[ 0 → 4] TrapCast Express [ 4 → 15] TrapCast Express, it's Monday, November 27th, 2017. [ 16 → 21] Everyone can breathe easier in Vatican City today because Francis is gone. [ 22 → 24] For just a short while, of course, but still. [ 24 → 29] He arrived in Myanmar today, a country in the Far East, [ 29 → 35] and he will head to Bangladesh later this week before returning to the Vatican on December 2nd. [ 35 → 41] No doubt we're going to get some crazy headlines from that because among his many scheduled activities, [ 41 → 48] there will be a visit with a bunch of Buddhist monks and an ecumenical and interreligious meeting for peace. [ 48 → 49] Can't wait for that. [ 50 → 54] By the way, not everyone who gets a marriage annulment in the Novoselic [ 54 → 58] does so in order to be allowed to marry someone else. [ 58 → 62] Some people actually go on to become Novoselic priests. [ 62 → 67] As the Portland Press-Herald reports in its November 26th edition, [ 67 → 74] Anthony Cipolli went on to become a Novoselic priest for the Diocese of Portland, Maine, [ 74 → 82] after divorcing his civil wife and getting an annulment because their marriage had not been witnessed by a Catholic priest, [ 83 → 84] which is legitimate grounds for annulment. [ 85 → 87] As far as I know, but that's not the point. [ 87 → 93] The point here is that they're starting to admit men to be priests in their church [ 93 → 100] that in the eyes of everyone else were married at some point and, as in this case, even have children. [ 100 → 104] But Anthony Cipolli is by no means the first such case. [ 104 → 110] Back in 2013, we reported on the divorced father of two, now Novoselic priest, [ 110 → 114] the Reverend Mark Kiziluski, who operates in the diocese, [ 114 → 116] of Seattle, Washington. [ 117 → 121] Just wait till they fully admit married men to their pseudo-priesthood. [ 122 → 124] Soon the question they will be asking is no longer, [ 124 → 126] should Catholic priests be allowed to get married, [ 126 → 129] but should Catholic priests be allowed to get divorced? [ 130 → 134] Oh, the Vatican II future looks really bright, doesn't it? [ 135 → 142] In other news, this past Sunday, Francis repeated one of his favorite misleading claims regarding the Last Judgment. [ 142 → 144] He asserted that the decisive question, [ 144 → 156] He was commenting on the Gospel of St. Matthew, chapter 25, [ 156 → 158] where Christ reveals that at the Last Judgment, [ 158 → 165] he will judge whether we clothed the naked, fed the hungry, visited the imprisoned, and so forth. [ 165 → 168] Now, this is obviously true, since Christ taught it, [ 169 → 172] but Francis reduces it all to this, [ 172 → 174] as though there were no other ultimatums. [ 174 → 180] The Apostate Antipope gives the impression that in the end, [ 180 → 186] all that matters is whether we practiced works of charity towards those in need. [ 186 → 189] But if that were true, why should anyone have to be a Catholic? [ 190 → 194] Why would martyrs endure the most cruel torments if, in the end, [ 194 → 199] the faith didn't matter, except insofar as it encouraged works of charity? [ 200 → 203] Is that what St. Thomas More died for, for example? [ 204 → 204] You don't have to be a Catholic to be a Catholic. [ 204 → 210] You don't have to be a Catholic to help out at a soup kitchen or collect clothes for needy children. [ 210 → 213] A pagan, an atheist, or a Jew can do that. [ 213 → 214] And they do. [ 215 → 222] Which is precisely why Francis likes to emphasize his false gospel of mere humanitarianism so much, [ 222 → 224] because it promotes indifferentism. [ 225 → 229] It allows him to promote his apostate agenda. [ 230 → 234] Now, obviously, we have an obligation to love God, [ 234 → 236] and love our neighbor for the love of God. [ 237 → 240] As St. Paul teaches in his first letter to the Corinthians, chapter 13, [ 241 → 246] we can have all the faith in the world and all knowledge of the greatest divine mysteries, [ 247 → 250] but if we do not have charity, it will profit us nothing. [ 251 → 256] But just as faith alone will not save anyone, neither will mere works of charity. [ 257 → 260] Just as charity is necessary, so is faith. [ 261 → 263] Francis completely omits from his Angelus address [ 263 → 264] the necessity of charity. [ 264 → 269] The necessity of supernatural grace, for which a prerequisite is faith. [ 270 → 273] Without faith, it is impossible to please God, [ 273 → 276] says St. Paul to the Hebrews, chapter 11, verse 6. [ 277 → 281] In the Gospel of St. Mark, chapter 16, verse 16, [ 281 → 282] our divine Lord says, [ 283 → 286] He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved, [ 