It is, moreover, Our will that Catholics should abstain from certain appellations which have recently been brought into use to distinguish one group of Catholics from another. They are to be avoided not only as "profane novelties of words," out of harmony with both truth and justice, but also because they give rise to great trouble and confusion among Catholics. Such is the nature of Catholicism that it does not admit of more or less, but must be held as a whole or as a whole rejected: "This is the Catholic faith, which unless a man believe faithfully and firmly; he cannot be saved" (Athanas. Creed). There is no need of adding any qualifying terms to the profession of Catholicism: it is quite enough for each one to proclaim "Christian is my name and Catholic my surname," only let him endeavour to be in reality what he calls himself."

Hardly. Sure a casual reading over this section may make it appear as though he is orthodox and that what he stated about the "freedom from the slavery of sin" at the start of his encyclical was simply a misunderstanding, but is there perhaps an insidious design behind his words? Read it again, but before you do, it is well to note that Pope Pius X had just condemned Modernism as a heresy, and so there were many people "within the Church" being called Modernists. Also remember the efforts that Benedict XV went to in destroying the Sodalitium Pianum, which kept a vigil against such heresy. With these facts in mind it seems that he cloaked an intention to subvert the Church into Modernism by using a quote from the Athanasian Creed, a completely and perfectly orthodox quote, under the guise of exhorting the faithful. Was he saying "There's no salvation outside of the Catholic Church"? No. He was saying "don't bother the Modernists, if they say they're Catholic, they're Catholic, just worry about yourself instead".

Since Benedict XV, each of the successive antipopes have been schismatic for their adherence to the line of antipopes. A pope cannot come from a line of antipopes, any more than a pope can come from Eastern 'Orthodoxy' or Calvinism. For this reason, and because they never publicly abjured, it is correct to assert that all of the successors Benedict XV have been antipopes, their own heresies notwithstanding. Their names are Pius XI, Pius XII, John XXIII, Paul VI, John Paul I, John Paul II and Benedict XVI. Each of these men, additionally to being schismatic for willingly following an antipope, either explicitly taught heretical or apostate doctrines, performed manifest acts of public heresy or apostasy, instituted disciplinary teachings (not binding on Catholics, since they were not popes remember) that would lead people to doubt or renounce their faith, and some of these men did all of the above, each of them contributing in their own way to the establishment and continuance of the counterfeit 'Catholic' church that busies itself in sending souls to hell by the millions.

Pope Pius VI, Auctorem Fidei (condemning the errors of the Synod of Pistoia), 1794: "[The Ancient Doctors] knew the capacity of innovators in the art of deception. In order not to shock the ears of Catholics, they sought to hide the subtleties of their tortuous maneuvers by the use of seemingly innocuous words such as would allow them to insinuate error into souls in the most gentle manner. Once the truth had been compromised, they could, by means of slight changes or additions in phraseology, distort the confession of the faith which is necessary for our salvation, and lead the faithful by subtle errors to their eternal damnation. This manner of dissimulating and lying is vicious, regardless of the circumstances under which it is used. For very good reasons it can never be tolerated in a synod of which the principal glory consists above all in teaching the truth with clarity and excluding all danger of error.

"Morever, if all this is sinful, it cannot be excused in the way that one sees it being done, under the erroneous pretext that the seemingly shocking affirmations in one place are further developed along orthodox lines in other places, and even in yet other places corrected; as if allowing for the possibility of either affirming or denying the statement, or of leaving it up the personal inclinations of the individual – such has always been the fraudulent and daring method used by innovators to establish error. It allows for both the possibility of promoting error and of excusing it.

"It is as if the innovators pretended that they always intended to present the alternative passages, especially to those of simple faith who eventually come to know only some part of the conclusions of such discussions which are published in the common language for everyone's use. Or again, as if the same faithful had the ability on examining such documents to judge such matters for themselves without getting confused and avoiding all risk of error. It is a most reprehensible technique for the insinuation of doctrinal errors and one condemned long ago by Our predecessor Saint Celestine who found it used in the writings of Nestorius, Bishop of Constantinople, and which he exposed in order to condemn it with the greatest possible severity. Once these texts were examined carefully, the impostor was exposed and confounded, for he expressed himself in a plethora of words, mixing true things with others that were obscure; mixing at times one with the other in such a way that he was also able to confess those things which were denied while at the same time possessing a basis for denying those very sentences which he confessed.

