Articles

Bugnini’s Ring of Power

Published on by Kathy ClubbLeave a comment

How surprising it is to think that the episcopal ring which once graced the finger of the arch-fiend Annibale Bugnini has become a treasured relic amongst the post-conciliar wreckovators.

The ring first fell into the possession of Bishop Luca Brandolini, a protege of the late Archbishop Annibale Bugnini. Bugnini was of course the treacherous architect of the new Mass. Brandolini, always a sensitive chap, revealed his jewellery fetish in 2007, after Pope Benedict XVI released Summorum Pontificum, the motu proprio which allowed for a wider use of the traditional Mass. At the time, Brandolini tearfully said,

“The episcopal ring which I carry on my finger belonged to archbishop Annibale Bugnini, the father of the Conciliar liturgical reform. I was, at the time of the Council, a disciple of his and a close co-worker. I was close to him when he worked in that reform and I always recall with how much passion he worked for liturgical renewal. Now, his work has been canceled.”

(Brandolini is on the right. I can’t quite make out the ring – can you? Let me know if anyone out there can find a close-up of the ring somewhere.)

Back in 1993, Brandolini had ordained a young man named Vittorio Viola to the priesthood; Viola was made a Bishop in 2014.

Seven years later, our Viola scored a top job when the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments was overhauled by Pope Francis. The saintly Cardinal Sarah was given the flick, the TLM-hating Arthur Roche was put in Sarah’s place and the new-look Dicastery for Divine Worship was born. Secretary of the new outfit was Bishop Viola.

Viola has been in the news in recent days for it was he who signed the dastardly decree shutting down a well-loved Latin Mass at the Cathedral in Melbourne. And it is Viola who now wears Bugnini’s ring!

I think we can safely say that Brandolini did not cut a finger from Bugnini’s cold hand in order to gain the precious ring. Far more likely is the hypothesis that Bugnini bequeathed it to his protege as a kind of torch which would illuminate the way along the next phase of the Latin Mass’ destruction. In a similar way, Brandolini, who is aged but apparently still living, must have passed on the ring to Viola to keep the flame alive. What a rotten legacy that is. A ring that is surely worthy of being flung into the Cracks of Doom.

Masonic-flavoured honours for the Pope

Published on by Kathy Clubb1 Comment

From Aldo Maria Valli at the website, duc in Altum

(and run through Google Translate). Please do visit Valli’s excellent site for the inside story on all things Romanita.

“Thank you for such a warm welcome. And see you at the Jubilee, see you all there!”. The Pope thus took his leave, off the cuff, from the Capitoline Hill, where a plaque was placed in memory of his visit, the second after that of 26 March 2019. Then looking outside, Francis greeted with words slightly different from those usual. He said “and don’t forget to pray for me”, but immediately added: “For sure!”. Evidently he too knows well that certain prayers, especially among those raised by the Vatican and surrounding areas, are not exactly motivated by the desire that he can enjoy a long happy life.

In his speech [ here ], Francis, speaking about slavery, warned against “the fact that also occurs in our days, when, almost unconsciously, we sometimes risk being selective and partial in the defense of human dignity, marginalizing or discarding some categories of people who end up finding themselves without adequate protection”.

Coming from Bergoglio, who behaves like a tyrant, punishing and marginalizing left and right, making a mockery of the law, they sound like mocking words. But perhaps that is precisely why he asked to pray for him. Because he begins to feel the weight of the not exactly benevolent prayers of all those who have fallen under the blows of his mercy.

The text of the plaque placed in memory of today’s visit is significant: “To His Holiness Francis, successor of Peter and bishop of Rome, promoter of care of the common home and witness of universal brotherhood”. A tribute that could be perfect for any Freemason.

The ‘Smiling Pope’ and the Freemason

Published on by Kathy ClubbLeave a comment

this article came from Tradition in action

Recently it was brought to light on the Internet that Pope John Paul I, Albino Luciano, found a way to praise the Satanist Giosue Carducci, who was one of the leading exponents of Italian Satanism and of the Italian Risorgimento, the Masonic movement that took over the Pontifical Territories in Italy and the papal properties in Rome.

Carducci’s most famous work is his Hymn to Satan or Ode to Satan, composed at a time when Freemasonry could tell the truth about its religious beliefs and its hatred against God and the Catholic Church.

