July 6, 2020, LifeSiteNews:
“I have no desire to separate myself from Mother Church, for the exaltation of which I daily renew the offering of my life,” stated Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò regarding accusations that he was “on the brink of schism” over his comments regarding the Catholic Church in relation to the 1962-65 Vatican II council.
In a new post today that was first published by Sandro Magister in Italian and Marco Tosatti in English (read full letter below), Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò responded to an article by Sandro Magister, in which the Italian journalist accused him of demeaning Pope Benedict XVI and for being “on the brink of schism.”
Magister had written, on June 29, a strong rebuke of Archbishop Viganòs recent interventions, in which he strongly criticized some elements of the Second Vatican Council that are ambiguous and that have been the basis of the creation of a “parallel church” that has little in common with the Catholic Church’s Tradition. In his post, Magister claimed that Archbishop Viganò blames Pope Benedict XVI for “having ‘deceived’ the whole Church in that he would have it be believed that the Second Vatican Council was immune to heresies and moreover should be interpreted in perfect continuity with true perennial doctrine.” However, the link provided by Magister leads to a June 9 post by Viganò (here in English) that does not claim that Pope Benedict had “deceived” the whole Church.
Viganò had spoken in his earlier June 9 post about the fact that “attempts to correct the conciliar excesses – invoking the hermeneutic of continuity – have proven unsuccessful,” and then added that “despite all the efforts of the hermeneutic of continuity which shipwrecked miserably at the first confrontation with the reality of the present crisis, it is undeniable that from Vatican II onwards a parallel church was built, superimposed over and diametrically opposed to the true Church of Christ.”
Viganò only used the word “deception” when he admitted that, just as he “honestly and serenely obeyed questionable orders sixty years ago, believing that they represented the loving voice of the Church,” he now recognizes “that I have been deceived.”
Next to this claim about Viganò’s purportedly accusing Pope Benedict XVI, Sandro Magister also claimed in his June 29 article that this Italian prelate is “on the brink of schism.” Further using harsh language, Magister also spoke of “a relentless barrage of denunciations of Church heresies over the last few decades” that Archbishop Viganò purportedly has published in recent weeks.
In his new response to Magister, the Italian prelate wrote that he was aware that someone critical of the Council easily “awakens” the “inquisitorial spirit,” but that nevertheless he considers it appropriate to “raise problems that remain unresolved to date, the foremost of which is the crisis that has afflicted the Church since Vatican II.”
He furthermore rejects Magister’s claim that he himself was on the “brink” of schism, saying: “I claim the right to say it without thereby making myself guilty of the delict of schism for having attacked the unity of the Church. The unity of the Church is inseparably in Charity and in Truth, and where error reigns or even only worms its way in, there cannot be Charity.”
Archbishop Viganò then assured Magister that, “unlike many bishops, such as those of the German Synodal Path, who have already gone far beyond the brink of schism (…) I have no desire to separate myself from Mother Church, for the exaltation of which I daily renew the offering of my life.”
He goes on to explain that he never accused Pope Benedict of having “deceived” the Church:
“I do not think that I have ever written such a thing about the Holy Father; on the contrary: I said, and I reaffirm, that we were all – or almost all – deceived by those who used the Council as a “container” equipped with its own implicit authority and the authoritativeness of the Fathers who took part in it, while distorting its purpose. And those who fell into this deception did so because, loving the Church and the Papacy, they could not imagine that in the heart of Vatican II a minority of very organized conspirators could use a Council to demolish the Church from within; and that in doing so they could count on the silence and inaction of Authority, if not on its complicity.”
Archbishop Viganò has started to open up this debate about Vatican II at the beginning of June, in response to a June 1 statement by Bishop Athanasius Schneider. The Italian prelate first published a June 9 intervention, adding a June 15 statement about some of the problematic propositions that can be found in Vatican II documents. He then responded to questions by Phil Lawler concerning the history and background of the turbulent Second Vatican Council and the signs that it had indeed been manipulated by a small group of modernists, on June 26.
