My Dear friends, the reason for my reply to Msgr. Perez’s sermon is that there seems to be little concern by many of the Traditional Fathers what they preach in front of the Blessed Sacrament at Mass these days. I hope my commentary will help in getting these Fathers to grow up to the Sanctity of the circumstances they face when there preaching.
Msgr. Patrick Perez, 22nd Sunday after Pentecost October 21, 2018
(pope) Francis and the Canonization of Paul VI.
Father began the sermon by reciting the Hail Mary. My dear faithful, I want to say a few words about the events of the week. In one way they do affect us and in one way they don’t affect us, but it can’t pass without noting from the pulpit, that Pope Francis canonized Pope Paul VI this week. To tell you the truth, there are so many things to say about this I really don’t know where to start. It’s wrong on almost every level. Why I think it’s important for us traditional Catholics is it goes together with what I’ve been talking about in the past month or so where Padre Pio, who saw the third Secret of Fatima, said to Father Gabriele Amorth, the chief exorcist of Rome, that in a very short time the Church will be taken over by Satanists and it will be governed by Satan. Now he said this in 1960. I think that time came with the election of Paul VI in 1963. Pope John XXIII died in 1963 and Pope Paul VI who had been Cardinal Archbishop of Milan, he was elected the pope. He presided over the destruction of the Church in every aspect.
Reply: This allusion of the Church being taken over by a Satanist goes against the prophecy of Scripture which indicates that it will be : The Man of Sin or the AntiChrist means a false pope, that takes over the Holy See. (1) Satanists practice witchcraft, black Mass’s and the like, not so with the AntiChrist’s of the Vatican II Church.
But there are certain things I want to say about this so-called canonization. The first regards the canonization process itself. I put the word “canonization” in quotes by the way because if he is a saint then we are all monkeys’ uncles as the saying goes. There is no way that Paul VI is any kind of a saint on any level in anybody’s book, but what I think is every time I go to the altar and I have the blessed Roman Missal there (and today we celebrate St. Hillary and then St. Ursula and companions, the virgins and martyrs,) I say to myself, thank God for this Roman Missal. They’re all real saints in here. I can trust that to be so because this is the real stuff as opposed to what’s going on now.
Reply: On the other hand he accepts Anti Christ John Paul II as a Saint who followed in Paul VI foot steps or at least does not comment on this new Saint as a Formal Public Heretic of the Vatican II Council.
Anyway, the canonization process was messed with first by John Paul II or under his pontificate, and it was specifically messed with because a certain group called Opus Dei wanted to get their founder, a certain, Josemaría Escrivá de Balaguer canonized. Now I lived in Spain; I had parishioners who knew Josemaría Escrivá de Balaguer and said he was no saint. He was extremely vulgar; he had a filthy mouth and, oh, just like Barack Obama, his school records went missing conveniently so they couldn’t bring out in public the shenanigans and failures of his academic life. In any case, they messed with it because Opus Dei knew that there was no way that they were going to get him canonized except by changing the canonization process itself and this is what they managed to do. They offered a huge truckload of money to John Paul II and without bothering you with all the details, what they did was basically neutralize the office of the devil’s advocate. Now who is the devil’s advocate? When somebody is presented for canonization, the devil’s advocate is the one who researches every reason the person should not be canonized and then they present the findings to the Congregation for the Canonization of Saints. Now, in days when the Church had a real canonization process, if they found out something about Josemaría: he had a filthy mouth, he was extremely vulgar, no people who actually knew him thought he was a saint of any kind; then the process would not go any further. So we have to do something about this devil’s advocate thing. So effectively, they eliminated it. Is there still a defender, a devil’s advocate? Yes, he still exists but officially, they don’t listen to him anymore. That is what the deal is. Because of doing that, the canonization process became cheap, okay? Cheap! What do I mean? John Paul II canonized more saints himself than had ever been canonized in nearly two thousand years of the history of the Church put together; not more than any one pope, more than all of them put together. Now do I say they are all bad? No, they are not, because some were people everybody knew to be saints anyway. John Paul II just put the Church’s seal of approval on them, like Padre Pio. But a lot of them were not saints and are not saints and then, of course, John Paul II was canonized. You know, the Buddhism-is-a-religion-of-salvation pope who allowed himself to be marked with the sign of the demon by topless pagan women and these kinds of things, along with all the other stuff he did during his tenure. So bottom line, the canonization process itself was cheapened.
Reply: What Msgr. ignores is that any Pope who pronounces someone a SAINT to the Universal Church has to carry Infallibility because it’s an Ex Cathedra pronouncement, devil’s advocate or not.