"In order to expose such snares, something which becomes necessary with a certain frequency in every century, no other method is required than the following: Whenever it becomes necessary to expose statements which disguise some suspected error or danger under the veil of ambiguity, one must denounce the perverse meaning under which the error opposed to Catholic truth is camouflaged."

When we have a man who fights against true doctrine by aiding the Modernists, and who promulgates heretical laws, it certainly becomes necessary to expose and denounce the perverse meaning under which his assault on Catholic Truth is camouflaged.

Monday, May 18, 2009

To all the Church Militant!

Love the good God very much! Honour His Blessed Virgin Mother!

(Downloads are at the bottom of the article)

Battle is upon us! Immortal souls created in God's own image hang in the balance, and unless we step up and do the will of God by denouncing sinners and calling non-Catholics to conversion, then how can we hope to partake in the merit of Christ's inevitable victory?

The Lord Jesus Christ has called us to do battle in His glorious name, against the rulers of the world of this darkness, and has promised victory to ALL who would persevere in His doctrine and in His love!

Take up the sword, raise the shield, don the breastplate and helmet! Look upon the world with the eyes of charity and see all those around you being dragged into the pit of hell by the chains of sin, with which they have so willingly bound themselves! Boldly proclaim that the sword you wield, which is the Word of God, can either be to their freedom and destroy their chains or it can be to their woe, for the rejection thereof will bring them great torment in eternity!

Ephesians, Chapter 6:1-20
"Children, obey your parents in the Lord, for this is just. Honour thy father and thy mother, which is the first commandment with a promise: That it may be well with thee, and thou mayest be long lived upon earth. And you, fathers, provoke not your children to anger; but bring them up in the discipline and correction of the Lord. Servants, be obedient to them that are your lords according to the flesh, with fear and trembling, in the simplicity of your heart, as to Christ:

"Not serving to the eye, as it were pleasing men, but, as the servants of Christ doing the will of God from the heart, With a good will serving, as to the Lord, and not to men. Knowing that whatsoever good thing any man shall do, the same shall he receive from the Lord, whether he be bond, or free. And you, masters, do the same things to them, forbearing threatenings, knowing that the Lord both of them and you is in heaven; and there is no respect of persons with him. Finally, brethren, be strengthened in the Lord, and in the might of his power.

"Put you on the armour of God, that you may be able to stand against the deceits of the devil. For our wrestling is not against flesh and blood; but against principalities and power, against the rulers of the world of this darkness, against the spirits of wickedness in the high places. Therefore take unto you the armour of God, that you may be able to resist in the evil day, and to stand in all things perfect.

"Stand therefore, having your loins girt about with truth, and having on the breastplate of justice, And your feet shod with the preparation of the gospel of peace: In all things taking the shield of faith, wherewith you may be able to extinguish all the fiery darts of the most wicked one. And take unto you the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit (which is the word of God). By all prayer and supplication praying at all times in the spirit; and in the same watching with all instance and supplication for all the saints: And for me, that speech may be given me, that I may open my mouth with confidence, to make known the mystery of the gospel. For which I am an ambassador in a chain, so that therein I may be bold to speak according as I ought."

Let those who deny God and His Christ know they are not only enemies of God, but ours also, for we are God's friends! What fellowship can be had between light and darkness? What accord can the faithful have with the unbeliever?

St. Matthew 10:36-39
"And a man's enemies shall be they of his own household. He that loveth father or mother more than me, is not worthy of me; and he that loveth son or daughter more than me, is not worthy of me. And he that taketh not up his cross, and followeth me, is not worthy of me. He that findeth his life, shall lose it: and he that shall lose his life for me, shall find it."

St. Matthew 10:22
"And you shall be hated by all men for my name's sake: but he that shall persevere unto the end, he shall be saved."