In a response to LifeSite’s editor-in-chief, Archbishop Viganò clarified his earlier words that he thinks this Council should better be forgotten, by saying that he considers this Council to be valid, but manipulated.
Finally, this new response to Sandro Magister is so far the last statement explaining his own position and critique. Viganò herewith is trying to open up a debate without immediately being silenced as being a “Lefebvrist,” as he wrote to Sandro Magister.
Archbishop Viganò’s full response to Sandro Magister:
3 July 2020
Saint Irenaeus, Bishop and Martyr
Dear Mr. Magister,
Permit me to reply to your article “Archbishop Viganò on the Brink of Schism,” published at Settimo Cielo on June 29 (here).
I am aware that having dared to express an opinion strongly critical of the Council is sufficient to awaken the inquisitorial spirit that in other cases is the object of execration by right-thinking people. Nonetheless, in a respectful dispute between ecclesiastics and competent laity, it does not seem to me to be inappropriate to raise problems that remain unresolved to date, the foremost of which is the crisis that has afflicted the Church since Vatican II and has now reached the point of devastation.
There are those who speak of the misrepresentation of the Council; others who speak of the need to return to reading it in continuity with the Tradition; others of the opportunity to correct any errors contained in it, or to interpret the equivocal points in a Catholic sense. On the opposing side, there is no lack of those who consider Vatican II as a blueprint from which to proceed in the revolution: the changing and transformation of the Church into an entirely new and modern entity, in step with the times. This is part of the normal dynamics of a “dialogue” that is all too often invoked but rarely practiced: those who thus far have expressed dissent about what I have said have never entered into the merit of the argument, limiting themselves to saddling me with epithets that have already been merited by my far more illustrious and venerable brothers in the episcopate. It is curious that, both in the doctrinal as well as the political arena, the progressives claim for themselves a primacy, a state of election, that apodictically places the adversary in a position of ontological inferiority, unworthy of attention or response and simplistically liquidatable as Lefebvrianon the ecclesial front or fascist on the socio-political front. But their lack of arguments does not legitimize them to dictate the rules, nor to decide who has the right to speak, especially when reason, even prior to faith, has demonstrated where the deception is, who the author is, and what the purpose is.
At first it appeared to me that the content of your article was to be considered more an understandable tribute to the Prince, who can be found in the frescoed salons of the Third Loggia or in the stylish offices of the Editor; and yet in reading what you attribute to me I discovered an inaccuracy – let’s call it that – that I hope is the result of a misunderstanding. I therefore ask you to grant me space to reply at Settimo Cielo.
You state that I have supposedly blamed Benedict XVI “for having ‘deceived’ the whole Church in that he would have it be believed that the Second Vatican Council was immune to heresies and moreover should be interpreted in perfect continuity with true perennial doctrine.” I do not think that I have ever written such a thing about the Holy Father; on the contrary: I said, and I reaffirm, that we were all – or almost all – deceived by those who used the Council as a “container” equipped with its own implicit authority and the authoritativeness of the Fathers who took part in it, while distorting its purpose. And those who fell into this deception did so because, loving the Church and the Papacy, they could not imagine that in the heart of Vatican II a minority of very organized conspirators could use a Council to demolish the Church from within; and that in doing so they could count on the silence and inaction of Authority, if not on its complicity. These are historical facts, of which I permit myself to give a personal interpretation, but one which I think others may share.
