Author: John Vennari
Publication: www.fatima.org
Date: June 3, 2004
URL: http://www.fatima.org/060304rit.htm
Another Interfaith Outrage Blessed
by Shrine Rector
"All the invocations of the pagans
are hateful to God because all their gods are devils."1
Saint Francis Xavier wrote these
words to Saint Ignatius about the pagan religion of Hinduism. Francis Xavier,
writing from India at the time, merely restates the truth from the infallible
Sacred Scriptures: "The gods of the gentiles are devils". (Psalm 95:5)
Yet on May 5, 2004 - the Feast of
Pope Saint Pius V - the Little Chapel of the Apparitions at Fatima was
allowed to be used for a pagan Hindu ceremony. This Little Chapel (also
called the Capelinha) is built on the site where Our Blessed Mother appeared
to the 3 children of Fatima in 1917.
News of the Hindu worship service
at Fatima was broadcast on May 5 on SIC, a national television station
in Portugal. CFN spoke with two people in Portugal, independent from one
another, who saw the televised newscast. The May 22 Portugal News also
reported on the event.2
According to the broadcast, a busload
of Hindus were allowed to commandeer the sanctuary inside the Fatima Capelinha
and to use the Catholic altar for their rituals. The SIC newscaster said,
"This is an unprecedented unique moment in the history of the shrine. The
Hindu priest, or Sha Tri, prays on the altar the Shaniti Pa, the prayer
for peace."
The outrage occurred with the blessing
of Shrine Rector Msgr. Guerra. No one may use the Capelinha without Rector
Guerra's permission.
The Hindus wore traditional garb,
a Hindu "priest" in traditional Hindu vestments led the ceremony that consisted
in the offering of flowers and food. This would seem to indicate that the
Hindus performed their pagan puja, a ritual in which the offering of flowers
and food is central.
After the Hindu worship service
at the Catholic altar, the Hindus were escorted by Fatima authorities to
see a model of the huge, round-shaped modernistic shrine at Fatima now
under construction, a fifty million dollar eyesore that will blot the landscape
of Our Lady's apparitions.
One of the Hindus is reported to
have said that they go to Fatima because there are many gods, and the gods
have wives and companions who will bring good luck. This is a blasphemy
against the Queen of Heaven as it places Our Blessed Mother on the same
level as some sort of "wife" of a false god.
Thus, the Hindus did not even come
to Fatima to learn of, or take part in, Catholic prayer.3 Rather, they
folded the holy event of Fatima into their own superstitions and pagan
myths.
These Hindus are said to be from
Lisbon, where they have a Hindu temple and a community of a couple hundred.
The SIC broadcast showed the Hindus' house of worship that contained the
many statues of their gods and goddesses.
It is reported that pilgrims who
witnessed the event at Fatima were scandalized, but Shrine Rector Guerra
defended the use of the Marian Shrine for pagan worship.
Appearing on Portuguese television,
Guerra regurgitated the long- discredited, ecumenical slogan that different
religions should concentrate on what we have in common and not on what
separates us. He also said that all religions are good because they all
lead us to God. As reported in previous issues of Catholic Family News,
the principle that "all religions lead to God" is nothing more than one
of Freemasonry's fundamental tenets. The French Freemason, Yves Marsaudon
wrote, "One can say that ecumenism is the legitimate son of Freemasonry.4
Continuation of the New Ecumenical
Orientation
Readers will recall that this is
the same Msgr. Guerra who hosted the Interfaith Congress at Fatima in October
2003. I traveled to Fatima to attend the event and reported on it in recent
issues of CFN. It was a Congress that would have horrified all pre-Vatican
II Popes, had any one of them walked in on it.
The first two days of the Congress
contained "Catholic" speakers promoting the ecumenical agenda. On the third
day - Sunday - representatives of Catholicism, the Schismatic Orthodox,
Anglicanism, Hinduism, Islam and Buddhism each gave testimony of the importance
of "sanctuary" within their various creeds. At the Congress:
* The ecumenical theologian Father
Jacques Dupuis called the defined dogma "outside the Church there is no
salvation", a "horrible text" that must be rejected;
* Dupuis claimed that all religions
are positively willed by God and that non-Catholics do not have to convert
to the one true Catholic Church for unity and salvation. He said that Catholics
and non- Catholics are equal members in the "Reign of God".
* Dupuis also said that the purpose
of ecumenical dialogue is not to convert others to the Catholic Church,
but to make "a Christian a better Christian, a Hindu a better Hindu";
* Dupuis said further that the Holy
Ghost is present and operative in the "sacred books" and "sacred rites"
of Buddhism and Hinduism;
* The Congress speakers placed all
religious sanctuaries on the same level, whether they be the Shrine of
Our Lady of Fatima, the Mecca of Islam or the Kyoto of Shintoism.