Below, we show photocopies:

First of the Angelus of September 17, 1978, in which John Paul I praised Carducci as a model for university professors. The Italian text (Vatican webpage) referring to this is underlined in green;

Second, the text of the same document translated to English by a website built to honor John Paul I. The corresponding part is also underlined in green;

Third, is a photo of Carducci along with one of his books which includes his Hymn to Satan.

Fourth, the entire Hymn to Satan both in Italian and English can be read in our files here, taken from the Church of Satan in the United States.

We credit this scoop to the blog Call Me Jorge, where we first read it.

Bergoglio’s false Mary, Undoer of Knots.

Published on by Kathy Clubb2 Comments

Some information new to this website from the well-known Italian journalist, Andrea Cionci. Cionci wrote it a couple of years ago – the entire article can be read here. As readers of this site are aware, I am not wont to call Francis an anti-Pope or usurper: in my opinion he can inflict similar damage on the Church whether legitimately elected as Pope, or illegitimately. Cionci makes no secret of his opinion and has written an entire book on the subject – but that is not the theme of the present article.

Andrea Cionci has apparently held reservations about the devotion to Our Lady, Undoer of Knots for some time. He claims that it is based on an spell, known variously as the Witch’s Knot, Magic of the Nine Knots, or Magic Ladder. Cionci also says that it was Bergoglio who began to spread this devotion in the ’80’s. I can’t speak to that, but agree that the image shown here is quite bizarre.

The image, which is not a painting but a bas-relief, was presented to Pope Francis by the President of Argentina, Christina Fernandez de Kirchner, in 2015. Closeups of the image came from here and show some disturbing details.

For example, “Mary” is depicted with a bare shoulder: something never seen in images of the Most Holy Mother of God, who is the epitome of modesty. She is surrounded by five-pointed stars rather than the traditional six-pointed ones. The angel offends against decency & metaphysics: although angels are pure spirits and therefore without gender, this one is shown with bare breasts.

Cionci points out that the foot of “Mary” does not crush the serpent’s head, but is at best, not touching it, and at worse, caressing it. And as seen in the main photograph, the snake itself is tied in a knot.

According to Cionci, the snake-loving, anti-Mary figure resembles the occult figure, Lilith – these days a feminist icon of sexual domination and originally known in Jewish mysticism as the first wife of Adam. Lilith is often linked with the moon and is also associated with snakes. She is said to be responsible for inflicting illness or death on newborn babies. She is also associated with adultery and lust, showing another link with the “Witch’s Knot” which is tied to reproduction and fertility.

It is all very strange. And President Kirchner? After her meeting with the Pope, she exclaimed to the waiting journalists that she felt “illuminated from within” !!

Lilith_john_collier
Lilith_john_collier

Bergoglio was “too radical” to be elected in 2005

Published on by Kathy ClubbLeave a comment

from the website of Marco Tosatti: english translation

Dear Tosatti, I am an Anglican prelate converted to the Catholic faith. When I read something in the newspaper headlines that refers to our Church and Pontiff, I hurry to read the content immediately, before reading other important news. Why? Because what, in my opinion, explains almost everything that has happened in the world for ten years is linked to the history in the same period of our dear Church which I also joined (Pope was Saint John Paul II), in the footsteps of Saint John Henry Newman ( in 1845. But what have I ever done!) .

Never more than in these last ten years have we felt (at least I am a new convert) the lack of a Moral Authority, an authority of the Catholic Church that speaks to the world about the Truth, inviting it to pursue it. And yet we had a very strong and very clear “warning” thanks to the courageous Cardinals who proposed DUBIA I and II. (the first, 2017, without an answer, the second, 2023, with “disturbing” answer). DUBED, ignored, even mocked and despised. Intolerable! But what have I ever done?

In a recent interview, Pope Francis (I apologize, I don’t remember who he gave it to) explains that it was he who appointed Card. Ratzinger in the 2005 Conclave). Exhilarating! and above all not true. I was an involuntary and indirect witness to it.

In 2005 a group of Eminent Cardinals wanted to support Bergoglio’s nomination. It was the great Jesuit cardinal Carlo M. Martini who dissuaded them and instead proposed the card. Ratzinger. The reasons, in short, that were confided to me, were that the former Archbishop of Milan would have considered this appointment a disaster for the Jesuits (it even seems that he had said something like: <if they elect him Pope, we Jesuits will, in fact, come , “suppressed” as in 1773, this time not for 40 years, but at least for 200 years…>).