With that in mind, let’s look at Paul VI. You know there was no devil’s advocate. So for example, let’s say this guy, his name is Jack, and he’s presented for canonization. And people thought he was mostly nice, okay? – let’s say Jack the Ripper. And so the devil’s advocate says, Well he might have been a nice guy but he killed women and cut them up into pieces. Well, in the old days then, I guess we can’t canonize him, right? Nowadays they go oh yeah, he killed women and cut them up into little pieces, sure, there’s that you know – little faults – we’ll just forget about it and we’ll wait until everybody who knew him personally is dead and then we’ll just forget about the little fact that he killed women and cut them up into little pieces and we’ll go ahead and canonize him because you know, he did great service, he used to spay and neuter the cats for free, and all these kinds of things, did great service in the community, so we’ll just forget about that part. Well, let’s look at Paul VI and please keep firmly in mind that any major fault that did not make this person somebody who we could imitate in all of their virtues, stopped the canonization process. What is a saint? A saint isn’t just somebody who we are saying is in heaven. A saint is a super hero of the saintly-in-heaven world of people. It’s a super hero; it’s someone who has literally practiced heroic virtue and was known for their heroic sanctity while they were alive.
Reply: What Msgr does not understand that in the past Popes declared persons to be a Saint without a canonization process and the Devil’s Advocate wasn’t established until 1587 anyway. (2)
Secondly, they were so saintly and holy and imitable while they were alive, that after their death a cult was established spontaneously. Now when I say a cult, I don’t mean the bad use of the word “cult”; there’s the Jim Jones kind of thing and there’s the Jehovah’s Witnesses and Scientology, this sort of nonsense; that’s the bad. But a cult strictly speaking is a following of anything and we’ve used the word in the Catholic Church for two thousand years. It means a following. So when somebody who is saintly, let’s say Padre Pio, best example of our times – when he died, people flocked to his grave by the tens- if not hundreds of thousands every year. They prayed for his intersession; they knew how saintly he was and that he was a saint. And they petitioned Rome to have him canonized. The miracles along with everything were in place.
Reply: Not true, not much was known about St Teresa Lisieux until her memoirs were published. (3)
With Paul VI first of all, there were so many things wrong with him. Father Luigi Villa wrote a book, “Paul VI, Saint? Never” that was the title of the book. And Paul VI was a scandal; he presided over the destruction of the Church; he took over from John XXIII. John XXIII started Vatican II in 1962, died in 1963; Paul VI went from 1963 until 1965. Now it is rumored that as John XXIII lay dying he was yelling, Stop the Council, Stop the Council, and then died in agony because he knew the third secret of Fatima and he knew that the Council would be the method of implementation of establishing a church of Satan instead of the Catholic Church. Well, Paul VI didn’t stop the Council, he went on, he presided over this monstrous council and then he changed every one of the seven sacraments, every one of them! Not one of them was left intact. And people say, Well, but you know we’ve had bad popes in the past; we had popes who had children you know, this kind of thing, in the mediaeval whatever. And I’m saying, You know what? Given the choice I would say I would welcome a pope with children over a pope who messed with the Church and changed all the sacraments. A pope with children has his problems, that’s a mortal sin, especially for a pope, and if he doesn’t repent of that he is going to go to hell. But Paul VI changed the sacraments and presided over changing the public content of the Faith itself. Because of Paul VI and his actions, (I can’t tell who’s in heaven or who’s in hell, I don’t know) – but I do know, outside the Church there is no salvation and I do know that if you don’t have the Faith you are outside of the Church. And I would say that because of the actions of Paul VI, possibly hundreds of millions of people will perish, will go to hell. Hundreds of millions – I’m not talking even a million or ten million. Look at the rate of apostasy both within and without the Church. The people who outright left the Church or the people who stayed in the Church as these fifth column kind of people who call themselves Catholic and they are not because they don’t believe anything that the Catholic Church teaches just because of Paul VI and because of the Vatican II that he presided over and insinuated into all of our lives. Just looking at him he should have never been on the slate to be canonized, let alone to go through with this process.
Reply: The commentary on pope John XXIII is ludicrous. It was pope John XXIII who 48 days after his election made Montini a Cardinal. It was John XXIII who brought in the 62 Missal with removal of some Saints and he put St. Joseph in the canon. It was John XXIII who established the birth control commission after the Vatican II Council began. When Cardinal Montini came to Rome, pope John XXIII had him move into the Vatican palace. Our Lady of Fatima never made any such mention of the Church becoming or going to become, the Church of Satan, this also violates the 5th Lateran Council which says we cannot predict when the AntiChrist will come into the world. Just as Pope Benedict XV decreed the La Salette message of “Rome will become the Seat of AntiChrist in the not to distance future.” to be forbidden and was put on the index of forbidden books and writings.
