Fr. Hewko: Latin Masses Everywhere But Which One to Drink?

[Stone]

Transcript of the above sermon [any inadvertent errors in transcription are mine]:


In the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost. Amen. Today is March 16th here in Post Falls area in Idaho. And tomorrow will be Passion Sunday. Normally the statues are veiled. No flowers on the altar. The organ doesn't play. The prayers at the foot of the altar at the beginning of Mass are shortened. The Psalm is dropped, the Gloria Patri is dropped, and the whole focus is the passion of Our Divine Lord. So here we are the night before its March 16th. Let's look at one of the saints today that we don't hear much of, but whose St. John Chrysostom gave a panegyric in praise of, and his name is St. Julian of Cilicia. Here's his story. It's always refreshing to go back to the early saints and their martyrdoms and their strength and their courage.

Listen to this, this saint, he was Cilician of a Sanatorium family in Anazarbus and a minister of the Gospel. During the persecution of the emperor, Diocletian, he fell into the hands of a judge, who by his brutal behavior, resembled more a wild beast than a man. The president seen his constancy proof against the sharpest torments hoped to overcome him by the long continuance of his martyrdom. So everything was dragged out. He caused him to be brought before his tribunal every day.

Sometimes he caressed him, patted him on the back and so forth. At other times, threatened him with 1000 tortures. For a whole year together he caused St. Julian to be dragged as a malefactor through all the towns of Cilicia. Imagining that this shame and confusion might vanquish him, but it served only to increase the martyr's glory and gave him an opportunity of encouraging in the faith all the Catholic people of Cilicia by his example and exhortations. He suffered every kind of torture. The bloody executioners had torn his flesh, furrowed, dug his sides with iron spikes, laid his bones bare and exposed his very bowels to view. Scourges, fire, and the sword were employed various ways to torment him with the utmost cruelty. The judge saw that to torment him longer was laboring to shake a rock.

And was forced at length to own himself, conquered, by condemning him to death, in which however, he studied to surpass his former cruelty. He was then at Aegea, a town on the sea-coast, and he caused the martyr to be sewed up in a sack with scorpions, serpents, and vipers and so thrown into the sea.

This was the Roman punishment for paracides, the worst of malefactors, yet seldom executed on them. Eusebius mentions that St. Ulpian of Tyre suffered a like martyrdom being thrown into the sea in a leather sack together with a dog, a rabid dog, and a poisonous snake. The sea gave back the body of our holy martyr, St. Julian, which the faithful conveyed to Alexandria of Cilicia and afterwards to Antioch where St. John Chrysostom pronounced his panegyric before his shrine. He eloquently sets forth how much these sacred relics were honored and affirms that no devil could stand the presence of his relics. And that men, by them, found a remedy for then bodily distempers in the cure of the evils of the soul.

And then here's words from Father Alban Butler, "The martyrs lost with joy their worldly honors, dignity, estates, friends, liberty, and their very lives, rather than forfeit for one moment their fidelity to God. They courageously bade defiance to pleasures and torments to prosperity and adversity, to life and death saying with the Apostle, 'Who shall separate us from the love of Jesus Christ? Crowns, scepters, worldly riches and pleasures. You have no charms which shall ever tempt me to depart in the least from the allegiance which I owe to God. Alarming fears of the most dreadful evils, prisons, racks fire and death itself in every shape of cruelty, you shall never shake my constancy. Nothing shall ever separate me from the love of Christ.' This must be the sincere disposition of every Catholic."

"Lying protestations of fidelity to God cost us nothing, but he sounds the heart. Is our constancy, is our fidelity such as to bear evidence to our sincerity that rather than to fail in the least duty to God, we are ready to resist to blood. And there we are always upon our guard to keep our ears shut to the voices of those sirens, which never cease to lay snares to our senses." So we look back and we say, "Yeah, it would be a lot easier if it was just Catholics and pagans." Pagans are bad, Catholics are good, the lines are drawn and it's nice and clear. But here we are. I'm in Post Falls area. In Post Falls like some other places in the world, you got every form of Catholicism. You got the whole banquet set with all sorts of platters and flavors and sauces and from soup to nuts as well.