These resources may be printed and/or distributed for the edification of the faithful and the conversion of sinners and non-Catholics, in the holy fear of the Lord, unto the salvation of souls. (please note that I do not endorse or support any adds or links that may appear on the host website)

For an explanation concerning the text below which states "This is for Catholics only...", please read the article:  Can non-Catholics pray to God?


Abjuration template: A sample form of abjuration of errors, heresies and schism, including references to  Catholic authorities (necessary discipline to enter the Church after heresy, schism or apostasy) - this is not a download per se, but an article which contains a template that can be copied into a document program.

Profession of Catholic Faith: The profession of Catholic Faith from the Councils of Trent and Vatican (a profession of Faith is necessary to enter the Church after baptism, as well as after heresy, schism or apostasy).


Alta Vendita, Execrabilis: Show people the truth, that this deception has been brewing for over a century and the Church has warned us in advance.

A Catholic Survival Plan: Instructions from a priest who lived through the French Revolution, on how to live the faith during times of apostasy. - This is for Catholics ONLY! You must convert before this is of any use to you.


The Holy Rosary: (this pamphlet is not the Scriptural Rosary) The most powerful weapon available to us today. - This is for Catholics ONLY! You must convert before this is of any use to you - UNLESS you pray it daily and devoutly for the purpose of obtaining contrition for your sins, a firm purpose of amendment and the grace to know and accept the TRUTH, i.e. pray for your own conversion to love and obedience of the true God.

Daily Works of a Catholic (includes Scriptural Rosary): A compilation of prayers and meditations, suggested for growth in personal piety. Formatted for printing as 5.5 x 8.5, booklet form. - This is for Catholics ONLY! You must convert before this is of any use to you.

Doctrinal Resources

Bible Reference Guide: Quickly and easily reference the verses in the Bible that support Catholic doctrine, including objector verses one must be aware of.  Updated for better readability and presentation of doctrines.  Print up a bunch of these and give them to Protestants, place them on car windshields at the meeting houses of heretics, etc.

Revised English Catechism of 1583: A most excellent resource, simple, to the point, and doctrinally pure. Formatted for printing as 5.5 x 8.5, booklet form.  Also includes the Scriptural Rosary and excerpts from Louis de Montfort's writings on the Rosary and devotion to Mary.

VulSearch 4:  Read and search the entire Bible, in either the Challoner edition of the Douay Rheims or the Clementine Vulgate (both are included).  Includes the Latin translation resource "Whitaker's Words".


Simply click the links, then "save as" using your browser of choice.

Gregorian Chant, Asperges Me
Creation vs. Evolution

What Must You Do To Get to Heaven?

Friday, May 8, 2009

Benedict XVI heresies

Ratzinger denying the resurrection of the body:

Benedict XVI, Introduction to Christianity, 2004, p. 349:
“It now becomes clear that the real heart of faith in the resurrection does not consist at all in the idea of the restoration of bodies, to which we have reduced it in our thinking; such is the case even though this is the pictorial image used throughout the Bible.”

Benedict XVI, Introduction to Christianity, p. 353: “The foregoing reflections may have clarified to some extent what is involved in the biblical pronouncements about the resurrection: their essential content is not the conception of a restoration of bodies to souls after a long interval…”

Benedict XVI, Introduction to Christianity, 2004, pp. 357-358: “To recapitulate, Paul teaches, not the resurrection of physical bodies, but the resurrection of persons…”

How much more obvious an attack on the Christian Faith can there be?

1 Corinthians 15:12-17, 44: "Now if Christ be preached, that he arose again from the dead, how do some among you say, that there is no resurrection of the dead? But if there be no resurrection of the dead, then Christ is not risen again. And if Christ be not risen again, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain. Yea, and we are found false witnesses of God: because we have given testimony against God, that he hath raised up Christ; whom he hath not raised up, if the dead rise not again. For if the dead rise not again, neither is Christ risen again. And if Christ be not risen again, your faith is vain, for you are yet in your sins...