* Father Arul Irudayam, Rector of
the Marian Shrine in Vailankanni, India told the audience on Sunday that
Hindus now perform their pagan rituals inside the Sanctuary of the Catholic
Shrine.
These and other outrages elicited
nothing but praise and applause from the audience, including applause from
Shrine Rector Guerra, the Bishop of Leiria-Fatima, and the Apostolic Delegate
of Portugal.5 (I was an eyewitness to their reaction). Cardinal Policarpo
of Lisbon, and Archbishop Fitzgerald from the Vatican's Pontifical Council
for Promoting Christian Unity, also voiced approval for the ecumenical
errors spouted at the Congress.6
News also surfaced that Fatima would
now become an "Interfaith Shrine," where all religions would be allowed
to perform their pagan rituals. Archbishop Fitzgerald and Rector Guerra
issued half-hearted denials of this. But their denials only affirmed the
ecumenical and pan-religious orientation now underway at Fatima.7
Yet because of these half-hearted
denials, many shallow individuals - who should know better - exclaimed
that there is no danger of Fatima losing its Catholic identity because
Church officials have told us that Fatima will not be an interfaith Shrine.
Chief among these is Father Robert
J. Fox, who in a recent issue of his Immaculate Heart Messenger,8 attacked
those who resist the new ecumenical orientation at Fatima and defended
Msgr. Guerra.9
This can only mean that Father Robert
J. Fox agrees with the outrages perpetrated at Msgr. Guerra's conference
of October 2003.
* Father Fox obviously agrees with
the modernist Father Jacques Dupuis who says that the Council of Florence
contains a "horrible text" that must be rejected;
* Father Fox obviously agrees that
we must not try to convert non- Catholics to the one true Church for salvation;
* Father Fox obviously agrees that
it is a good thing that Hindus perform their pagan rituals inside the Marian
Shrine at Vailankanni.
Otherwise, why would Fr. Fox defend
Msgr. Guerra and his ecumenical Congress, where Guerra applauded all of
these vagaries?
Fr. Fox assures his readers that
"Fatima Will Retain Its Catholic Identity". Fr. Fox said the same thing
on an EWTN interview in late April with Father Mitch Pacwa. Here Fr. Fox
ridiculed those of us who reported on Fatima's new interfaith orientation,
he claimed that the recent stories about Fatima are nothing but "fabrications"
and he assured the viewers that despite what they hear about what's going
on at Fatima, there's nothing to worry about.
The recent Hindu ceremony at Fatima
demonstrates how fraudulent are Fr. Fox's "assurances". (For a superb response
to Father Fox, read Christopher Ferrara's "Father Fox's Modernist Assault
on Fatima". Click here for more information on this Special Report.)
Thus, Fr. Fox, Father Pacwa and
EWTN are guilty of neutralizing the healthy resistance that thousands of
Catholics should mount against the outrages now perpetrated at Fatima.
They have effectively placed themselves on the side of those who would
permit pagan ceremonies in the Catholic sanctuary at the Fatima Shrine.
I feel sorry for those who look to Fr. Fox and EWTN to tell them the truth.10
Zenit News on May 13 likewise ran
an article boasting that the construction of the new, futuristic Shrine
at Fatima is moving forward despite the controversy surrounding the alleged
"Interfaith Shrine"11.
Yet, as I stressed repeatedly in
my articles on this subject, it does not matter whether the site is formally
called an "Interfaith Shrine" or not. Now that the ecumenical mind-set
is accepted by Fatima officials (I said in "Fatima to Become Interfaith
Shrine?), "it is only a matter of time before this blasphemy" of pagan
rituals in Catholic sanctuaries "takes place at Fatima".
Only five months after the publication
of these words, the blasphemy took place. Our Lady's Shrine at Fatima -
with the blessing of Rector Guerra - has now been used for pagan worship.
This blasphemy will not incur God's
blessing, but His wrath. The Lord God tells us solemnly in Sacred Scripture,
"For I am the Lord thy God, a jealous God ..." (Dt. 5:9)
Imagine how the prophet Isaiah would
react if he learned that the high priest of the Temple at Jerusalem allowed
the Holy of Holies to be used for Hindu worship or pagan ceremonies? As
a prophet of the one true God, would he have cracked an ecumenical grin
saying, "that's okay because all religions lead us to God"?
Far from it. This blasphemy, were
it enacted in the Temple at Isaiah's time, would probably result in the
Israelites being cast into exile.