I permit myself also to remind you, as if there was any need, that the positions of moderate critical re-reading of the Council in a traditional sense by Benedict XVI are part of a laudable recent past, while in the formidable Seventies the position of then-theologian Joseph Ratzinger was quite different. Authoritative studies stand alongside the same admissions of the Professor of Tubingen confirming the partial repentances of the Emeritus. Nor do I see a “reckless indictment launched by Viganò against Benedict XVI for his ‘failed attempts to correct conciliar excesses by invoking the hermeneutic of continuity,’” since this is an opinion widely shared not only in conservative circles but also and above all among progressives. And it should be said that what the innovators succeeded in obtaining by means of deception, cunning and blackmail was the result of a vision that we have found later applied in the maximum degree in the Bergoglian “magisterium” of Amoris Laetitia. The malicious intention is admitted by Ratzinger himself: “The impression grew steadily that nothing was now stable in the Church, that everything was open to revision. More and more the Council appeared to be like a great Church parliament that could change everything and reshape everything according to its own desires” (cf. J. Ratzinger, Milestones, translation from the German by Erasmo Leiva-Merikakis, Ignatius Press, San Francisco, 1997, p. 132). But even more so by the words of the Dominican Edward Schillebeecks: “We express it diplomatically [now], but after the Council we will draw the implicit conclusions” (De Bazuin, n.16, 1965).
We have confirmed that the intentional ambiguity in the texts had the purpose of keeping opposing and irreconcilable visions together, in the name of an evaluation of utility and to the detriment of revealed Truth. A Truth that, when it is integrally proclaimed, cannot fail to be divisive, just as Our Lord is divisive: “Do you think that I have come to bring peace on earth? No, I tell you, but rather division” (Lk 12:51).
I do not find anything reprehensible in suggesting that we should forget Vatican II: its proponents knew how to confidently exercise this damnatio memoriae not just with a Council but with everything, even to the point of affirming that theircouncil was the first of the new church, and that beginning with their council the old religion and the old Mass was finished. You will say to me that these are the positions of extremists, and that virtue stands in the middle, that is, among those who consider that Vatican II is only the latest of an uninterrupted series of events in which the Holy Spirit speaks through the mouth of the one and only infallible Magisterium. If so, it should be explained why the conciliar church was given a new liturgy and a new calendar, and consequently a new doctrine – nova lex orandi, nova lex credendi – distancing itself from its own past with disdain.
The mere idea of setting the Council aside causes scandal even in those, like you, who recognize the crisis of recent years, but who persist in not wanting to recognize the causal link between Vatican II and its logical and inevitable effects. You write: “Attention: not the Council interpreted badly, but the Council as such and en bloc.” I ask you then: what would be the correct interpretation of the Council? The one you give or the one given – while they wrote the decrees and declarations – by its very industrious architects? Or perhaps that of the German episcopate? Or that of the theologians who teach in the Pontifical Universities and that we see published in the most popular Catholic periodicals in the world? Or that of Joseph Ratzinger? Or that of Bishop Schneider? Or that of Bergoglio? This would be enough to understand how much damage has been caused by the deliberate adoption of a language that was so murky that it legitimized opposing and contrary interpretations, on the basis of which the famous conciliar springtime then occurred. This is why I do not hesitate to say that that assembly should be forgotten “as such and en bloc,” and I claim the right to say it without thereby making myself guilty of the delict of schism for having attacked the unity of the Church. The unity of the Church is inseparably in Charity and in Truth, and where error reigns or even only worms its way in, there cannot be Charity.
The fairytale of the hermeneutic – even though an authoritative one because of its Author – nevertheless remains an attempt to want to give the dignity of a Council to a true and proper ambush against the Church, so as not to discredit along with it the Popes who wanted, imposed and reproposed that Council. So much so that those same Popes, one after the other, rise to the honors of the altar for having been “popes of the Council.”