Finally the last thing which I can’t say too much about, but something I do know for a fact and know personally – all you adults know the problem with then Cardinal McCarrick and what he is infamous for and these bad priests, the bad priests like the ones in Pennsylvania and elsewhere who did things to people that were very, very sinful. Paul VI was one of them. A cardinal that I knew and visited with, the cardinal in charge of the canonization process, was there and said they used to bring handsome children into the Vatican for Paul VI, okay? So doesn’t this make sense now? We see what supplanted the true Church and how quickly it happened. He was one of them. And Cardinal Palazzini told me, We all knew it. We’d be sent out of the Vatican; we had to go on a picnic or something while they were doing these things, but we all knew what was going on and nobody could do anything about it.
Reply: It could have been leaked out to the news media or even the police.
So this is who we are dealing with. Doesn’t this make sense now, in view of this awful diabolical perversion that has been going on under the guise of the Vatican II Church? It all makes sense. Yes, as the Italians say, the fish rots starting with the head. And there you have it. They have officially put on the Church’s calendar with a halo on his head one of these very, very evil people. I mean he wasn’t just not good enough to be a saint. He was satanically evil in what he did.
Reply: Once again my friends, here Paul VI is everything but a “Formal Public Heretic.” everyone lies about this (except sede vacantists) because they know to admit to this truth means that Paul VI broke Infallibility and would cease to be Pope and then have to admit that he was the “Man of Sin,” St. Paul was talking about. http://www.catholicendtimetruths.com./ (Why sede vacante)
This is what we have now… this is what we have now. Just thank God for where you are, thank God for where you are and that you have a place where this will not affect you as long as we are able to do this, because everything is in smoking ruins around us. I’m beginning to think we should not have called our church Our Lady Help of Christians; we should have called it Refuge of Sinners (Monsignor laughing) you know, because that’s how I feel sometimes. Pray for us, pray for the Church, pray for our parish, but just know what is happening, this inter-play between good and evil that has reached to the very highest points in the Church.
Reply: Well he’s 50 years late on this one.
One last comment is that the starry-eyed modern Catholics say, Well, canonization is an exercise of infallibility. I will tell you that in the past it was the general feeling that it was; but it was never a declared doctrine. You do not have to absolutely believe that canonization is an exercise of infallibility. In the past it was generally considered by theologians to be that but it was never declared so. And thank God for that. But what I say is, okay, suppose it is an act of infallibility? What does that mean? By analogy, let’s consider the Sacrament of Marriage. Well, when two Catholics, a man and a woman (let me specify that these days) go to get married, they are free to marry, they are baptized Catholics, and they are married before a priest. We believe that that bond is indissoluble, that they are married until death parts them, right? But how many annulments are given out and some of them are real annulments. Why? Because there was a condition in that “marriage” that prevented the sacrament from actually taking place, okay? So for example, of the couple, one or both had secretly decided they were never going to have children, ever. We are not ever going to have children. We’ll go through this sacrament business because our parents won’t give us the inheritance unless we do and this kind of thing. Well, their marriage is invalid whether or not they have the annulment certificate. And for the most part these canonizations are invalid too for the same reasons. Sometime in the future a heck of a lot of annulments will have to be given to so-called “saints”. Josemaria, John Paul II, Paul VI, all these wackadoodle people that Francis has been canonizing will be getting annulments because NONE.OF.THEM.QUALIFY.FOR.SAINTHOOD. In the future, some good pope, when we get one, is going to have to go back and redo all these things and retry all the cases. Pray for our parish – this is the only place where you’ll hear the truth about these matters.
Reply: Msgr. knows that it’s not the starry-eyed modern Catholics that are insisting sainthood Infallibility but Traditional Catholics do and it is a declared doctrine, under Infallibility, as above, any Pope who pronounces someone a SAINT to the Universal Church has to carry Infallibility because it’s an Ex Cathedra pronouncement. So who’s kidding who.
The Novus Ordo crowd may assail you when you wax vehement over this latest canonization. They’ll want you to pray to John-Paul-the-Great and Paul-the-Wonderful (Paul-the-Ripper – I like that one) Pray, pray, pray, (I say it in the confessional – most of you know that) the Holy Rosary. Never let a day pass without each and every one of you saying five decades. NEVER! NEVER! NEVER! If you do not have the grace and the strength of Our Lady’s Rosary surrounding you, then you are a target! You’re going into battle with a tee shirt on, saying, Here I Am! Our Lady will protect us. Our Lady will give you the strength and the grace and the virtue that you need to make it with your Faith intact and your soul in the state of grace until death. Do not ever let a day go by when you do not somehow, even with your last hold on being awake – do not let a day go by unless you say your Rosary somewhere in there! May Our Lord and Our Lady help and protect us. Amen.In the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost. Amen.
Reply: The reason the Msgr. wants you to pray in all the free time that you have, is not for Grace, it’s to keep you from researching some of the contradiction’s he’s made on Church Teaching so that he won’t have to admit that the Sede Vacantists are right after all.
1. Catholic Encyclopedia 1912 AntiChrist. “…..most likely will be a False pope.”2. Catholic Encyclopedia Canonization
3. Butler Lives of the Saints.