It is sown a natural body, it shall rise a spiritual body. If there be a natural body, there is also a spiritual body, as it is written"

Benedict XVI, March 19, 2009 Address:

“In the Lord Jesus there is no more Jew or Gentile, man or woman (cf. Gal 3:28). In his flesh he has reconciled all peoples. In the power of the Holy Spirit, I appeal to everyone: “Be reconciled to God!” (2 Cor 5:20). No ethnic or cultural difference, no difference of race, sex or religion must become a cause for dispute among you.”

This is an example of Benedict XVI totally twisting the scriptures. He quotes Galatians 3:28, which states that we are all one in Jesus Christ. Then he says this means that differences of religion or religious issues should never become a dispute among people! This is apostasy from Benedict XVI, especially considering he was preparing his 'clergy' to go out and 'dialogue' with Muslims.

Benedict XVI, March 19, 2009 Address to Muslim community of Cameroon:

“Dear Friends, Grateful for this opportunity to meet representatives of the Muslim community in Cameroon, I express my heartfelt thanks to Mr Amadou Bello for his kind words on your behalf. Our encounter is a vivid sign of the desire we share with all people of good will – in Cameroon, throughout Africa and across the globe – to seek opportunities to exchange ideas about how religion makes an essential contribution to our understanding of culture and the world, and to the peaceful coexistence of all the members of the human family… Cameroon is home to thousands of Christians and Muslims, who often live, work and worship in the same neighborhood. Both believe in one, merciful God who on the last day will judge mankind (cf. Lumen Gentium, 16). Together they bear witness to the fundamental values of family, social responsibility, obedience to God’s law and loving concern for the sick and suffering. By patterning their lives on these virtues and teaching them to the young, Christians and Muslims not only show how they foster the full development of the human person, but also how they forge bonds of solidarity with one’s neighbors and advance the common good. My friends, I believe a particularly urgent task of religion today is to unveil the vast potential of human reason, which is itself God’s gift and which is elevated by revelation and faith. Belief in the one God, far from stunting our capacity to understand ourselves and the world, broadens it. Far from setting us against the world, it commits us to it. We are called to help others see the subtle traces and mysterious presence of God in the world which he has marvelously created and continually sustains with his ineffable and all-embracing love. Although his infinite glory can never be directly grasped by our finite minds in this life, we nonetheless catch glimpses of it in the beauty that surrounds us...

“Genuine religion thus widens the horizon of human understanding and stands at the base of any authentically human culture. It rejects all forms of violence and totalitarians: not only on principles of faith, but also of right reason. Indeed, religion and reason mutually reinforce one another since religion is purified and structured by reason, and reason’s full potential is unleashed by revelation and faith. I therefore encourage you, my dear Muslim friends, to imbue society with the values that emerge from this perspective and elevate human culture, as we work together to build a civilization of love. May the enthusiastic cooperation of Muslims, Catholics and other Christians in Cameroon be a beacon to other African nations of the enormous potential of an inter religious commitment to peace, justice and the common good! With these sentiments, I once again express my gratitude for this auspicious occasion to meet you during my visit to Cameroon. I thank Almighty God for the blessings he has bestowed upon you and your fellow citizens, and I pray that the links that bind Christians and Muslims in their profound reverence for the one God will continue to grow stronger, so that they will reflect more clearly the wisdom of the Almighty, who enlightens the hearts of all mankind.”

First, Benedict XVI states that Muslims are “of good will.” Second, he states that “religion” – any religion – “makes an essential contribution”! Third, he utters the heresy that Muslims believe in the one God who will judge mankind on the last day. Fourth, he says that Muslims have obedience to God’s law. Fifth, he states that all religions have “vast potential”! Sixth, he states that different religions “are called to help others see the subtle traces and mysterious presence of God.” Seventh, he states that “genuine religion thus widens the horizon of human understanding and stands at the base of any authentically human culture”; and he adds: “I therefore encourage you, my dear Muslim friends, to imbue society with the values that emerge from this perspective and elevate human culture”! This means that there is more than one “genuine” religion. Eighth, he states that “I thank Almighty God for the blessings he has bestowed upon you.” Benedict XVI therefore believes that God blesses Muslim leaders who reject the one true God, Jesus Christ. Ninth, Benedict XVI then utters the heresy that “I pray that the links that bind Christians and Muslims in their profound reverence for the one God will continue to grow stronger, so that they will reflect more clearly the wisdom of the Almighty.” This is pure heresy and blasphemy.