Our Lord in the Old Testament did
not tell the Israelites that "what unites them to the pagans is greater
than what divides them". In fact, any time the Israelites engaged in worship
- or any 'ecumenical compromise' - with pagan religions, the Lord God equated
this with harlotry and meted out to them severe punishments.12
What was true for the one true religion
of the Old Testament is even more true for the One True Religion of the
New Covenant (the Catholic Church), since the rites and ceremonies of the
Old Covenant were superseded and perfected in the New.
Likewise, the First Commandment
mandates, "I am the Lord Thy God, thou shalt not have strange gods before
Me", and the gods of Hinduism are strange gods that all of mankind are
forbidden to worship. As Saint Francis Xavier rightly explained, "All the
invocations of the pagans are hateful to God because all their gods are
devils."
Fidelity to Catholic Tradition Equated
with "Talibanism"
Then on May 7, 2004, Notícias
de Fátima, a local newspaper in Fatima on friendly terms with the
Fatima Shrine, published a defense of the new ecumenical orientation. It
contained an article headlined "Radical Movements Against Ecumenism" that
chaffed against the "Open Letter to the Faithful of Portugual Concerning
the Scandal at the Fatima Shrine" that was published in three Portuguese
newspapers by Father Nicholas Gruner's organization.13
In this May 7 article, Msgr. Guerra
defended the ecumenical initiative, saying that the "Shrine is open to
dialogue with different religions and religious congregations, as it is
practiced in the Catholic Church for a long time already."
The "long time" to which Guerra
refers is only the 40 chaotic years since Vatican II, a time of unprecedented
novelty that spawned the greatest crisis of Faith in Church history. For
one thousand, nine hundred and sixty- two years before Vatican II - that
is, since the founding of the Church by Jesus Christ - the Catholic Popes
uniformly condemned the type of ecumenism and interreligious dialogue practiced
since the Council as grave sins against the Faith.
Notícias de Fátima
then quoted the Capuchin Brother Fernando Valente who said, "We deal with
traditionalists and fundamentalists; with people who actually missed the
train. People, for whom time seems to have stopped decades ago, who are
way back behind reality, and have therefore to be considered on a mental
and spiritual level, comparable to the Taliban."
Notícias de Fátima
then said, "Declaring this 'Catholic Talibanism' to be unhealthy, Br. Valente
recalls that 'It is possible to interpret the Bible in such a way that
it can say anything.' This is what these radical movements do, he adds,
remembering that 'it is necessary to read the Bible with the spirit with
which it was written'."
So Catholics faithful to Tradition
are compared to the "Taliban", a name calculated to make us look as nasty,
as barbaric, as unreasonable as possible. According to Brother Valente
and Msgr. Guerra, it is now considered a crime to be faithful to Catholic
Truth as it has always been taught by the Church throughout the centuries,
and by the consistent teachings of the Popes.
We are in a situation similar to
that of the Fourth Century, when over 80% of the world's bishops fell into
the heresy of Arianism. At this time, Saint Basil lamented, "Only one offense
is now vigorously punished, an accurate observance of our fathers' traditions."14
Yet Catholic history condemns the majority who accepted the novel teachings,
and praises the minority who maintained Tradition. This is a lesson to
us all.
Brother Valente misleads the reader
when he says, "It is possible to interpret the Bible in such a way that
it can say anything', claiming that 'This is what these radical movements
do".
Yet the Catholic opposition to ecumenism
has nothing to do with subjective interpretation of Scripture, but of objective
fidelity to Catholic dogma. The Catholic Church herself tells us how we
must interpret various points of Scripture when the Church solemnly defines
a truth found in Scripture and Tradition.
Once the Church pronounces a solemn
definition, we are not free to interpret the Scriptures against this infallible
Catholic truth.15 The defined definition of the Church tells us the "spirit
in which" this-or-that Gospel passage is written, and we may not depart
from this in the name of a new ecumenical delirium.
Brother Valente complains of Catholics
who "missed the train", saying that for them, "time stopped decades ago".
Yet in saying this, Brother Valente reveals himself as a modernist, since
it is modernism that teaches that the religious truths of yesterday must
be discarded for the new religious "truths" of today.16
Brother Valente, who happily rejects
tradition, and urges others do to the same, forgets the solemn condemnation
infallibly taught by the Second Council of Nicea:
"If anyone rejects any written or
unwritten tradition of the church, let him be anathema."17
All of the Rector Guerras, Fr. Foxes
and Brother Valentes in the world - no matter how much they squawk, no
matter how often they castigate faithful Catholics - cannot change the
infallible Catholic dogma that "outside the Catholic Church there is no
salvation".