Allow me to quote from the article that Doctor Maria Guarini published on June 29 at Chiesa e postconcilio in reaction to your piece at Settimo Cielo, entitled: “Archbishop Viganò is not on the brink of schism: many sins are coming to a head.” She writes: “And it is precisely from here that is born and for this reason risks continuing – without results (thus far, except for the debate triggered by Archbishop Viganò) – the dialogue between deaf people, because the interlocutors use different reality grids: Vatican II, changing the language, has also changed the parameters of approach to reality. And so it happens that we talk about the same thing which, however, is given entirely different meanings. Among other things, the principal characteristic of the present hierarchy is the use of incontestable affirmations, without ever bothering to demonstrate them or with flawed and sophistic demonstrations. But they do not even have need of demonstrations, because the new approach and the new language have subverted everything from the beginning. And the unproven nature of the anomalous ‘pastorality’ without any defined theological principles is precisely what takes away the raw material of the dispute. It is the advance of a shapeless, ever-changing, dissolving fluid in place of the clear, unequivocal, definitive truthful construct: the incandescent perennial firmness of dogma against the sewage and shifting sands of the transient neo-magisterium” (here).
I continue to hope that the tone of your article was not dictated by the simple fact that I have dared to reopen the debate about that Council that many – too many – in the ecclesial structure, consider as an unicum in the history of the Church, almost an untouchable idol.
You may be certain that, unlike many bishops, such as those of the German Synodal Path, who have already gone far beyond the brink of schism – promoting and brazenly attempting to impose aberrant ideologies and practices on the universal Church – I have no desire to separate myself from Mother Church, for the exaltation of which I daily renew the offering of my life.
Deus refugium nostrum et virtus,
populum ad Te clamantem propitius respice;
Et intercedente Gloriosa et Immaculata Virgine Dei Genitrice Maria,
cum Beato Ioseph, ejus Sponso,
ac Beatis Apostolis Tuis, Petro et Paulo, et omnibus Sanctis,
quas pro conversione peccatorum,
pro libertate et exaltatione Sanctae Matris Ecclesiae,
preces effundimus, misericors et benignus exaudi.
Receive, dear Sandro, my blessing and greeting, with best wishes for every good thing, in Christ Jesus.
+ Carlo Maria Viganò
I am a convert to Catholicism.
I thought that one of the hallmarks of the faith was that the clergy did not openly criticize their superiors.
I guess I was wrong. 🌷
LikeLiked by 1 person
These unhappy comments by Monsignor Viganò are constitutive of Schism and Heresy.
Well, Jabba, Archbishop Viganò’s reply to Sandro Magister makes very good sense to me and it echoes much of what Bishop Athanasius Schneider wrote in his call for a Syllabus of Errors re Vatican II in 2011. I would not be so quick to accuse him of schism and heresy, especially as he has stated quite clearly that he does not wish to separate himself from Holy Mother Church.
To find ‘Princes of the Church’ who in their statements and actions regularly border on the schismatic and heretical with impunity (to put it mildly), you need look no further than to Germany (to name but one obvious example) and take your pick!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Look folks let’s cut to the chase! You have the same access to pertinent information that I’m locating and discerning as to its validity. I’m also depending on God Almighty in the Holy name of Jesus Christ allowing revelatory inspiration and insight to reach me and hopefully as many others in this dire situation quickly. We are on the precipice and much of what I see Archbishop Vigano saying as being forthright and necessary as the plan in motion currently is global and comprehensive, which is to enslave the entire human race to serve Satan himself! The Devil has had plenty of time to design his plan and patiently wait for the ripe opportunity to present itself. He infiltrated the Church long ago and Vatican II was a prize catch opportunity to create or lay the ground work for the final nail in the coffin and seize control of the Church. Biblical prophecy makes it clear that this would happen and Satan would put at the head of the Church in place of Peter and all subsequent Popes the Antichrist who would declare himself as being God!