What do I mean by that? Here you've got every form of, they're all saying the Latin Mass. You've got Sedevacantist, up on the Mount, you've got CMRI. Some of them are Sedevacantist, some are not. Most of the CMRI are consecrated and ordained. Unless I misunderstand, but as far as I know, and I could stand to be corrected on this, but I understand most of the CMRI are from the Thuc line. And of course, yeah, you got Father Pfeiffer coming in with Episcopal robes and he got himself consecrated in the Thuc line. Who else do we have up here? We've got, of course the long-standing, Society of St. Pius X, which since 2012 has gone more Conciliar and has compromised with the New Mass, Vatican II. After all, Bishop Fellay said, "I accept 95% of it." They accept the New Code with no distinctions anymore and the new fidelity, the new Profession of Faith under Cardinal Ratzinger. And then all the jurisdictions they've received from Pope Francis.

And then who else we got here? Oh, of course you got the Resistance coming through. So Resistance priests coming through, not so luxuriously, only once every five, six months if you're lucky, or three or four months if you're lucky. So that's not too appealing, because you don't get mass every week. So who else we have around here? Of course, yeah, St. Joan of Arc and Fraternity of St. Peter who hate the Society, because the Society is schismatic and their sacraments they say are invalid, because they're not under a bishop. But honestly, that's just bad Canon Law. That's bad Canon Law, because even an honest Novus Ordo canon lawyer like such as Father Murray, he says, "I don't agree with Archbishop Lefebvre. I don't follow Archbishop Lefebvre, but he does not incur excommunication and his sacraments and all his priests are all valid." There's no question of validity. And their marriages are valid and their sacraments of confession are valid, because of the crisis of the church. So I think we covered most of them. And if I forgot any, well what's a few more dishes or a few missing?

And we could look at it and if we took all the priests of each group together, sat them down together at a nice meal and sat together and talked and you put questions to them and you asked, "Do you believe in the Apostles Creed?" Every one of them would probably die to shed their blood for the Apostles Creed. They would all accept the teachings of the Church, the Magisterium. They would all accept the condemnations of liberalism and modernism. They would all accept the Council of Trent. They would all accept the Novus Ordo is at least bad.

But then when you get down to the details of Vatican II and the New Mass and the new Code of Canon Law, that's where the battles begin, because the devil has arranged things such that Catholicism has been attacked at every level. And with the embodiment of the New Mass and Vatican II, it's a whole new fresh attack on the Catholic religion in a way only the devil could invent.

Now, what would really be the solution to all these traditional Latin Mass groups coming together? How would you ever get them together? Well, we have to always judge the way the Church judges. The only way to pull any groups of Catholics together is on the Catholic Truth. We must profess the same Faith. Partake of the same traditional sacraments and we must be under one Shepherd. Christ is the invisible head of the Church and the reining Pontiff is the visible head.

And that's where we get the confusion. I would say maybe the second layer for the confusion, the heart of the confusion is doctrine. The doctrine is not confusing, truth is not confusing. It's us men who make it confusing by our trying to water it down or trying to mix truth like liberal Catholics. Mix Catholicism with the modern ideas, which is perfectly embodied in the Vatican Council II, which was, as Pope Benedict XVI said, "Vatican II is nothing more than taking two centuries of Liberalism and Freemasonry and bringing it into the Church, liberal culture and bringing it into the church." So he admitted that. That Vatican II is the epitome of liberal Catholicism, which was condemned under Pope Pius IX.