Benedict XVI, March 20, 2009 Discourse to political and civil authorities in Cameroon:

“I am glad, too, that members of other Christian ecclesial communities were able to be present at some of our gatherings, and I renew my respectful greetings to them and their leaders… My meeting with members of the Muslim community here in Cameroon was another highlight that will remain with me. As we continue on our journey towards greater mutual understanding, I pray that we will also grow in respect and esteem for one another, and strengthen our resolve to work together to proclaim the God-given dignity of the human person…”

Benedict XVI respects and esteems heretics and the leaders of false religions.

Benedict XVI, March 15, 2009 Discourse at Simile International Airport:

“I gratefully acknowledge too the presence of members of other Christian confessions and the followers of other religions. By joining with us today you offer a clear sign of the good will and harmony that exist in this country between people of different religious traditions… Not bitter inter ethnic or inter religious rivalry, but the righteousness, peace and joy of God’s kingdom, so aptly described by Pope Paul VI as the civilization of love.”

Benedict XVI says he is grateful for heretics and for members of false religions. He also says that the joy of God’s kingdom is demonstrated by members of false religions!

Benedict XVI, March 17, 2009 answers to questions during his flight to Cameroon:

“I have now spoken with more than half of the African Bishops, and they have told me that relations with the Muslims, despite the problems that can be identified, are highly promising. Dialogue is growing in mutual respect and cooperation in common ethical responsibilities. Moreover, there is a growing sense of catholicity which helps overcome tribalism, one of the great problems, and from this comes the joy of being Christian. One problem with the traditional religions is the fear of the spirits.”

Benedict XVI states that he has respect for Muslims who reject Jesus Christ, are outside the Church and on road to eternal damnation. For these and other reasons, he is NOT POPE.

What Must You Do To Get to Heaven?

Friday, May 1, 2009

The Roman Catechism does NOT teach Baptism of Desire

Addendum: please see I have to stop fighting baptism of desire and admit that I am more confused about the Crisis now than I was when I thought I had a tidy answer

Baptism of desire, like baptism of blood, is not a sacrament, but the necessity of sacraments for salvation is infallibly attested to by Pope Pius IX at the Vatican Council.

Pope Pius IX, Vatican Council, Session 2, Profession of Faith (#4), ex cathedra: "I profess also that there are seven sacraments of the new law, truly and properly so called, instituted by our lord Jesus Christ and necessary for salvation, though each person need not receive them all."

The necessity of the sacrament of water baptism is taught to be a necessity of means, not only a necessity of precept. This means that without baptism, it is absolutely impossible for a person to attain salvation.

However, there are many opinions flying around about the so-called doctrine of baptism of desire, which attempt to argue that "God is so merciful that a person does not need to receive baptism before death, so long as they truly desired it while living. You know, if they really, really wanted to be baptized but some unforeseen event took their life beforehand. After all, God is merciful and even the Catechism of Trent teaches it."

The problem, however, with using the passage from the Catechism of Trent to 'prove' baptism of desire is threefold:
  • The text does not objectively teach baptism of desire; that someone can be saved who dies unbaptized
  • It is not held to be infallible, unlike the Councils of Vienne, Florence, Trent, etc.
  • The subsequent English translations take gratuitous liberties and wind up contradicting infallible dogma from the very Council they claim to be explaining
LATIN from the 1669 Roman Catechism (note that this is not the Original text, but the oldest  I have been able to find - scans viewable at the bottom of this post): "...qui rationis usu praediti sint, Baptismi suscipiendi propositum, atque consilium, & male actae vitae poenitentia satis futura sit ad gratiam, & iustitiam, si repentinus aliquis casus impediat, quominus salutari aqua ablui possint."

The original Latin can easily be and should be translated (in order to preserve the coherence of dogma) to say that if some impediment, obstruction, snare or difficulty (impediat) should be imposed, which holds (possint) a person back from receiving the sacrament then the intention and determination to receive the sacrament and their repentance of sins will avail them to grace and righteousness or justice. This does not explicitly teach baptism of desire, but is perfectly in line with the Catholic position, which states that God will get the sacrament to those whom He deems truly worthy. It teaches that the impediment may be somehow overcome. The subsequent English translation, however, takes the liberty to change the words into something that they never explicitly said.