Who the current Pontiff was and what he had done in his previous roles in Argentina is well known, with testimonies. Who wanted it and why, it is difficult to prove and testify, but in the very days of his appointment to the Papal Throne, therefore well before he began to govern the Church, it was explained from many quarters what his task would be. 100% done. There was even a book published by a French intellectual who joked about the consequences of the choice. Benedict had to renounce so that Francis could be Pope. Francis had to be Pope because Benedict would never have allowed the Church to support the choices of destruction of Christian Civilization that were subsequently made.

Perhaps many Catholics still have not understood that what needed to be destroyed (beyond faith, of course) is Christian Civilization. Well, I really fear that many of you Catholics haven’t understood this yet, you look at the finger but you don’t understand what it indicates.

I would also like to make a critical observation on the behavior of some prelates who are preparing for the (supposed) change of pontificate, expressing negative assessments of the pontificate, all of a sudden and with suspicious delay. “Maramaldesque” assessments, dear Tosatti, and not at all acceptable. I explain the expression “maramaldesca”, which means “vile”. On his arrival in Italy in 1527, Charles V, Catholic emperor of the Holy Roman Empire, eager to punish Pope Clement VII (Giulio de Medici for having joined the Cognac League (pro-French and anti-Habsburg), had hired the Landsknecht (Protestant) mercenaries who they carried out the famous “sack of Rome” and brought the plague throughout Italy. During the siege of Florence in 1530 the famous Maramaldo (Neapolitan mercenary) attacked the commander Francesco Ferrucci, already wounded and half dead on the ground, skewering him (“vile! you kill a dead man”, Ferrucci told him). Here, dear Tosatti, until yesterday everyone (except for a very few) were sock lickers and allowed everything that appeared to happen. Now they are all courageously critical, with interviews and even with books (not credible ) referring to the previous Pope, post-mortem, of course.

It is curious that apart from the famous Cardinals of the DUBIA and a few others, only in this moment of progressive weakening of Francis, some “neo-courageous” ones, suffering from the “Maramaldesque” contagion, are slowly beginning to emerge. This is not exemplary and leaves us fearing even worse times ahead.. Thank you for this hospitality.

His Hugo AGW

OPEN LETTER ‘MARIA SUPPLICANS’

Published on by Kathy ClubbLeave a comment

from the Facebook page of fr. Jesusmary Missigbètò

Concerning the truth about Pope Francis and his moral and doctrinal errors

Part 6; 29 March 2024; Good Friday

Dear faithful Catholics throughout the world,

This letter is the last in a series of six dedicated to explaining Pope Francis’ moral and doctrinal errors and their logical implications. After analysing why Pope Francis is a heretic, a false doctor, a false pastor, a false prophet, a false pope, a new Judas, a new Martin Luther, a new devil, we finally need to see why Francis is probably a member of ecclesiastical Masonry or is influenced by ecclesiastics who are members.

1. The Catholic Church and ecclesiastical Masonry

There is no doubt that for many centuries there has been a Masonic project to control the Catholic Church and divert it from its mission of saving the world. St. Maximilian Kolbe gives an interesting account of this in the notes he took during his stay in Rome. In 1917, he saw several blasphemous Masonic processions shouting songs in honour of Satan, and leaflets were distributed in Saint Peter’s Square reading: “Satan must reign in the Vatican and the Pope must be his servant”. On 14 November 2007, Our Lady of Anguera said: “The day will come when perverse men will occupy privileged space in the House of the Lord. It will be these who will draw into the Church the one who opposes Christ. It will be the time when the Sacred will be cast out and the faithful will be persecuted. Few will remain steadfast in the faith, but through these few, God will bring forth great hope for his people” (2.916). Who is Our Lady of Anguera talking about? Many analysts think it is about ecclesiastical Masonry, i.e. priests, bishops and cardinals who outwardly give the impression of being with Jesus but are in reality his enemies, since they pervert the Christian life by encouraging immoral behaviour, errors in the traditional teaching of the Church and the promotion of their fellow men to important positions in the Church. What is their greatest ambition? To install at the top of the Church a pope who helps to ‘masonicise’ the Church, i.e. to put the Church at the service of the aspirations of Masonry in this world.