So I think if we had all these priests in a room, I think everyone would agree that if we had a good pope on the throne of Peter who would condemn Vatican II and all its heresies and errors, condemn the New Mass, condemn and basically chuck the new Code of Canon Law and restore the old Code, which was not ecumenical and not giving communion to Protestants, for example, which is promoted in the New Code. Nor encouraging the use of other oils, putting the sacraments in doubt, because the new code permits oils that the Catholic Church has never considered valid. The only one that considered valid for the sacraments is olive oil. Why? Because when Christ, just as when he stood in the waters of the Jordan and St. John the Baptist baptized him, St. Thomas Aquinas says, "Christ sanctified all the waters of the earth. So any water anywhere on the earth can be used for baptism. So when Christ also entered the Garden of Olives, which was full of olive trees from where you get olive oil, Christ sanctified all the olive oil of the world that ever will be used for the sacraments if it's properly consecrated, exercised and blessed," which is done by the bishop on the Chrism Mass on Holy Thursday.

So I think all the priests would agree that if we had a good pope, the Sedevacantist would say, "All right, we have a good pope. The see is no longer empty." And then all the poor lost Novus Ordo's, they're probably the only ones that would probably form a system and rebel, because they're quite comfortable in the new religion of Vatican II, which allows divorce, which allows all kinds of immorality, which allows contraception, which permits every form of liberalism. So I think if we ever get a good pope, which we will and is promised by Our Lady, the real schismatics then will be the Novus Ordo's who reject the Pope's traditionalism. I'm sure that will happen when it comes, because liberals are quite contradictory and they're quite sectarian. As Pius X said, and Leo XIII, "There's no one more sectarian than a liberal."

And then with a good pope, of course Society of St. Pius X, bishops and priests would be very happy, because the good pope would condemn Vatican II and the New Mass, make things clear and restore the sacred liturgy of the Tridentine Mass.

If Archbishop Viganò , I don't know, none of us know, but if that's in God's plan that in the future he becomes pope, he would certainly restore the liturgy to the pre '55 without any question. He already said publicly the Society St. Pius X should go back to the pre '55 liturgy. But that's another debate and that's another question. And then if it was Archbishop Viganò  as pope, he would certainly consecrate Russia, that would be one of his first acts. So God alone knows. But so I think we could say that under a good pope, just as strike the shepherd and the sheep scatter as Christ said, our shepherd has been struck since Vatican II, 59 years since 1965 the shepherd has been struck. The Pope has been the cause of error, confusion, heresy, scandal. So the sheep have scattered to all different groups.

As I said before, you got them all here in Post Falls, you got all of them. The only ones missing in Post Falls, I think, are bishops and priests from the da Costa line. I forgot about them. Da Costa was excommunicated under Pius XII. He was from Brazil and he wanted women priests. He wanted vernacular. He was pretty radical and his orders are quite doubtful while he was certainly excommunicated under Pius XII for legitimate reasons. So otherwise you got everybody here in Post Falls. So it makes it quite interesting for traditional Catholics. And of course they are fighting each other on questions of how much Vatican II do you accept? How much liberalism do you accept? And I think that's the dividing line among the traditional groups is how much mingling of liberal Catholicism do you swallow? And that's the dividing line.

With the Sedevacantists, most of them are not liberals. Most of them will not accept any liberalism. For most of them the question is just the papacy. But they will never accept evolution. They will never accept the compromise with modernism and they will never accept, for example, the new Code of Canon Law, ever. So when we get a good pope, the Sedevacantists will pretty much be very strong on the Faith, except on the papacy, which would be no more an issue.

For the Society St. Pius X, they'd be happy. Some of them might have to correct their wrong ideas, such as Father Paul Robinson, who's been promoting evolution in his book, heavily promoted. Promoting that the 13.5 billion year old earth, which is complete fiction and completely against Scripture and Tradition. So that's just one example. And then Bishop Fellay dreams of being back with, as he calls, the 'Official Church.'

But Archbishop Lefebvre was very clear, we want nothing to do... He never called it the 'Official Church.' He called it what it was, the Conciliar Church, a schismatic church with a bastard Mass, with its bastard rights, with its bastard priesthood. Bastard, because you don't know if they're valid or not. And under a good pope, he would declare whether those Novus Ordo ordinations and Masses were valid or not. And that's where [the Fraternity of] St. Peter's are in a pickle as well. St. Peter's Society, because most of their priests are ordained by bishops consecrated in the Novus Ordo rite.