COMMON ENGLISH TRANSLATION: "...should any unforeseen accident make it impossible for adults to be washed in the salutary waters, their intention and determination to receive Baptism and their repentance for past sins, will avail them to grace and righteousness."

Note the addition of the word "impossible". This is a gratuitous and heretical choice on behalf of the translator, and is not a translation at all, but a paraphrasing which changes the sense of the text. It is heretical because it directly contradicts the two canons below, which are infallible declarations of the Catholic Church, under the guidance of God the Holy Ghost:

Pope Paul III, Council of Trent, Session 7, 1547, On Baptism, Canon II, ex cathedra:"If any one saith, that true and natural water is not of necessity for baptism, and, on that account, wrests, to some sort of metaphor, those words of our Lord Jesus Christ; Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost; let him be anathema."

Pope Paul III, Council of Trent, Session 7, 1547, On Baptism, Canon V, ex cathedra: "If any one saith, that baptism is free, that is, not necessary unto salvation; let him be anathema."

This means that if it is impossible for the person to be washed in the salutary waters, then it is impossible to be translated to the state of grace and thus merit salvation.

Another argument used by baptism of desire heretics is that Trent taught it in the infallible decrees of the Council. The following is THE ONE AND ONLY infallible decree that baptism of desire and baptism of blood adherents are ever going to bring forward, and as we will see, this decree actually teaches CONTRARY to their heresy.

Pope Paul III, Council of Trent, Session 6, 1547, Decree on Justification, Chapter IV, ex cathedra: "And this translation, since the promulgation of the Gospel, cannot be effected, without the laver of regeneration, or the desire thereof, as it is written; unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God. (St. John 3:5)"

The first and most obvious reason this does not teach baptism of desire is that the Council Fathers, had they meant to teach contrary to the absolute necessity of water baptism, would certainly not have used St. John 3:5 as their passage of choice from the Bible, since they would seem to be contradicting it, but rather it is much more likely that they would have chosen St. John 3:8.

St. John 3:8: "The Spirit breatheth where he will; and thou hearest his voice, but thou knowest not whence he cometh, and whither he goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit."

But they did not. Anyone who tries to use this passage to prove baptism of desire, quite simply is guilty of private interpretation of the Scriptures, contrary to the dogmas of Holy Mother Church.

The remaining problem here for baptism of desire and baptism of blood is twofold. First in order to believe in baptism of desire one has to falsely understand this decree in a manner, which necessarily involves denying the Canons on baptism, when the correct understanding does not necessitate this: The translation (to the state of grace) cannot take place without the laver of regeneration (water baptism) or the desire thereof, in the same sense as a man cannot sail a boat without a body of water upon which to sail, or the will to do so. Absence of either one renders the desired result impossible, until the absence is remedied. In this interpretation, no dogmas are denied, thus it is the correct interpretation.

This is further attested to by understanding the rules of logic, specifically De Morgan's Law, when dealing with statements worded in this manner. This is the important section of the decree to pay attention to: "...cannot be effected, without the laver of regeneration, or the desire thereof..."

We are dealing with the negation of a compound statement. We are talking about something that CANNOT take place without this or that. In other words we are stating the circumstances , which are necessary to exist for this event to be incapable of taking place: the absence of only one of the two above elements, the laver of regeneration, or the desire thereof. Only one has to be missing. Things would be entirely different if the disjunction were changed to a conjunction, that is if the word "or" was switched to the word "and", OR if the "cannot be effected, without" were switched to "can be effected with". Either one of these changes would completely alter the meaning of the phrase, whereas if both changes took place, there would be no change in the meaning whatsoever.

Here is a further breakdown of the rules of logic involved:

Negating a Conjunction (and) and a Disjunction (or):

If we were dealing with a conjunction:
"This translation to the state of justification cannot be effected without the laver of regeneration and the desire thereof."