Is Francis opposed to Christ (Truth)? Yes, of course. Parts 2, 3, 4 and 5 of this open letter have given proof of this by presenting and explaining his moral and doctrinal errors. In addition, his obstinate refusal to rectify his errors since 2016 leads us to believe that he wants to leave them as seeds that will install spiritual lukewarmness among Christians and slowly destroy the Catholic Church from within, which would be precisely an objective of ecclesiastical Masonry [1]. Does Francis have anything to do with the phrase “the Sacred will be cast out and the faithful will be persecuted”? Some analysts see in this the motu propio Traditionis custodes (16 July 2021) which, in the universal Church, has unleashed a veritable persecution of the traditional Mass and of the faithful who celebrate it, and is gradually causing the celebration of this Mass to disappear in all modern churches. Is it really legitimate to think that Masonry finally has ‘its pope’ in the person of Francis? The answer seems to be “yes”, because by emphasising mercy, he has discreetly and cunningly inserted Masonic principles [2] into the traditional teaching of the Church, unbeknownst to the vast majority of Christians. Here is the proof…

2. Pope Francis is probably a member of ecclesiastical Masonry or is influenced by ecclesiastics who are members

Masonry is spreading the idea of universal brotherhood united with a relativistic mentality, Francis too. With the Abu Dhabi Declaration or Document on Human Fraternity for World Peace and Living Together (4 February 2019) and the Encyclical Fratelli tutti on fraternity and social friendship (3 October 2020), the Argentine Pope has called for universal human fraternity. This first aspect is not opposed to the Christian faith, since all human beings are brothers and sisters and therefore children of the same God. The problem is the second aspect: relativism. This is very characteristic of Masonry. In concrete terms, it implies a situational ethic and the primacy of individual conscience over the moral law. On various occasions, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger has emphasised the relativistic nature of Masonry and its incompatibility with Christianity: “Even if it is stated that relativism is not assumed as dogma, nevertheless there is really proposed a relativistic symbolic concept… firm adherence to the truth of God, revealed in the Church, becomes simple membership, in an institution, considered as a particular expressive form alongside other expressive forms, more or less just as possible and valid, of man’s turning toward the eternal. The temptation to go in this direction is much stronger today, inasmuch as it corresponds fully to certain convictions prevalent in contemporary mentality. The opinion that truth cannot be known is a typical characteristic of our era and, at the same time, an essential element in its general crisis” [3]. Samuël Tomei explains, in an excellent article, the link that Pope Benedict XVI has established between Masonry and relativism [4].

In the intellectual field, Masonry inherits the Enlightenment and stipulates that no person, society or religion can claim to know or possess the truth about the world or a supra-sensible being, which implies a pluralism of conceptions, all equally valid. In the field of sexuality, Masonry accepts a pluralism of sexualities and therefore transsexuality, homosexuality and homosexual cohabitation laws, a concept of love that considers homosexual affectivity to be equal to heterosexual love, a concept of marriage and family that considers the common life of homosexual persons to be equal to the homes of heterosexual couples. In the field of life, Masonry accepts a pluralism of free choices authorising euthanasia, abortion, artificial insemination, surrogate motherhood, birth control and anti-natalist measures such as contraception. In the field of religions, Masonry accepts a religious pluralism which considers that no religion can affirm that it possesses a supernatural truth or claim that it must be followed by all humanity. Unfortunately, Masonic relativism has been imported into the Catholic Church through ecclesiastical Masonry and affects the understanding and celebration of the Christian sacraments. Baptism is no longer considered necessary for salvation. Consequently, the traditional “extra Ecclesiam nulla salus” is rejected, while Jesus’ missionary mandate is minimised or even cancelled. Good proselytism, respectful of freedom and proposing Christianity as the definitive religion willed by God for all mankind, is then considered disrespectful and bad. Christianity is seen and presented as one religion among others, and it must not be said that it has a universal vocation. As far as the Sacraments of Confession and the Eucharist are concerned, ecclesiastical Masonry removes all the legitimate restrictions that the Church traditionally places on access to them (conversion and penance for Confession, a state of grace for the Eucharist) and, by relying on individual conscience, allows anyone, even unbaptized, to receive these sacraments if he so wish.

Strangely enough, all these relativistic principles are perfectly reflected in the main errors of Francis’ magisterium. Where do we see more relativism and situation ethics in Francis? In Amoris laetitia (19 March 2016) and in the letter of the Argentinian bishops (5 September 2016) validated by Francis and published as “magisterium authenticum” (5 June 2017). Several university professors and experts in History, Theology, Morality and Canon Law have written filial corrections in which they have collected the relativistic phrases of Francis contained in these two documents [5]. Let us now study Bergoglio’s other reforms…