The Council of Florence defined
infallibly that "Pagans, Jews, heretics and schismatics" are "outside the
Catholic Church," and as such, "can never be partakers of eternal life,"
unless "before death" they are joined to the one true Church of Jesus Christ,
the Catholic Church.18 Msgr. Guerra, however, applauds Father Jacques Dupuis,
who calls this defined dogma from the Council of Florence a "horrible text"
that must be trashed.
The Catechism of the Council of
Trent, faithful to perennial truth, teaches: "infidels, heretics, schismatics
and excommunicated persons" are "excluded from the Church's pale".19 In
other words, Protestants, Jews, Muhammadans, Hindus, Buddhists, etc., are
not part of the Catholic Church, which is the Kingdom of God on earth.20
How many times is it necessary to
repeat the unchanging teaching of the Popes on this fundamental dogma against
today's ecumenists who claim that salvation is found in any religion? Here
we will give just a few examples:
Pope Saint Gregory the Great: (590-604)
"Now the holy Church universal proclaims that God cannot be truly worshipped,
saving from within herself, asserting that all they that are without her
shall never be saved."21
Pope Pius VIII (1829- 1831): "...
We profess that there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church ... the
Church is the pillar and firmament of truth, as the apostle Paul teaches
(1 Tim. 3). In reference to these words St. Augustine says: 'Whoever is
without the Church will not be reckoned among the sons, and whoever does
not want to have the Church as Mother will not have God as Father'."22
Pope Gregory XVI (1831 - 1846):
"It is not possible to worship God truly except in Her (the Catholic Church);
all who are outside Her will not be saved."23
Blessed Pope Pius IX (1846-1878):
"It must be held as a matter of faith that outside the Apostolic Roman
Church, no one can be saved; that this is the only ark of salvation; that
he who shall not have entered therein will perish in the flood."24
Pope Pius XI (1922-1939): "The Catholic
Church alone is keeping the true worship. This is the font of truth, this
is the house of faith, this is the temple of God; if any man enter not
here, or if any man go forth from it, he is a stranger to the hope of life
and salvation."25
Pope Pius XII complained in his
1950 Encyclical Humani Generis: "Some reduce to a meaningless formula the
necessity of belonging to the true Church in order to gain eternal salvation."
Pius' complaint could be dead aimed
at the Rector Guerras, the Fr. Foxes, the Brother Valentes, and all those
in high place who not only abandon this infallible dogma, but publicly
castigate those Catholics who defend this Divinely revealed Truth.
Defined Dogma Cannot Change
It must be noted too that the First
Vatican Council solemnly defined that even a Pope may not teach a new doctrine,
change doctrine, or interpret Catholic dogma in a different manner from
the way it has always been taught. The Popes themselves are bound to the
dogmatic definitions, and to the consistent, unchanging teaching of these
doctrines throughout the centuries.26
In a sermon on the subject, the
eminent 19th Century Cardinal John Henry Newman quoted a Pastoral Letter
from the Bishops of Switzerland concerning Papal Infallibility, and on
what a Pope may or may not teach. In this Pastoral Letter, which received
the approval of Blessed Pius IX, the Swiss Bishops stated clearly the Catholic
doctrine on the subject:
"It in no way depends upon the caprice
of the Pope, or upon his good pleasure, to make such and such a doctrine
the object of a dogmatic definition. He is tied up and limited to the divine
revelation and to the truths which that revelation contains. He is tied
up and limited by the creeds, already in existence, and by the preceding
definitions of the Church. He is tied up and limited by the divine law,
and by the constitution of the Church ..."27
Now today's ecumenism is a new doctrine
that says that non-Catholics need not convert to the Catholic Church for
unity and salvation, and that false religions with their pagan gods are
"equal partners in dialogue" with the one true Church established by Christ.
This is contrary to divine revelation, contrary to the creeds already in
existence, contrary to preceding definitions of the Church. No authority
in the Church may force a Catholic to abandon the traditional teaching
and adopt this new mind- set.28
In fact, Pope Pius XI, in his 1928
Encyclical Mortalium Animos, condemned the type of ecumenism that has been
nurtured since the Council. He said that the Holy See has "never allowed"
its subjects to take part in the ecumenical assemblies, "nor is it lawful
for "Catholics to support or work for such (ecumenical) enterprises, for
if they do so they will be giving countenance to a false Christianity,
quite alien to the one Church of Christ".
Pius stated: "Unity can only arise
from one teaching authority, one law of belief, one faith of Christians"
and reiterated the truth that the only true unity can be that of the return
of non-Catholics to the one true Church of Christ.