Here is what I wrote on the 5th in my blog,-What follows is the complete article of this title “Something Is Rotten In America,” written By Ray DiLorenzo —— Bio and Archives—July 4, 2020, which is the most concise and well laid out piece of journalism to date that I’ve found that is both completely legitimate and an honest reporting of the facts about the COVID-19 staged pandemic which is only a piece to the puzzle that was hidden from the public and indeed the world for many years now in plain sight! Many of our elected and appointed officials have been part of a giant global criminal conspiracy like nothing this world has ever seen which is happening in the most advanced highly technological era ever! This means that the old George Orwell science fiction novel “1984” is now happening for real, as these hideous people are seeking to thrust the planet into totalitarianism which will be ruled by this group of elite and most sinister humans to have ever walked the earth! Big Brother in the novel is what we have heard bantered about in the last several years called “Deep State” which most of us were not too concerned about because we were gravely misinformed by our own media outlets while being manipulated by just about anyone in a position of power or authority; and most people have been good little “sheeple” just swallowing what they are fed vis-a-vis the MSM hook line and sinker!
So what I just wrote in my blog on the 5h as you can read was how I thought what DiLorenzo the other writer was saying in his article actually aligned perfectly with all of my own sentiments and research, but, moreover my spiritual intuition from Jesus Christ in my heart that the nightmare has already begun and Biblical prophecy is absolutely real and Spot-On. What this author says here is precisely coalescing around this one central theme or concept about humanity that I wrote in my reblog intro for his most astute article, how I also for months have seen this all coming! This following statement that I wrote about on the 5th just came to my attention in an email regarding yet another writer’s overview of the global crisis unfolding in real time. Just to make it clear here is my statement again followed by today’s article title. “This means that the old George Orwell science fiction novel “1984” is now happening for real, as these hideous people are seeking to thrust the planet into totalitarianism.” Then here is that articles title that came to me today in an email notice; “Breaking News: Covid19 Exposed As Globalist Hoax To Usher In Orwells1984 – Viruses Are NOT Contagious!”
The reason I mention all of this is that it to me correlates precisely with what Archbishop Vigano is driving home as to why he is speaking out about this crisis in the Church!
Here I quote author DiLorenzo, “In writing this article, I had to constantly remind myself that what is happening in America today is not an outlandish work of fiction that few people would find conceivable, but a harsh reality that is happening now. On one hand, I am fortunate to be a witness to history, but on the other hand, sick at heart that this could happen here, the country I love..
It is not hyperbole to say that we are witnessing the culmination of decades of massive corruption. It is so fantastic in size, scope, and evil as to be worthy of the most heinous crime organizations that have ever existed.”
“Mass Murder, Treason, Insurrection, Sedition” Ray DiLorenzo —— Bio and Archives
So my brothers and sisters, we see clearly by world events and circumstances as for example the blatant treasonous criminality that has taken over the US Government with many highest ranking individuals claiming they are Catholics, but, are the farthest thing from that and are indeed Satanist’s or the term going around Luciferians and Illuminati, that I had a direct run in with over the last dozen or so years. These are people who have decided it’s better to rule in hell than serve in heaven. These simultaneous circumstances that are so conflicting in the Church presently began in earnest back at the time of the Vatican II council like the Archbishop has “bravely” pointed out! And, the current crisis of governance in the US Congress simultaneously is not accidental but orchestrated by the same diabolical entity that has manipulated the Roman Catholic Church, the true Mother Church, on earth that Jesus Himself told Peter to build; is happening now to bring on the final crisis and battle between Heaven and Hell, Armageddon is real and on the way pronto!
Allow me to quote the Archbishop here to focus on my point of what I see happening. “Unlike many bishops, such as those of the German Synodal Path, who have already gone far beyond the brink of schism (…) I have no desire to separate myself from Mother Church, for the exaltation of which I daily renew the offering of my life.”
“And those who fell into this deception did so because, loving the Church and the Papacy, they could not imagine that in the heart of Vatican II a minority of very organized conspirators could use a Council to demolish the Church from within; and that in doing so they could count on the silence and inaction of Authority, if not on its complicity. These are historical facts, of which I permit myself to give a personal interpretation, but one which I think others may share.”
Here Archbishop Vigano I believe focuses on a CRITICAL point for all to take to heart!