The hysterectomy (removal of the uterus) that Francis adopted on 10 December 2018, together with Cardinal Ladaria and Archbishop Morandi, constitutes the first anti-natalist measure of the Catholic Church and the first error of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. Unfortunately, by insisting on the expression “spontaneous abortion”, this new hysterectomy has been presented to Christians in such a cunning way that many do not realise its gravity. According to Francis, Ladaria and Morandi, the desire to avoid spontaneous abortion implies that a fertile woman who has sexual relations can have her uterus removed when there is no present or future danger to her health and when a group of medical experts certify that all her children will die before birth. Let us remember that spontaneous abortion is a natural death, and therefore not imputable to the woman as a moral fault. Let us also remember that, by nature, all human beings are mortal, and therefore the children of all women in the world past, present and future are necessarily mortal either before or after birth. So we will not fall into the situation ethics of Francis, Ladaria and Morandi and we will not accept an immoral hysterectomy, which is in reality a direct sterilisation prohibited by divine laws [6].

On 21 December 2018, by saying that “one is not born a saint, one becomes one, and this also applies” to “Our Lady”, Francis relativised Mary’s original sanctity. On 4 February 2019, by affirming that “the pluralism and the diversity of religions… are a wise divine will”, Francis expressed his religious relativism, which denies the specificity of Christianity as the definitive religion willed by God for all humanity [7] and minimises or cancels out the Christian duty of evangelising the world. Here we can recall the many statements in which Francis rejects all proselytism without specifying that we should not reject good proselytism, which respects the freedom of individuals and offers Christianity to everyone by following the missionary mandate of Jesus Christ: “Go, therefore, and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you” [8].

Francis’ sexual relativism, discreetly attacking marriage and the family, can be appreciated in his zeal for homosexual cohabitation laws, of which he has become the international apostle, given his numerous interventions in favour of these laws, for which St. John Paul II and Benedict XVI had asked Christians to show their “absolute personal opposition” otherwise they would be committing a “gravely immoral” [9] act. On 21 October 2020, speaking of homosexual persons, Francis said: “what we have to do is a civil coexistence law”. On 15 September 2021, 5 February 2023, 10-11 March 2023, and even more recently, on 19 March 2024, he returned to the same idea, encouraging humanity to adopt this kind of law. Francis’ sexual relativism also came to the fore when he asked priests to perform “blessings for couples in irregular situations and for couples of the same sex” (18 December 2023), couples which in reality are based on adultery, fornication or sodomy. This sexual relativism can also be seen when Francis establishes equality between homosexual affectivity and heterosexual love by saying of homosexual persons living together: “I bless two persons who love each other” (8 February 2024); “they live the gift of love” (19 March 2024). It is really a pity that Francis does not ask himself a very simple and obvious question: “How do they love each other?” The truth is that what he calls “love” is neither a love nor a gift from God but an affective disorder. In fact, it is a sexual desire and a sexual practice that do not conform to God’s will and are different from the noble love of friendship, which desires the good of others and necessarily refuses to subject them to an unnatural sexual practice.

The relativism of Francis in the access to the sacraments and the indirect promotion of abortion can be observed. First, with Alberto Fernández, a remarried divorcee and pro-abortion former president of Argentina, who met him at the Vatican and who, with his partner Fabiola Yáñez, received the Holy Eucharist there in a Mass celebrated by Bishop Marcelo Sánchez Sorondo (31 January 2020). Later, Francis authorised Joe Biden and Nancy Pelosi to receive the Holy Eucharist without having to reject their commitment to abortion (15 September 2021, 9 October 2021, 29 October 2021). Let us also not forget that the number of times Francis preaches mercy without mentioning conversion and repentance is incalculable. He often repeats “in the Church, there is room for everyone, everyone, everyone”, referring to the parable of the wedding feast of the king’s son, but he usually does not speak about the conclusion of this parable, which requires conversion and repentance [10]. Francis’ mercy is therefore false because it is incomplete and constitutes a half-truth that is different from the mercy of Jesus [11].