He said that these ecumenical enterprises
are full of "fair and alluring words that cloak a most serious error, subversive
to the Catholic Faith".29
The Dutch Bishops Against Ecumenism
Twenty years after Pius XI spoke
these words, we see a magnificent example of a national episcopacy's fidelity
to this teaching.
In 1948 the Catholic Bishops of
the Netherlands issued a Pastoral Letter on why Catholics may have nothing
to do with the "Amsterdam Assembly", which was a World Council of Churches'
ecumenical gathering.
"There can be no question" said
the Dutch hierarchy, "of the Holy Catholic Church taking part in the Congress
at Amsterdam."
The Dutch bishops explained why:
"This aloofness is not based on
any fear of losing prestige or any other merely tactical consideration.
This attitude solely proceeds from the conviction of the Church that she
must be unshakably true to the task with which Jesus Christ has entrusted
her. For she is the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church which was founded
by Jesus Christ in order that His work of salvation might be carried on
through her unto the end of all time; she is the Mystical Body of Christ;
she is Christ's Bride. In her this unity exists imperishably; for Christ
has promised her that the gates of hell should not prevail against her
(Matt. 16:18).
"That is why the divisions between
Christians can only be put an end to in one way: by a return to her; by
a return within the unity which has always been preserved within her. If
however, the Catholic Church were to participate in the endeavor towards
a new religious unity and this on an equal footing with the others, then
by doing so she would in fact admit that the unity, willed by Christ, does
not continue within her and that, therefore, there really is no Church
of Christ. Indeed, it is just by her very aloofness that she must not cease
to manifest that within her the unity as willed by Christ has always been
preserved and that within her this unity remains accessible to all."30
The Dutch bishops go on to state
that there can be no unity without unity of faith, that is, unity of belief
in the truths taught by the Church, revealed by God.
This is the truth taught throughout
the centuries: that the Catholic Church is the one true Church established
by Christ, and that the Church may not join with false religions in a "search
for unity" - a unity that the Catholic Church already possesses.
Further, Pope Leo XIII rightly taught
that to treat all religions as equal is to "adopt a line of action that
leads to godlessness", since it gives the impression that all religions
are true, despite their contradictory doctrines. This is not only unreasonable,
but in the practical order, it leads men, who have not rejected the principle
of contradiction, to godlessness. They will come to believe that if all
religions are true, then none of them can be true, since these "true" religions
contradict one another.
This ecumenism also places the salvation
of millions of souls in jeopardy, since influential members of one true
Church, the only ark of salvation, now give the impression by their words
and deeds that non- Catholics may find salvation in the darkness of paganism,
and in the falsehood of their man-made creeds. Thus, the non-Catholic will
be scandalized into believing it unnecessary to convert to Christ's one
true Church for salvation. This is a betrayal of Christ's Divine Mandate.
Our Lord said to His apostles, "Go forth and teach," not "Go forth and
dialogue".
Yet Msgr. Guerra ignores these basic
Catholic truths, and opens the Fatima Shrine to Hindu rituals at a Catholic
altar. This blasphemy makes it necessary for the Capelinha to be re-consecrated,
as it has now been desecrated by the pagan worship of false gods.
It should also be noted that the
Bishop of Leiria-Fatima forbids the Latin Tridentine Mass in his diocese.
This means that the Fatima Sanctuary may be used for Hindu ceremonies,
but not for the Catholic Mass of all time. The "diabolic disorientation"
of these men has never appeared so diabolic: for it is here we see their
hatred of true Catholic worship, and their love for the pagan rituals of
a religion whose "gods are devils".
A Second Desecration
In 1922, Portuguese Freemasons placed
four bombs in the original Capelinha built on the site where Our Lady appeared
to the children. They were detonated on March 5-6, and severely damaged
the chapel, blowing a hole straight up through the roof. A Mass of reparation
was held on May 13 the same year at which twenty-thousand people attended.
Forty thousand attended the Mass held there on October 13. By the end of
1922, the chapel was being rebuilt.31
Now in May of 2004, the Capelinha
is desecrated again. This time the weapon was not the bombs of Freemasonry,
but the ecumenical religion of Freemasonry, which allows Hindus to perform
pagan ceremonies in Catholic chapels, and propounds the lie that "all religions
lead to God". And this time, there will be no Mass of reparation for this
sacrilege, no public processions asking God's forgiveness, no immediate
re- consecration of the chapel. Rather, Shrine Rector Guerra, Fr. Robert
J. Fox, and the various apologists for the "New Fatima" will continue to
attack those who defend perennial Catholic truth against these blasphemies
that cry to Heaven for vengeance.