And quite honestly, that's objectively doubtful and you can have some hot debates and snowball wars over these questions, but let me just say this, because of if you compare the changes for the Novus Ordo Mass and Ordinations and Consecration of bishops with what was done by the Anglicans in the 1500s, you would see a striking similarity. And as certain that Mother Church under Pope Leo XIII, who called together all the best theologians to settle the question, are the Anglican orders valid? They came to the conclusion they're not valid.

My point is, and not just mine, but many other traditional priests, is if the church declared the Anglican changes and rites and sacraments invalid and the Novus Ordo changes sacraments and rites and ordinations and consecration of bishops are very similar to those changes, it's very possible some day the church will declare them absolutely invalid. It's very possible. We must just wait for the proper authority to draw the proper conclusion. And only one authority has the authority from God and the guidance of the Holy Ghost to settle the question, and that's the Roman Catholic Church. This is the beauty of our Catholic faith. We can debate, we can throw snowballs at each other, but really the questions will be settled when the Rome has returned to tradition and that will be a happy day.

And then all these phony canonizations of so-called St. Paul VI, so-called St. John Paul II and St. Joseph Escriva. They are probably not saints if they even made it to heaven at all. But some of them are saints, Pope Francis of all Popes canonized Jacinta and Francisco of Fatima. So we know they're saints because Our Lady said they're going to go to Heaven, "You will be with me in Heaven." And Lucia was so upset and sad, "You mean I got to stay on this earth, I got to live longer here?" But Our Lady said, "You will come to Heaven also, but you must suffer much."

So these canonization questions will be all settled by a good pope and all these groups who we must suppose are of goodwill, all these priests and scattered bishops will come under a good pope and that's a happy day when you think of that. That's the true unity, isn't it? It's the true unity of Faith. We all profess the same Faith under the one head, the Pope visible, and Our Lord the invisible Head, united at the same Sacraments, but not the Novus Ordo Sacraments, but the real traditional Sacraments.

I say St. Peter's will be in a pickle, because if those ordinations and those changes of the consecration of the bishops are doubtful and they're declared to be invalid, all those priests will have to be conditionally reordained. And I think they would gladly do it. So if you had all these priests together, they would all agree on the doctrines of the Faith. That's for sure. I guess the only thing that we fight about is really how much liberalism do you want to swallow?

And by liberalism I mean the mixing of the ideas of Freemasonry, the ideas of the enlightenment, the ideas condemned by the Church, by the Syllabus of Errors of Pius IX and all the great magisterial, papal encyclicals condemning the modern errors, evolution, modernism, separation of Church and State, freedom of the press, freedom of the video we would add today, freedom of speech, freedom of education, freedom of conscience. All these false freedoms which have been condemned would all be clarified.

And one of the great ones, as Archbishop Lefebvre said, "The real heart of the fight is the Kingship of Christ. The devil wants Him uncrowned, the liberals want Him uncrowned, they can't tolerate the Kingship of Christ." And that's where the heart of the fight really is. And that's where we, in this confusion, we gather around the tradition of the Church, we gather around the one who taught and defended the papal encyclicals. And that's Archbishop Lefebvre. Who warned his own priests and bishops, "Don't make any agreements with Rome until Rome comes back to tradition. Don't call the New Mass legitimate, because it's not," but they did. But Bishop Fellay did and they have to all accept that now with the Doctrinal Declaration of 2012.

And the Archbishop warned, "Be careful, don't make any... shaking hands with modernists. Don't seek any deals, any agreements, because Rome has the authority and they will crush tradition and they will try to put you in a position of silence." If you make any deals, you sign any deals with modernist Rome, you will be put in a position of silence. And that's exactly the trap Bishop Fellay led the new SSPX into. They are in a position of silence. They cannot preach publicly and boldly against the teachings of Pope Francis, his heresies and his bad example, his scandals and Vatican II in the New Mass. They can attack some points of these still, but overall it's a position of silence and compromise. And this is why the Catholic Resistance, we want to hold the line of Archbishop Lefebvre, because we can't put the light under a bushel.