Two elements need to be considered before concluding this analysis, as they raise legitimate questions. The first is the fact that, since 1999, Francis is an honorary member of the Rotary Club, usually considered close to Masonic lodges. Why such a membership when the Church has expressly forbidden it to ecclesiastics since 1951? [12] Here is the second element: in a television show (‘La Mirada’ by Roberto García, Canal 26, 27 November 2017), Ambassador Juan Bautista Yofre (Tata) recalled that an Argentine television station (La Nación) had published a telephone call in which the head of Vatican intelligence in Argentina claimed that he and Francis are members of Masonry [13]. Since this information was made public to all Argentinians, why did neither Francis nor the Vatican deny it if it was false? Why did not they take legal action against ‘La Nación’ or Ambassador Yofre for defamation? The current subject is a sensitive one because it has important consequences. As all Christians have the right to know the truth, it is up to the College of Cardinals and the College of Bishops to confirm to them that relativism and the situation ethic have indeed been inserted into the traditional teaching of the Church and to what extent ecclesiastical Masonry has contributed to this. Will these colleges have the courage to investigate? In fact, membership of Masonry by a Catholic is prohibited and sanctioned by excommunication [14]. Some analysts believe that the recent reminder of this prohibition and sanction, through an official response from the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith (13 November 2023), as well as the Vatican’s rejection of a new Lebanese Masonic ambassador (October 2017), could help to silence the suspicions hanging over Pope Francis and Cardinal Víctor Manuel Fernández.

Anyway, the convergence between the errors of Francis and the aspirations of ecclesiastical Masonry is incontestable. To deny this reality is, in the beautiful words of Cardinal Joseph Zen, “truly an offense to our intelligence”. What is the cause of this astonishing convergence? Why does the magisterium of the relativist pope implement the Masonic ideal in the Catholic Church today? From a scientific point of view, there are only three possible hypotheses: either it is a pure coincidence of two erroneous visions that have met today and see their similarities, or Francis is a member of ecclesiastical Masonry and has simply fulfilled the mission of his association, or Francis has been unknowingly influenced by ecclesiastics who are members of Masonry. It is quite possible that Pope Francis and the Vatican do not agree with the above statements. But in this case, it would be good for them to explain to the Christian People what other hypothesis could justify the convergence between Francis’ errors and the ideals of ecclesiastical Masonry, since this convergence is scientifically undeniable for any intellectually honest theologian. On the other hand, let us remember that the Catholic Church has enemies, but loves everyone, following the advice of her Divine Founder [15]. Let us therefore pray for the members of Masonry, that they may have the grace to abandon relativism and experience the happiness of being totally Christian: “Only Jesus Christ is, in fact, the Teacher of Truth, and only in him can Christians find the light and the strength to live according to God’s plan, working for the true good of their brethren” [16]. Finally, let us thank the Lord for having given us the strength to live this Lenten season by offering him forty days of prayer and fasting for Francis’ total conversion to the truth.

Your African brother, Fr. Janvier Gbénou

Pen name: Fr. Jesusmary Missigbètò; fatherjmm@gmail.com

Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, Truth, Threads, Instagram, TikTok, SoundCloud: @fatherjesusmary

_________________________

[1] Cf. Taylor Marshall, Infiltration: the plot to destroy the Church from within, Crisis Publications, 2019

[2] Cf. Claude Delbos, Humanisme 2013/3, n° 300, pp. 45-51

[3] Document of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, 11 March 1985

[4] Cf. Humanisme 2013/2, n° 299, pp. 94-97

[5] Cf. Open Letter to the College of Cardinals, 29 June 2016, 45 signatories; Filial Correction to Pope Francis, 16 July 2017, 62 signatories; Open Letter to the Bishops, April 2019, 20 signatories; etc.

[6] Cf. my 3rd open letter, 25 March 2022

[7] Cf. John 14:6; Declaration Dominus Iesus 13, Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, 6 August 2000

[8] Matthew 28:19-20

[9] Document of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, 3 June 2003, 10

[10] “when the king came in to meet the guests he saw a man there not dressed in a wedding garment. He said to him, ‘My friend, how is it that you came in here without a wedding garment?’ But he was reduced to silence. Then the king said to his attendants, ‘Bind his hands and feet, and cast him into the darkness outside, where there will be wailing and grinding of teeth.’ Many are invited, but few are chosen.” (Matthew 22:11-14)

[11] “This is the time of fulfillment. The kingdom of God is at hand. Repent, and believe in the gospel.” (Mark 1:15); “I have not come to call the righteous to repentance but sinners.” (Luke 5:32); “Neither do I condemn you. Go, and from now on do not sin any more.” (John 8:11)

[12] Cf. Decree of the Holy Office, 11 January 1951

[13] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z6EdvEeIzWI, the information appears at minute 27:40

[14] Cf. Encyclical Humanum genus, Pope Leo XIII, 20 April 1884; Code of Canon Law 1917, canon 2335; Documents of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, 17 February 1981, 26 November 1983, 11 March 1985

[15] “love your enemies, and pray for those who persecute you” (Matthew 5:44)

[16] Document of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, 11 March 1985