Let us ignore these blind guides
and pray for their conversion back to the Catholicism of their youth. They
have abandoned the Catholic Faith of Saint Francis Xavier, of Pope Pius
IX, Pius X, Pius XI and Pius XII. They promote a new modernist religion
that claims the Catholic truths of yesterday must be trodden underfoot
to make way for the new ecumenical "truths" of today. They have violated
their Oath Against Modernism and as such, in the words of Msgr. Joseph
Clifford Fenton - in the objective order - they are "sinners against the
Catholic Faith and common perjurers."32
As for us, we will remain steadfast
in our public resistance to the new ecumenical orientation. Let us continue
to offer Masses, Rosaries and prayers of reparation for the blasphemies
against the Immaculate Heart of Mary now perpetrated by those men at Fatima
who should be Her defenders.
Our Lady Conqueror of All Heresies,
pray for us.
Notes:
1. Saint Francis Xavier, James Brodrick,
S.J., (New York: Wicklow Press, 1952), p. 135.
2. "Hindus Worship at Fatima Altar,"
Portugal News, May 22, 2004.
3. There is nothing wrong with a
non- Catholic coming to a Catholic Shrine to perhaps learn what the Shrine
is about, to learn about Catholic devotion or Catholic prayer, or to pray
that the one true God leads him to the truth. This must be said, since
our opposition to the Interfaith Shrine has been falsely interpreted to
mean that we believe that non-Catholics should never be allowed to enter
a Catholic Shrine. This is not the case. In fact the fiercely anti-Catholic
Jew, Alphonsus Ratisbonne, was miraculously converted to the Catholic Faith
when he visited the church of Sant'Andrea delle Fratte in Rome. The anti-Catholic
Dr. Felix Leseur was miraculously converted to Catholicism when he visited
Our Lady's Shrine at Lourdes. The real problem with today's new orientation,
is that non-Catholics are now allowed to worship at the Shrine as non-Catholics,
they are allowed to perform their pagan rituals (and invoke their false
gods) inside the Catholic Church, and they are told that there is no need
for them to convert to Christ's one true Church for salvation.
4. The French Freemason Yves Marsaudon
wrote approvingly: "One can say that ecumenism is the legitimate son of
Freemasonry ... In our times, our brother Franklin Roosevelt claimed for
all of them the possibility of 'adoring God, following their principles
and their convictions.' This is tolerance, and it is also ecumenism. We
traditional Freemasons allow ourselves to paraphrase and transpose this
saying of a celebrated statesman, adapting it to circumstances: Catholics,
Orthodox, Protestants, Israelites, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, freethinkers,
free-believers, to us, these are only first names; Freemasonry is the name
of our family." Yves Marsaudon, Oecumènisme vu par un Maçon
de Tradition (pp. 119-120). English translation cited from Peter Lovest
Thou Me? (Instauratio Press, 1988), p. 170. Except for the first line "One
can say ..." which was translated into English by S.M. Rini.
5. It should be noted that the Apostolic
Delegate was there only for the Saturday sessions, which included the outrageous
speech by Father Jacques Dupuis. The Apostolic Delegate was not present
for the Sunday session wherein the various religions gave testimony of
the importance of "sanctuary".
6. My three previous reports on
the Fatima Congress are: "Fatima to Become Interfaith Shrine, an Account
from One Who Was There', Catholic Family News, Dec. 2003;"More News on
the Fatima Interfaith Program", Catholic Family News, January, 2004; "Shrine
Rector Confirms New Ecumenical Orientation at Fatima", Catholic Family
News, February, 2004; http://www.fatima.org/news020504.htm
7. For example, the Fatima Shrine's
December 28 Communique says that the only time the Shrine Rector spoke
at the Congress was at the final session of the Congress and it provides
the following verbatim from the speech: "It is true that (...) we are all
very far from journeying towards the only, or through the only, bridge.
We could therefore relax, since, if one's bridge is collapsing, it could
happen that the neighbor's bridge is not. But it is also true that a disease
of epidemic proportions seems to have threatened the faith of all religions,
of all confessions, of all traditions, during the last decades. That's
why we rejoice in the brotherly presence of the representatives of the
various spiritual schools and we are sure that their presence here opened
the way for a greater future openness of this Shrine; Shrine that seems
already vocationed, thanks to divine providence, for contacts and for dialogue
(...). This calling is almost explicit, in regard to the oriental, orthodox
and Catholic churches, in the message of the Angel of Peace; and, in regard
to the Islamic religion, in the name itself that God chose for the town
where Mary would one day appear: Fatima." (emphasis added) This clearly
confirms the new ecumenical orientation at Fatima.
