TrapCast Express
TrapCast Express, it's Monday, November 27th, 2017.
Everyone can breathe easier in Vatican City today because Francis is gone.
For just a short while, of course, but still.
He arrived in Myanmar today, a country in the Far East,
and he will head to Bangladesh later this week before returning to the Vatican on December 2nd.
No doubt we're going to get some crazy headlines from that because among his many scheduled activities,
there will be a visit with a bunch of Buddhist monks and an ecumenical and interreligious meeting for peace.
Can't wait for that.
By the way, not everyone who gets a marriage annulment in the Novoselic
does so in order to be allowed to marry someone else.
Some people actually go on to become Novoselic priests.
As the Portland Press-Herald reports in its November 26th edition,
Anthony Cipolli went on to become a Novoselic priest for the Diocese of Portland, Maine,
after divorcing his civil wife and getting an annulment because their marriage had not been witnessed by a Catholic priest,
which is legitimate grounds for annulment.
As far as I know, but that's not the point.
The point here is that they're starting to admit men to be priests in their church
that in the eyes of everyone else were married at some point and, as in this case, even have children.
But Anthony Cipolli is by no means the first such case.
Back in 2013, we reported on the divorced father of two, now Novoselic priest,
the Reverend Mark Kiziluski, who operates in the diocese,
of Seattle, Washington.
Just wait till they fully admit married men to their pseudo-priesthood.
Soon the question they will be asking is no longer,
should Catholic priests be allowed to get married,
but should Catholic priests be allowed to get divorced?
Oh, the Vatican II future looks really bright, doesn't it?
In other news, this past Sunday, Francis repeated one of his favorite misleading claims regarding the Last Judgment.
He asserted that the decisive question,
He was commenting on the Gospel of St. Matthew, chapter 25,
where Christ reveals that at the Last Judgment,
he will judge whether we clothed the naked, fed the hungry, visited the imprisoned, and so forth.
Now, this is obviously true, since Christ taught it,
but Francis reduces it all to this,
as though there were no other ultimatums.
The Apostate Antipope gives the impression that in the end,
all that matters is whether we practiced works of charity towards those in need.
But if that were true, why should anyone have to be a Catholic?
Why would martyrs endure the most cruel torments if, in the end,
the faith didn't matter, except insofar as it encouraged works of charity?
Is that what St. Thomas More died for, for example?
You don't have to be a Catholic to be a Catholic.
You don't have to be a Catholic to help out at a soup kitchen or collect clothes for needy children.
A pagan, an atheist, or a Jew can do that.
And they do.
Which is precisely why Francis likes to emphasize his false gospel of mere humanitarianism so much,
because it promotes indifferentism.
It allows him to promote his apostate agenda.
Now, obviously, we have an obligation to love God,
and love our neighbor for the love of God.
As St. Paul teaches in his first letter to the Corinthians, chapter 13,
we can have all the faith in the world and all knowledge of the greatest divine mysteries,
but if we do not have charity, it will profit us nothing.
But just as faith alone will not save anyone, neither will mere works of charity.
Just as charity is necessary, so is faith.
Francis completely omits from his Angelus address
the necessity of charity.
The necessity of supernatural grace, for which a prerequisite is faith.
Without faith, it is impossible to please God,
says St. Paul to the Hebrews, chapter 11, verse 6.
In the Gospel of St. Mark, chapter 16, verse 16,
our divine Lord says,
He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved,
but he that believeth not shall be condemned.
And St. John the Apostle writes in his second letter, verse 9,
Whosoever revolteth and continueth not in the doctrine of Christ hath not God.
He that continueth in the doctrine, the same hath both the Father and the Son.
And of course, we could go on and on.
But if we're looking for a singular decisive criterion
that will determine our final destination, heaven or hell,
that criterion is sanctifying grace.
If we have sanctifying grace in our souls,
at the moment of death, we will be admitted to heaven.
We may have to go through purgatory first,
but heaven will be our eternal reward.
If, on the other hand, we die without sanctifying grace,
if we die in mortal sin, we will go to hell.
That is the ultimate criterion,
according to the Roman Catholic faith,
not simply works of charity,
which can be done without faith for the wrong reason
or for a merely natural motive.
Only if they are done through grace, united to faith,
for a supernatural motive,
will works of charity be supernaturally meritorious.
It's no accident that Francis never talks about that.
Modernists are very shrewd, you see.
They do not typically deny a dogma explicitly and leave it at that.
Their mode of operation is much more cunning.
They instill heresy in the minds of their hearers
by omitting what they ought to affirm,
by relativizing what is absolute,
and by placing excessive emphasis on particular points
that, although true in themselves, are not the whole story.
Francis has just done it again.
Beware of serpents like him who tempt you to deny the faith
by exaggerating a truth to the exclusion or obscuring of other truths.
And lastly, in case you haven't seen it yet on our blog,
guess which sinner in the drama of the book of Acts,
the drama of the passion of our Lord,
Francis has a particular soft spot for.
You guessed it. Judas Iscariot.
Come on. Who else?
Judas, we recall, is the disciple who betrayed Christ
and then committed suicide in despair.
Well, on the Italian television program Padre Nostro,
our father, Francis said this, quote,
There's one thing that makes me think that Judas' story doesn't end there.
Perhaps someone might think,
think this pope is a heretic, but no, unquote.
And then he goes on to explain that perhaps Judas was saved after all.
You can see it all in our blog post dated November 26th, 2017.
Well, Francis, why would anyone suspect you of heresy?
Come on.
Let's see what Holy Mother Church and Sacred Scripture
have to say about the fate of Judas Iscariot.
The Catechism of Trent says,
that the priesthood derived by Judas from the apostleship
only brought him everlasting destruction.
Pope Pius XI, in his encyclical,
says that Judas was led down to the abyss of iniquity.
And our blessed Lord himself,
who obviously foreknew the eternal destiny of the traitor,
said this in his prayer to the Father on the eve of his passion,
Those whom thou gavest,
me have I kept,
and none of them is lost,
but the son of perdition,
that the Scripture may be fulfilled.
That's John 17, 12.
And in Mark 14, 21,
Christ said that it would have been better for Judas
if he had never been born,
which would simply not be true
if he was going to enjoy eternal happiness in heaven at some point.
And in chapter 1 of the Acts of the Apostles,
verse 25,
we read that Judas went to,
And that's not the kind you want to encounter.
Trantcast Express is a production of Novos Ordo Watch.
Check us out at trantcast.org.
And if you like what we're doing,
please consider making a tax-deductible contribution
at novosordowatch.org
slash donate.