The above statement would mean that BOTH must be missing for the translation the the state of justification to be impossible. Since BOTH have to be missing, this means that the presence of only one is sufficient to effect justification. Baptism of desire adherents would like it if the decree used a conjunction, but this is not the way it was decreed. The council used not a conjunction, but a disjunction:

"This translation to the state of justification cannot be effected without the laver of regeneration OR the desire thereof."

If the translation to the state of justification cannot be effected without the laver of regeneration or the desire thereof, then it cannot be effected if EITHER one is missing. So it can be said that "This translation to the state of justification cannot be effected without the laver of regeneration" and "This translation to the state of justification cannot be effected without the desire thereof."

Now that we see this is the only way to understand this decree, it behooves us to examine ta common he one seemingly legitimate objection, namely that infants, since they have not attained the use of reason, cannot actively desire the sacrament of baptism. It is clear that the God would not decree something that is impossible, so it is clear that He means that in those receiving the sacrament, who have the use of reason, and are thus capable of desiring, it is necessary that the desire for the sacrament not be missing. Otherwise one would have to assert that baptism on infants is never valid. And the context of this session of the Council of Trent is further attested to by Chapter 5 of the same session:

Pope Paul III, Council of Trent, Chapter V, On the necessity, in adults, of preparation for Justification, and whence it proceeds, AD 1547, ex cathedra: "The Synod furthermore declares, that IN ADULTS, the beginning of the said Justification is to be derived from the prevenient grace of God, through Jesus Christ..."

Second, if the Council had purposed to teach baptism of desire, which would have been an exception to the dogmatic canons stating that water baptism is necessary, it certainly would have done so explicitly in the Canons on baptism, as would be fitting, rather than in the Decree on Justification. In fact, this Council did exactly that with regard to making an explicit exception in the decree on original sin, when it stated the following at the end of the same decree:

Pope Paul III, Council of Trent, Session V, Decree Concerning Original Sin, 1546, ex cathedra: "This same holy Synod doth nevertheless declare, that it is not its intention to include in this decree, where original sin is treated of, the blessed and immaculate Virgin Mary, the mother of God; but that the constitutions of Pope Sixtus IV., of happy memory, are to be observed, under the pains contained in the said constitutions, which it renews."

And besides, if it was meant to be understood to teach baptism of desire, then it certainly would have been rejected as heretical for denying two previously defined infallible and irreformable decrees on the subject.

Pope Clement V, Council of Vienne, 1311-1312, ex cathedra: "To this one Baptism which baptizes all people who in Christ are regenerated, as one God and one Faith, all the faithful must confess, which celebrated in water in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost, we believe to be, in common for adults and infants, a perfect remedy unto salvation."

There is one baptism and it regenerates ALL those who are baptized in Christ. This baptism is celebrated in water, not in desire or in blood.

Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, Session 8, 1439, ex cathedra: "Holy baptism holds the first place among all the sacraments, for it is the gate of the spiritual life; through it we become members of Christ and of the body of the church. Since death came into the world through one person, unless we are born again of water and the spirit, we cannot, as Truth says, enter the kingdom of heaven. The matter of this sacrament is true and natural water,"

Through baptism we become members of the Church and we CANNOT, as the Truth says enter the kingdom of heaven, unless we are born again of WATER and the Spirit. No ifs, conjunctions, disjunctions or buts.

Now one might ask "How could this be allowed to be written in the English translation of the Catechism if it is heretical?" This is a fair question with a simple answer right out of Scripture.

St. Matthew 7:15: "Beware of false prophets, who come to you in the clothing of sheep, but inwardly they are ravening wolves."

1 Corinthians 11:19: "For there must be also heresies: that they also, who are approved, may be made manifest among you."

The apostle says there must be heresies, which God permits, that they who are approved, may be made manifest, that is, that on such occasions, the just may show their fidelity and constancy in their faith in and duty to God. A Catechism, while it may be reliable, is not an infallible document of the Church.

Since we know that to contradict or deny a dogma is heresy and separates us from the body of Christ, then we know that baptism of desire, which does NOT involve water, and necessarily distorts the words of our Lord into a metaphor, is heretical.