8. Immaculate Heart Messenger, April-
June, 2004. In these pathetic articles, Fr. Fox made a series of ad hominum
attacks against Father Nicholas Gruner. Yet he made no complaint whatsoever
about Msgr. Guerra, even though Fr. Fox has read my articles where I explained
that I was an eyewitness to the ecumenical outrages at Guerra's Congress,
including Father Dupuis' speech and Father Irudayam's presentation wherein
he said that Hindus now perform their rituals inside the sanctuary. I also
said in my article (that Fr. Fox quoted from in his magazine) that I tape-recorded
all of these conferences, so Fr. Fox knows I am telling the truth of what
took place there. Thus, he obviously agrees that the ecumenical outrages
perpetrated at Guerra's Congress are good and praiseworthy.
9. Further, Fr. Fox defends the
fact that Fatima needs a larger Shrine. But no one is saying that a larger
church should not be built. I have been to Fatima and I'm aware that the
present basilica can not hold many people. But there is no need for the
authorities at Fatima to build a hideous new modernistic structure that
looks like a futuristic spaceship hanger. Why not build a larger church
that is beautiful, majestic, and reflects the glorious patrimony of Catholic
architecture that awes and edifies? The building now under construction
does none of this. The eminent theologian Msgr. Rudolph Bandas quoted Cardinal
Constantini, Chairman of the Pontifical Academy of Art, who rightly categorized
modernistic art and architecture in Catholic churches as "visual blasphemies".
See "Modernistic Art and Divine Worship", Mgr. Rudolph Bandas, October,
1960. Reprinted in Catholic Family News, April, 2004. (Reprint #930 available
from CFN for $1.75.)
10. Father Mitch Pacwa told the
viewers on this broadcast that EWTN has called in Fr. Fox to tell them
what was going on at Fatima, despite the fact that Fr. Fox was not present
at the October Congress. Yet EWTN never contacted CFN, to investigate the
truth of what we were saying, even though I published in my reports that
I attended the Interreligious Congress at Fatima and was an eyewitness
to all that occurred, including the heterodox statements of Father Jacques
Dupuis.
11. "Fatima's New Church Moves Ahead"
Zenit News, May 13, 2004.
12. For example, see Ezechial, Chapter
15, especially v. 35 ff.; Psalm 105, v. 28-43; Osee, Chapter 3, v. 1, Chapter
4, v. 12-14.
13. This "Open Letter" was published
in the May 2004 issue of Catholic Family News. It is also on the web at:
http://www.fatima.org/042804open.htm
14. St. Basil the Great (ca. 330-ca.
379), Epistulae, in a letter to the bishops of Italy and Gaul (in 376).
15. Neither are we free to interpret
Scripture against the consistent teachings of the Ordinary Magisterium
throughout the centuries: that is, a Catholic doctrine that the Church
has always taught, even though it may not have been the subject of a dogmatic
definition.
16. Pope Saint Pius X taught in
Pascendi, his Encyclical Against Modernism, "But for Catholics nothing
will remove the authority of the second Council of Nicea, where it condemns
those 'who dare, after the impious fashion of heretics, to deride the ecclesiastical
traditions, to invent novelties of some kind . or endeavor by malice or
craft to overthrow any one of the legitimate traditions of the Catholic
Church.' . Wherefore the Roman Pontiffs, Pius IV and Pius IX, ordered the
insertion in the profession of faith of the following declaration: 'I most
firmly admit and embrace the apostolic and ecclesiastical traditions and
other observances and constitutions of the Church'."
17. Cited from The Great Facade:
Vatican II and the Regime of Novelty in the Roman Catholic Church, Christopher
A. Ferrara and Thomas E. Woods Jr. (Wyoming, MN: Remnant Press, 2002),
p 28.
18. The dogma "Outside the Church
there is no salvation" was infallibly defined three times. The most forceful
and explicit definition of this dogma was pronounced de fide from the Council
of Florence: "The Most Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and
preaches that none of those existing outside the Catholic Church, not only
pagans, but also Jews, heretics, and schismatics can ever be partakers
of eternal life, but that they are to go into the eternal fire 'which was
prepared for the devil and his angels,' (Mt. 25:41) unless before death
they are joined with Her; and that so important is the unity of this Ecclesiastical
Body, that only those remaining within this unity can profit from the sacraments
of the Church unto salvation, and that they alone can receive an eternal
recompense for their fasts, almsdeeds, and other works of Christian piety
and duties of a Christian soldier. No one, let his almsgiving be as great
as it may, no one, even if he pour out his blood for the Name of Christ,
can be saved unless they abide within the bosom and unity of the Catholic
Church." [Pope Eugene IV , Council of Florence, February 4, 1442.]