As far as Father Pfeiffer and the Thuc line, Archbishop Lefebvre warned, "Stay away from the Thuc line, because it's riddled with dubiousness and strange behavior." Because Bishop Thuc consecrated five bishops in Palmer de Troya in Spain, and they later elected their own Pope. And many strange things going on there with apparitions. "And Bishop Thuc," Archbishop Lefebvre said, "judging by his actions, he didn't seem to be in his right mind, because he consecrated a non-Catholic as a bishop. That's one of the heaviest punishments the Church could give and he would probably be reduced to the lay state." But then Bishop Thuc was known to apologize to Pope Paul XI saying, "I'm sorry."

And he told Pope John-Paul II, "I withheld my intentions of these consecrations in ordinations." So he puts himself into a bag of confusion. Did he withhold his intentions? If he did, then they're invalid. And that's what he told the Pope. So that's why Archbishop Lefebvre so wisely said, "Stay away from the Thuc line." Father Pfeiffer knew this and he should have listened and he should have trusted more in God and Our Lady who will give a solution to a good bishop. He will. And sometimes He just wants us to fight longer and in the trenches longer, but God will always give a solution in Our Lady. But we must not throw ourselves into dubious lines when the Thuc line is really dubious. And of course the Sedevacantist say, you've got two Thuc lines, you've got the more reliable one from Bishop des Lauriers, and then you got the quacky ones under Bishop Tessarone and Henenberry.

So if you want to study the question, there's a good study done by Father Clarence Kelly at the time, who is Bishop Kelly now, who is Sedevacantist. But aside from that question of Sedevacantist, he does treat well the question of the Thuc line and he just shows its absurd events of that history.

So we don't say there's no pope. We do pray for the Pope. And again, that's another question that a future pope will settle. Were these popes, popes? Pope Francis, John Paul II, were they popes at all? The Pope may declare, "No, they were not popes, the seat was vacant for that time." That's possible. It's possible. Or the Pope may say, which I think is more likely, "They were popes, they were validly elected, but they are condemned. All their teaching are condemned, because they went openly and publicly against Catholic tradition."

That's probably what will be the case, because we have examples of that from history. Pope Honorius III, Pope John XXII, and Pope Liberius, who either signed heretical documents or were weak in correcting heresy and error. But all of them were condemned by their success in popes, but they never said they were not popes. So our position is with Archbishop Lefebvre who says, "As far as we know, they're popes. We pray for them as popes, but we resist them. We resist them to the face." And that's based on Scripture. St. Paul standing up to the first Pope St. Peter. Cephas is Peter.

And you have one group who don't say Mass here, because they don't have priests, but one group says that Cephas wasn't St. Peter, which is also ridiculous. Cephas is Peter.

Basically it's how much liberalism do you want to swallow or that's on the left, errors with the left and on the right you've got Sedevacantism. That he's just not a pope, which is easy to conclude with this bad pope, and he's so scandalous.

And they might be proven right, God knows. But as far we stand on the sound, theological position of Archbishop Lefebvre, which was and most Catholics I think stand on this. And my question would be, if Pope Francis was not really Pope, could he do so much damage as he's doing now? If Pope Francis wasn't really the Pope, could he do the damage? He couldn't do the damage he's doing. So another angle on this is also how heavily the popes will be judged. And we know there are popes in hell, Dante painted some popes in hell and he put some popes in hell in the Inferno. And I think Michelangelo and some other artists painted some popes in hell, because they were so scandalous. So there are popes in hell.

So dear flock here in Post Falls area, yes, the confusion is great. The devil is having a heyday. On the positive side of the state of affairs now, on the positive side, every one of these traditional Catholic groups would agree, we profess the Faith, we agree on the Creed, we profess all that the Church has taught. I think most would say that. The fighting only comes from whether you go to the right saying there's no pope or onto the left, how much liberalism are you willing to swallow? The Novus Ordo's have swallowed it, hook, line and sinker. The St. Peter's have swallowed it, hook and line, but not the sinker. The SSPX has swallowed it, the hook, but not the sinker and the line. And then the Catholic resistance priests will not swallow the hook line or sinker at all.