“A Truth that, when it is integrally proclaimed, cannot fail to be divisive, just as Our Lord is divisive: “Do you think that I have come to bring peace on earth? No, I tell you, but rather division” (Lk 12:51).
“You will say to me that these are the positions of extremists, and that virtue stands in the middle, that is, among those who consider that Vatican II is only the latest of an uninterrupted series of events in which the Holy Spirit speaks through the mouth of the one and only infallible Magisterium. If so, it should be explained why the conciliar church was given a new liturgy and a new calendar, and consequently a new doctrine – nova lex orandi, nova lex credendi – distancing itself from its own past with disdain.”
“This would be enough to understand how much damage has been caused by the deliberate adoption of a language that was so murky that it legitimized opposing and contrary interpretations, on the basis of which the famous conciliar springtime then occurred.”
He says it quite clearly how there has been a plan of “DECEPTION” in place for a long time and I say the evidence that is supporting this statement is correct and overwhelming. He also points out the severe damage that’s been done and is being done to the Mother Church that I see not by coincidence is happening within America’s government of the People One Nation, and here is the key that always made America Great and “The Envy” or a grand prize for Satan to own, over any counties government system; “under God.” This is the time for Satan to usher in human totalitarian control vis-a-vis the NWO Communist China Party in conjunction with the Great America corrupted government to finally have the world bowing to Satan and the Antichrist who will appear! I see the current Pope, Francis, as having done nothing but facilitate this process making him the heretic and an antichrist agent!
God bless you!
Brother in Christ Jesus,
PS I see that it is fitting, to reblog this fine article of yours, or perhaps this evening to write this as a new blog quoting these passages by the Archbishop, and I appreciate your understanding in this most vitally urgent matter before all of us who have faith in our Lord Jesus Christ. Amen.
Yep, even St. Paul had to confront St. Peter. The heretic Arius was a bishop. It becomes necessary to accuse our superiors of heresy when they teach things not in line with the faith. St. Robert Bellarmine has a famous passage where he says that it’s perfectly licit to defend oneself against the pope if he comes at you with a sword. He continues, if it is licit to defend your body from the physical attacks of a pope, it is also licit to defend yourself against the pope when he attacks your spirit with falsehood.
The only thing one can’t do is leave the Church.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Pingback: It’s No Coincidence – Zero Lift-Off
Calling for an Ecumenical Council of the Church to be “revoked” is blatantly schismatic, including because it is a declaration of abandonment of communion with the Holy Father Pope Paul VI who promulgated the teachings of Vatican II.
It is Heretical against the constant teachings of the Councils that all are subjected to all Ecumenical Councils.
The so-called “Old Catholics” are in schism for their rejection of Vatican I.
This is no different.
Thanks for the explanation. We converts need mentorship and guidance. 🌷🤗
LikeLiked by 2 people
For clarification, respect of authority is a hallmark of the Faith. But it is the duty of the bishops to protect their flocks, and if this means contradicting the Holy Father where he has erred, then so be it. However all things should be done in charity. We as laymen should be especially careful to respect the Pope. It is not the privilege of the laity to publicly criticize the Pontiff, we should leave that to our good bishops.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Where does the good Archbishop imply he desires to separate himself from the Church?
Thank-you for the clarification.
Yes, all things should be done in charity, for sure.