Here is where people tend to show their bad will and lack of faith. They argue for example that God is merciful, and therefore He will allow salvation to come to people who desire baptism. Some even say that a person who has never even heard of Jesus Christ can be saved by an 'implicit desire for baptism'. These arguments are offensive to the justice, omniscience, mercy and omnipotence of God. Here is how they offend each:

They offend God's justice, failing to accept that punishment for sin extends down through genealogies.

Exodus 20:5: "...I am the Lord thy God, mighty, jealous, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me"

And that he fulfills all justice.

St. Matthew 3:13-15: "Then cometh Jesus from Galilee to the Jordan, unto John, to be baptized by him. But John stayed him, saying: I ought to be baptized by thee, and comest thou to me? And Jesus answering, said to him: Suffer it to be so now. For so it becometh us to fulfill all justice. Then he suffered him."

They offend God's omniscience by failing to account for God's infallible foreknowledge of all things, including who will ultimately respond to His grace unto salvation and who will not.

Isaias 46:10: "Who shew from the beginning the things that shall be at last, and from ancient times the things that as yet are not done, saying: My counsel shall stand, and all my will shall be done."

They offend God's mercy by which He may preserve from greater condemnation, those whom He foresees as receiving the true faith only to later forsake it.

St. Matthew 11:21-22: "Woe to thee, Corozain, woe to thee, Bethsaida: for if in Tyre and Sidon had been wrought the miracles that have been wrought in you, they had long ago done penance in sackcloth and ashes. But I say unto you, it shall be more tolerable for Tyre and Sidon in the day of judgment, than for you."

By denying certain souls baptism, He may limit their inevitable just punishment to merely that of original sin, not of original sin and infidelity or betrayal of the faith. In the case of infants who die without baptism, He may limit the punishment even further to exclude any sins the person would have committed, if only they had attained the use of reason. His mercy is great indeed.

Finally they offend His omnipotence in failing to recognize that He can indeed exact swift and immediate justice on souls conceived in original sin, whom he foreknows to reject obedience to Him.

Deuteronomy 7:9-10: "And thou shalt know that the Lord thy God, he is a strong and faithful God, keeping his covenant and mercy to them that love him, and to them that keep his commandments, unto a thousand generations: And repaying forthwith them that hate him, so as to destroy them, without further delay immediately rendering to them what they deserve."

God has the power to get His sacrament and salvation to all those whom He deems worthy. Remember that the only way a person can believe in baptism of desire, is by denying the infallible dogmas listed above as well as the following infallible dogmas:

Pope Pius IX, Vatican Council, Session 4, Chapter 4, #9, 1870, ex cathedra: "Therefore, faithfully adhering to the tradition received from the beginning of the Christian faith, to the glory of God our savior, for the exaltation of the Catholic religion and for the salvation of the Christian people, with the approval of the Sacred Council, we teach and define as a divinely revealed dogma that when the Roman Pontiff speaks EX CATHEDRA, that is, when, in the exercise of his office as shepherd and teacher of all Christians, in virtue of his supreme apostolic authority, he defines a doctrine concerning faith or morals to be held by the whole Church, he possesses, by the divine assistance promised to him in blessed Peter, that infallibility which the divine Redeemer willed his Church to enjoy in defining doctrine concerning faith or morals. Therefore, such definitions of the Roman Pontiff are of themselves, and not by the consent of the Church, irreformable."

Finally, those who believe in baptism of desire, as we have seen in this article, are trying to say that one infallible decree can contradict another.

Pope Pius IX, Vatican Council, Session 3, Chapter 4, (#6, 7), ex cathedra: "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."

There may be, of course still many questions left, but it must be said that while we may not always understand or know the full reason behind why a certain truth exists, we must always believe that truth, or we forfeit our faith and number ourselves among the reprobate. I choose to believe God the Holy Ghost, and His words, which He uttered through the mouths of men, rather than to judge His law, even if I don't fully understand it.

Isaias 55:9: "For as the heavens are exalted above the earth, so are my ways exalted above your ways, and my thoughts above your thoughts."

What Must You Do To Get to Heaven?