And I think we got to go back to Pius IX. We got to go back to Archbishop Lefebvre and St. Pius X to be our guides. And Pius IX said, "There's no enemy more harmful to the church than the liberal Catholics." And what is liberal Catholicism today at the doctrinal level, because at the practical level there's a lot of liberal Catholicism. But at the doctrinal level it's any compromise with Vatican II and the New Mass and the New Code. Any degree of compromise, how much you compromise with that determines how much liberal Catholicism you swallowed. And that's the barometer. So we want to stand with Archbishop Lefebvre and Cardinal Pie of Poitier, of the great popes and St. Pius X, and all the good popes. And Pius IX and Pope Pius VI do not accept any liberal Catholicism, because the liberalism is the destruction of the Catholic faith, the destruction of the church.

And so we must refuse all compromise with Vatican II and the New Mass. And that's where the new SSPX slid in 2012, because now they have a public documents and signed and the ongoing jurisdictions for marriages, confessions, and Holy Orders. They did everything that our Archbishop Lefebvre, our founder, warned not to do. The only thing they're not doing now is saying the New Mass, but they agreed that it's legitimately promulgated, which is one step from saying it. And they will not accept Vatican II 100%, but they accept 95% of it, which that's swallowing 95% poison.

So this is where again, where's our compass in this confusion? St. Vincent Ferrer said, "Look to what the Church is always taught." There's your compass, there's your guideline. And what did the martyrs do? They went to death rather than compromise an inch with the faith, they would not burn one half a grain before the goddesses and gods of Rome and they could have gotten away with it.

And then the great Eleazar in the book of Maccabees Book Two, and he was 80-something year old, and they said, "Look, you're an old man, don't make your life difficult. Retire in peace. All the Jews are looking at you." This is before Christ, of course. "All the Jews are looking at you, just look like you're eating pork. But when we serve your plate, we won't serve pork. But everybody will think you're eating pork. But don't worry, you're not compromising, because you're not really eating it." And Eleazar, the old wise man said, "Wait a minute, if they think that I'm eating pork, even though I'm not, that already is a terrible scandal." And he says, "I haven't lived this long to throw my soul to hell. I will not eat pork and I will not be seen to eat pork." In our case today, I will not accept the New Mass nor say that it's legitimately promulgated nor accept Vatican II nor accept the new Code of Canon Law with its heresies and errors. That's the position of Archbishop Lefebvre. We will not mix Catholicism with error.

So what did the old man Eleazar do? He accepted to be tortured and [was] put to death. And that's true Catholicism. That's the Catholics our Lord wants from us, to be non-compromising. And of course you get the normal snowballs thrown at you and tomatoes and eggs, you're bigoted, you're stuck in the past, you're disobedient, you're a rebel, you're a renegade. And the list goes on and on. Those are all badges of honor. That's why Archbishop Lefebvre said, "It's a badge of honor to be excommunicated from this Vatican II Church of Assisi, of ecumenism, of collegiality, of the New Mass, of evolution. It's a badge of honor.

And that's why it was a shame for the four bishops of the Society St. Pius X to ask Pope Benedict XVI, "Please, Holy Father, we know we were bad boys, can you lift our excommunication?" That was in fact, objectively speaking, and I know that maybe they had the best of good wills, but objectively speaking, it was a real betrayal to Our Lord, to Archbishop Lefebvre our founder, and to all the faithful who depended on them to take the heat, to be crucified with Our Lord, but they wanted to come down from the cross and they burnt the incense to come down from the cross.

So let's not imitate that, but pray for them. Pray for all the bishops of the society. Pray for all the Novus Ordo bishops, pray for these modernist Popes. Pray for them, because they all have souls to save. But you and I, we must beg the Virgin Mary, "Don't let me compromise the Faith." And so we got to study liberalism. We got to study the writings of Archbishop Lefebvre, of Cardinal Pie of Poitier, of the great popes.