We remember what St. Paul said in Corinthians about how our Lord sees us if we have no charity. 🌷😁
LikeLiked by 1 person
That was an article in itself! Long read. Easily on the same page as me though. Francis is ushering in the anti-c as you said, and that, in biblical terms, (among other reasons) makes Francis the False Prophet of Scripture. Just to be clear.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Hi again. Oh I see this clearly we are in the most unprecedented time in earths history and not by accident or coincidence but purely biblical prophecy and God’s plan unfolding exactly the way He foretold us it would. I caught on to Francis when I starting seeing cracks in his approach to issues and then the subsequent failure to address key issues forthrightly but to instead be like some progressive Obama turn the Church into a political took for the left or radical departure from the conventional standards of Catholicism. But what really worried me was when he came to America to address he US Congress and his direct linkage with the UN becoming part of the political beast and all of this went in hand with his not responding to a letter I sent to him which I know arrived a few years ago requesting his advice regarding Deep State, Freemasons Illuminati oppression in my locale that I had a direct run in with in which they nearly killed me but did turn my life upside down while still carrying out an agenda to benefit a group of highly toxic criminal corruption and power that has done not only damage to me directly attacking me in plots one that caused chemical injury to my lungs but more importantly my community as well entire State. I didn’t even get a letter of acknowledgement about such a horrible situation from him or his staff which is a dead giveaway. No true Pope would ignore such an unusual and sincere letter that I wrote very eloquently from my heart of hearts unless he was a damn beast which he is and a very evil man! We are no doubt in the latter days and I have faith in God He is the only reason I’m still alive and able to take care of myself and have the determination to be ready to serve Him when He wants me to. But, it’s also very sad and painful now to face the fact that this world is going to hell in a hand basket very fast and complete devastation could be a blink of an eye away or it can be a long protracted time of horrific tribulation of unimaginable suffering and that is the one scenario that I pray won’t play out because i believe it would be so much more merciful of God to end the misery quickly and being all love I tend to think He won’t allow things to go that far, so I have hope. Our human race is seething with unimaginable and filthy rotten sin to its core which is too much to live in I feel. My first article brushes on this matter I wrote to the Pope about and indeed was one of the main reasons I started to Blog, after I got an article published in the local paper only because I used to know the publisher back when I was a News Photographer but that was the only article that the powers that be were going to allow in that paper or that I was going to be allowed to get published in the area period. I do see Francis as the falsehood that Muhammad was in his time to concoct the evil ideology that he did I too feel Francis is up to the same ulterior designs all fed by the most diabolical evil from Satan himself. This all tells us that the anti-c is here and I stumbled across something that mentioned that he would have been born around 1960 but to me that wouldn’t matter as much as the truth that he is ready to take his position soon to usher in the final conflict or Armageddon. The thing I remember in Scriptures that bothers me is how it says in Revelation how fierce and horrible times would become that if those days were not shortened it would be too much to bear even for the elect! I’m just a low down sinful man like anyone but I take credit for knowing in my heart I have always loved Jesus in spite of any of my sins and I think of Dismus on the cross next to Jesus Himself how He loved Jesus a man condemned to die for being apparently a bad man or criminal and yet God’s mercy is always greater than His judgment for those He loves! And I know I came from a good beginning always being a good heart and kind to a fault which I still am. I recently broke down so bad when a dove I had rescued on my property had seemed to be recovering during the pandemic but then a miscalculation on my part caused the dove to suffer and die that gentle little bird that I wanted so badly to see fly away free and happy again, which broke me up to pieces. I mean I really and still bothered by it weeks later now. Then I can leave it to God and say I know His awesome omnipotent power can right anything so that is fine in the end but I think from this to the scene of all the Unborn being ripped apart and even experimented with now having hearts removed while alive without any anesthetic is only the work of Satan through human minions doing evil to an innocent baby like that is intentional to lash out at God and His children. I have to be honest that for this alone I see this world has come to the point that it’s not fit to continue. I really pray that God please hurry and help us and I cry for it! A consecrated woman of the Church told me several years back that I was attacked for a reason, it was no accident that it occurred on North American Martyr day and that someday I would know why it happened the way it did. Thanks for the interest and i just decided to open up I’m not even too sure why but I do tend to talk too much when i decide to do it for whatever reason. God bless you.
By the way I woke up toward 3 am much too early again only have a few hours’ sleep the night before, and just got back to catching up online so I feel I’m here when you just sent this message for good reason. It just came in as I was taking care of a couple of files and getting ready to hop back to bed.