19. Catechism of the Council of
Trent, McHugh & Callan Translation, (Rockford: Tan, Reprinted 1982),
p. 101.
20. The eminent theologian Msgr.
Joseph Clifford Fenton explains that the word "Church" has a very definite
meaning. It means, the Kingdom of God on earth, the People of the Divine
Covenant, the one social unit outside of which no one can be saved. See
"The Meaning of the Word 'Church'," Msgr. Fenton, American Ecclesiastical
Review, October, 1954, republished in the November 2000 Catholic Family
News. (Reprint #519 available from CFN for $1.75.)
21. Moralia, XIV: 5.
22. Ubi Primam, Inaugural Encyclical
of Pope Leo XII, May 5, 1824.
23. Encyclical Summo Jugiter, May
27, 1832.
24. Denzinger 1647.
25. Mortalium Animos, January 6,
1928.
26. It is defined dogma that a Pope
may not teach new doctrine, and that doctrine cannot change. It also needs
to be stressed repeatedly that even a Pope may not change defined dogma,
or interpret Catholic dogma in a different manner from the way it has always
been taught. This was solemnly defined. When Vatican I defined papal infallibility,
it also taught with equal infallibility: "The Holy Spirit was not promised
to the successor of Peter that by the revelation of the Holy Spirit they
might disclose new doctrine, but that by His help they might guard sacredly
the revelation transmitted through the Apostles and the deposit of Faith,
and might faithfully set it forth." ( Vatican I, Session IV, Chapter IV.
Pastor Aeternus.) Vatican I also taught, "The meaning of Sacred Dogmas,
which must always be preserved, is that which our Holy Mother the Church
has determined. Never is it permissible to depart from this in the name
of a deeper understanding. (Vatican I, Session III, Chap. IV, Dei Filius),
The eminent theologian Msgr. Fenton employs this text to explain that "Catholic
dogma is immutable ... the same identical truths are always presented to
the people as having been revealed by God. Their meaning never changes."
We Stand With Christ, Msgr. Joseph Clifford Fenton, (Bruce, 1942) p. 2.
Thus, it is defined dogma that a Pope may not teach new doctrine (such
as ecumenism) and that doctrine cannot change. This is only fitting to
the nature of truth itself, which cannot change. For if this or that Catholic
"truth" can change, then it was never true. It is here we see that modernists
destroy not only all idea of religion, but all idea of truth itself.
27. Taken from a sermon by Cardinal
Newman published in Lead Kindly Light, The Life of John Henry Newman, Michael
Davies (Neumann Press, Long Prairie, 2001) p. 184. (Emphasis added.)
28. This means Catholics must resist
ecumenism even if it comes from a Pope. The great theologian Suarez says
"If (the Pope) lays down an order contrary to right customs one does not
have to obey him, if he tries to do something manifestly opposed to justice
and to the common good, it would be licit to resist him, if he attacks
by force, he could be repelled by force, with the moderation characteristic
of good defense." (De Fide, disp. X. Sect. VI, n. 16. Quoted from Pope
Paul's New Mass, Michael Davies, Angelus Press, p. 602).
29. See Mortalium Animos, "On Fostering
True Christian Unity", Pope Pius XI, January 6, 1928.
30. "The Pastoral Letter of the
Dutch Hierarchy About the Amsterdam Assembly of 1948", published The Church
and the Churches, (Westminster: Newman Press, 1960), pp. 290-294. (Emphasis
added.)
31. Fatima in Twilight, Mark Fellows
(Niagara Falls: Marmion Publishing, 2003), Chapter 4, pp. 45-46.
32. Msgr. Guerra and Fr. Robert
J. Fox both would have taken the Oath Against Modernism, since the Oath
was not "retired" until 1967. Guerra and Fox both promote the new ecumenical
religion, and attack those who insist that Catholic Truth can not change.
Msgr. Fenton said in his 1960 article that any priest who promoted Modernism
after taking the Oath Against Modernism would mark himself as a "sinner
against the Catholic Faith and as a common perjurer". (See "The Sacrorum
Antistitum and the Background of the Oath Against Modernism," Msgr. Joseph
Clifford Fenton, The American Ecclesiastical Review, October, 1960, pp.
259-260.) This is why we exhort our readers to pray for these men, but
do not follow or support them.
This article was reprinted with
permission from the June 2004 issue of Catholic Family News - a Roman Catholic
monthly published 12 times a year.
Catholic Family News
In U.S.A: M.P.O. Box 743, Niagara
Falls, NY 14302
In Canada: P.O. Box 694, Niagara
Falls, ON L2E 6V5