If I could close this sermon with one study, which I encourage for all of you, and Archbishop Lefebvre spoke about this one quite often, it's called the papal bull, the papal bull called Auctorem Fidei, A-U-C-T-O-R-E-M, fidei, F-I-D-E-I. A papal bull of Pope Pius VI in 1794. And it is a beautiful document, because it condemns Vatican II long before Vatican II. It condemns all compromise with the errors of Vatican II long before Vatican II. [See here and here.]

And he exposes the snakes, how they want to use double tongued phrases to weave in their errors into the minds of Catholics. And that's what happened in Vatican II. And that was Bishop Fellay himself admitted that the Doctrinal Declaration of April 15th, 2012 was a double tongued document. Do you remember when he said that? He said, "If you read it with black sunglasses, you'll read it traditionally. But if you look at it with pink sunglasses," he said, "you'll read it in a liberal way." So why would he sign a double tongued document when he knows as well as I and all of you, how God says, "I have detested, I have hated the double tongued." And when St. Pius X said, "Modernism is perfect. On one page they'll say, 'Traditional Catholicism,' on the next page is pure heresy or error or compromise or modernism." That's what a modernist is. He tries to combine oil and water and they can't mix. Tries to combine uncombinables, reconcile light and darkness, reconcile truth and error, reconcile Christ and Satan to sit at the same table and enjoy a dinner together. It just can't happen.

And that's where we must love Christ. We must love truth to death and hate compromise. We must hate it and be allergic to it. And that's why when Catholics hear language like, "The New Mass isn't so, so bad, you can go to it to nourish your faith if there's nothing else." And when you hear about New Mass Eucharistic miracles being heavily promoted and pushed, the Catholic reaction is, "No, this is wrong." And that's the right reaction, because a Catholic, he's allergic to liberalism. And if you are, and if we have that grace, pray to the Mother of God never to lose that grace, because the modern world swims in the soup of compromise and the devil loves it.

So yes. So if you get all these priests together and sat down together and you come down to the nitty-gritty, the nuts and bolts of Vatican II, New Mass, New Code, then the fights and the punches and the punching gloves come out. Why? Because truth does matter after all. And so let's pray to the Mother of God that she grants us a good pope, a very good pope.

As I repeated thousands of times, blessed Anna Maria Taigi, she said, "It'll get so bad, the state of the church, that God will send St. Peter and Paul from Heaven onto earth and point out the next pope." Are we at that point when Pope Francis dies? I would say definitely Heaven has to step in, because he's already set up the cardinals to be all modernist and rotten. They're all rotten. The only one I can see papabul, from my 2 cent angle, is Archbishop Viganò or one of the bishops of the line of Archbishop Lefebvre. But even they are not strong like Bishop Viganò, they've all become cushy and wooshy. I hear rumblings that a few of the ones Archbishop Lefebvre consecrated, some of them, one or two of them is starting to shine. Let's hope that's true. Let's hope that at least one of them or two of them rise up like Archbishop Lefebvre.

So here's the state of affairs, but it always comes down to we must not be liberal Catholics. And when you get all those priests together and they're all fighting over Vatican II and the new mass, the question is how much liberalism do you swallow? How much do you want to compromise the Catholic faith? That's where the crunch is. And as I said, St. Peter's will accept Vatican II, they'll accept the New Mass. At least [they] don't condemn it in the pulpit, but 'we got to work with the local bishop.' Well, there's your compromise. "Well, why? They're legitimate authority. Why don't you work with them?" Because that same bishop of Coeur d'Alene here, he has the Latin Mass and St. Peter's approved at St. Joan of Arcs. But down in another church of his diocese, he's got the rock and roll mass and another church of his diocese, he's got of course the 'Dignity Mass' with rainbow flags. And he is got the friendly Mass with Buddhists coming to pray together with the Catholic priest on the altar and Jews and Protestants.