286 → 289] but he that believeth not shall be condemned. [ 290 → 294] And St. John the Apostle writes in his second letter, verse 9, [ 294 → 301] Whosoever revolteth and continueth not in the doctrine of Christ hath not God. [ 302 → 307] He that continueth in the doctrine, the same hath both the Father and the Son. [ 308 → 310] And of course, we could go on and on. [ 310 → 314] But if we're looking for a singular decisive criterion [ 314 → 318] that will determine our final destination, heaven or hell, [ 318 → 321] that criterion is sanctifying grace. [ 321 → 324] If we have sanctifying grace in our souls, [ 324 → 327] at the moment of death, we will be admitted to heaven. [ 328 → 330] We may have to go through purgatory first, [ 330 → 333] but heaven will be our eternal reward. [ 334 → 337] If, on the other hand, we die without sanctifying grace, [ 337 → 340] if we die in mortal sin, we will go to hell. [ 341 → 343] That is the ultimate criterion, [ 344 → 346] according to the Roman Catholic faith, [ 346 → 348] not simply works of charity, [ 348 → 352] which can be done without faith for the wrong reason [ 352 → 354] or for a merely natural motive. [ 355 → 359] Only if they are done through grace, united to faith, [ 359 → 360] for a supernatural motive, [ 361 → 364] will works of charity be supernaturally meritorious. [ 365 → 368] It's no accident that Francis never talks about that. [ 369 → 371] Modernists are very shrewd, you see. [ 371 → 376] They do not typically deny a dogma explicitly and leave it at that. [ 376 → 378] Their mode of operation is much more cunning. [ 378 → 381] They instill heresy in the minds of their hearers [ 381 → 384] by omitting what they ought to affirm, [ 384 → 387] by relativizing what is absolute, [ 387 → 391] and by placing excessive emphasis on particular points [ 391 → 394] that, although true in themselves, are not the whole story. [ 395 → 397] Francis has just done it again. [ 397 → 401] Beware of serpents like him who tempt you to deny the faith [ 401 → 407] by exaggerating a truth to the exclusion or obscuring of other truths. [ 408 → 411] And lastly, in case you haven't seen it yet on our blog, [ 412 → 414] guess which sinner in the drama of the book of Acts, [ 414 → 416] the drama of the passion of our Lord, [ 416 → 419] Francis has a particular soft spot for. [ 420 → 423] You guessed it. Judas Iscariot. [ 423 → 424] Come on. Who else? [ 425 → 428] Judas, we recall, is the disciple who betrayed Christ [ 428 → 430] and then committed suicide in despair. [ 431 → 434] Well, on the Italian television program Padre Nostro, [ 435 → 437] our father, Francis said this, quote, [ 437 → 442] There's one thing that makes me think that Judas' story doesn't end there. [ 442 → 444] Perhaps someone might think, [ 444 → 448] think this pope is a heretic, but no, unquote. [ 448 → 453] And then he goes on to explain that perhaps Judas was saved after all. [ 453 → 458] You can see it all in our blog post dated November 26th, 2017. [ 459 → 464] Well, Francis, why would anyone suspect you of heresy? [ 464 → 464] Come on. [ 465 → 468] Let's see what Holy Mother Church and Sacred Scripture [ 468 → 471] have to say about the fate of Judas Iscariot. [ 471 → 474] The Catechism of Trent says, [ 474 → 478] that the priesthood derived by Judas from the apostleship [ 478 → 481] only brought him everlasting destruction. [ 482 → 485] Pope Pius XI, in his encyclical, [ 485 → 492] says that Judas was led down to the abyss of iniquity. [ 492 → 494] And our blessed Lord himself, [ 494 → 497] who obviously foreknew the eternal destiny of the traitor, [ 498 → 501] said this in his prayer to the Father on the eve of his passion, [ 502 → 504] Those whom thou gavest, [ 504 → 505] me have I kept, [ 505 → 507] and none of them is lost, [ 507 → 509] but the son of perdition, [ 509 → 512] that the Scripture may be fulfilled. [ 512 → 514] That's John 17, 12. [ 514 → 516] And in Mark 14, 21, [ 517 → 519] Christ said that it would have been better for Judas [ 519 → 521] if he had never been born, [ 521 → 523] which would simply not be true [ 523 → 526] if he was going to enjoy eternal happiness in heaven at some point. [ 527 → 530] And in chapter 1 of the Acts of the Apostles, [ 530 → 531] verse 25, [ 531 → 533] we read that Judas went to, [ 534 → 539] And that's not the kind you want to encounter. [ 540 → 543] Trantcast Express is a production of Novos Ordo Watch. [ 543 → 545] Check us out at trantcast.org. [ 545 → 547] And if you like what we're doing, [ 547 → 549] please consider making a tax-deductible contribution [ 549 → 552] at novosordowatch.org [ 552 → 553] slash donate.