That's the perfect Vatican II religion. It's called pluralism. It's the church with many altars to many gods. And when it comes to that, the Catholic says, "I'm out of here. It's Christ the King or nothing." "Oh, you're bigoted. You're being snobbish. You're being proudful, conceited, renegade, disobedient." "Yes, you're right. For Christ the King? Yes, you're right." And that's what Archbishop Lefebvre said to Pope Paul VI, "You call me disobedient, renegade, rebellious, and disobedient." He said, "Yes, I am. If it means disobedience and renegade to tradition, I'm not a renegade nor disobedient. But if it means disobedient to you, Holy Father, and your new Vatican II and your new doctrines and New Mass, yes, I am disobedient and rebellious and renegade, because I will not make peace with the uncrowning of Christ the King, and what will take souls to hell." And that's really the bottom line, isn't it?

If we believe like liberals, we will lose the faith like liberals and end up in hell. And that's the bottom line. We don't want to lose the faith, because without the faith, we can't save our soul. And how many are in hell who have compromised and played with the faith? So little flock here in Post Falls area, you have a whole bunch of drive-thru, traditional masses you can pull up to and order your platter or make your order, but stay with the truth. And I know some people say, "Well, how can you be right? The priests of the Resistance, you're just a few idiots and you're just this and you're that." I know, I'll be the first to admit that.

But if I compromise tomorrow and accept Vatican II and accept the New Mass or accept that it's legitimate, then I am salt that's also lost its flavor, to be stepped on. And God will raise some other priests. He'll raise a good SSPX priest who finally sees the light and makes a stand. That could happen, or better yet more, a whole bunch of them come together and make a stand. That would be wonderful.

So it doesn't depend on Father X, Y, Z. It depends on our Lord Jesus Christ and what priests and what bishops are in line with the Catholic tradition, with the magisterium of tradition, with the line of the great defenders of tradition and the Christ the King, Archbishop Lefebvre, Cardinal Pie of Poitier and all the popes. There's your litmus test. And a priest [that] departs from that, stay away from them. If they stay with that, then stay faithful with them. It's the crisis of the Church. But what's wonderful about these events of our times, we know it's going to have a happy ending, which will be, in the end, 'My Immaculate Heart will triumph.' The Pope will consecrate Russia. Our Lady did say that. And there will be peace. And there's the peace, not a Cold War peace, but the real reign of the Sacred Heart of Jesus and Mary. That's the peace that She speaks of.

So it has a happy ending. And all these scattered groups that say the Latin Mass, they will be brought together under a good Pope. And those that are liberal will straighten out and become Catholic again in their thinking, hopefully. And those who say there's no Pope, well, they won't need to say that anymore, because there'll be a good pope. And then the Catholic Resistance, will we just continue like we've always been fighting. That's all. Like Archbishop Lefebvre said, "When Rome comes back to tradition, it'll be not us coming back to the Church, but they coming back to where we always stood and fought and held the position." So little flock here, hold strong.

And the last point, Our Lord had many for lunch at His table, 5,000 in one crowd, 4,000 in another crowd, and He fed them delicious, probably the best bread ever made, and the best-tasting fresh fish. And they all ate to be satisfied and well-filled. So that's quite a crowd, 5,000, 4,000.

But when it came to Calvary, when it came to the crunch, who stood at the foot of the Cross? What is it for? Our Blessed Mother, St. John, St. Mary Magdalene, Mary of Salome, and Mary of Cleopas stood at the foot of the cross. That's it. That's it. Where's the thousands? So that's our honor today, and we want to pray for that grace to stay at the foot of the Cross. Come what may, stay at the foot of the Cross with Our Lady. And with Her you're going to stay faithful to death and persevere.

Oh, Mary conceived without sin.

Oh, Mary conceived without sin.

Oh, Mary conceived without sin.

And for those who do not every course to Thee, especially all communists and Freemasons and other enemies of Holy Mother Church. Amen. In the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost. Amen.