What do the Satanists want to accomplish in the Catholic Church? Exactly what they have sought in government: Decentralization of power that lasts long enough to create confusion and insert their agents, so as to later take over the central power. This has become clear now with hindsight.
We will never understand the new mass until we become aware of the elements of a Satanic mass, that is, the worship of man as God. A study of the elements of a Satanic mass is not easy if one is not part of that group, however, a brief glance at what is available on youtube reveals that their altar is a table which they dance around wearing black. The satanic altar is designed for a naked woman or a small child to be laid upon it. This is why the Catholic altar had to be changed by them; there was no way to dance around the old altar, nor the ability to lay a human being on the old altar. The satanic mass has lots of physical contact, as does the Novus Ordo Mass. Further satanic influence can be seen with the laity imitating the gestures of the priest, such as open arms when saying the Our Father, and holding the host in the hand. These are all elements found today both in the Novus Ordo and a Satanic mass.
Therefore, it is possible that the SSPX is correct in warning Catholics not to attend the Novus Ordo mass because it is offensive to God, I am very sorry to report. This is not a reason to lose your faith, but to strengthen it. As true Catholics, we must be intelligent and analytical people. This is what God asks of us in this moment, as I see it.
The only safe thing to do is to find a traditional mass, and it is slowly becoming easier to do this as more priests awaken to God’s truth and begin to see the tricks of the Jews who’ve taken over the Vatican. Jesus himself gave us an example of what to do when Jews take over the ancient church buildings. He maintained the old faith and walked away from the Temple buildings, carrying his faith with him to the people, preaching the proper way and predicting the destruction of those buildings, even as the number of faithful increased.
Author John W. O’Malley has written a book called “Trent: What Happened at the Council”. In it, one realizes that Trent was called to reaffirm traditional practices and precepts. It was not called to introduce innovations, but to eliminate them. It becomes clear that the innovations sought by ‘reformers’ [de-formers in my opinion] were all steps toward a Satanic Mass that glorifies man over God. The exact Satanic innovations that did not succeed at Trent, thanks to powerful individuals who fought them, did succeed at Vatican II and in the confusion afterwards.
Also, in studying Trent, one realizes that the innovations which were sought in the council of Trent and which were rejected, were actually introduced in certain parishes by certain bishops after the council of Trent closed, and these independent innovations were known as Tridentismo. We are now dealing with Vaticanismo II, which is independent action on the part of secretly satanic or duped priests.
At the time of the Council of Trent, it was not required to attend mass every Sunday. Even after Trent, there was no regulation on this at all, other than to receive communion at least once a year or as often as possible, depending on your circumstances. Remember that at the time of Trent, not only was the Protestant Terror at full swing destroying churches and killing priests, but many people were emigrating to the New World where a visit from a priest was a rare event.
From the book “Trent, What Happened at the Council” Epilogue p.248:
In the middle of the sixteenth century the Catholic leaders of Europe were forced, under pressure from the Protestant Terror, to ‘play the dangerous game of a council’. As the council dragged on for a seemingly endless 18 years, they came to realize with ever deeper anxiety and frustration what a treacherous game they were engaged in. It finally concluded on December 4, 1563.
What is most dangerous about a Council is the emergence of innovations in the years following the council, innovations that had not actually been approved at the Council. This happens when laws are complicated and too long to be easily published and disseminated to the public. This is the trick of Democracy and Parliaments and Councils, whereby the authority of the head is diluted through planned confusion of the laws. The more one tries to clarify the law’s dictates, the longer the document gets and the more easily it is to circumvent the law due to inability to access or assess the actual facts of the law.
The French Find Their Voice (p. 209 ‘Trent’, O’Malley)
Focus on Cardinal Charles de Guise
Since the deaths of Gonzaga and Seripando, Cardinal de Guise, whose brother was King of France, had by sheer virtue of his personality filled the leadership gap, But his prestige suffered two heavy blows. Pius IV had not, as he and others fully expected, named him legate, and Morone, the Pope’s legate who controlled the topics to be discussed, had not included him in important meetings. De Guise supposedly had no idea how deeply Pius IV distrusted him. The pope through Borromeo instructed Morone to play a duplicitous game with de Guise: to flatter him and show him every sign of respect but at the same time to conspire with Simonetta to get bishops “friendly to us” to embarrass him in public and cut him down to size. This part of the letter was written in code. (6)
In late February he received word that his brother, Duke Francois de Guise who was fundamentally King of France at the time, had been assassinated, along with the massacre of his family at an assembly at Blois, by the son of Catherine de Medici. This event jeopardized the future of Catholicism there, because Catherine and her sons were on the Protestant side. This is also the event that triggered a massive migration of Catholics to Nova Scotia and elsewhere in the New World. Cardinal Charles de Guise, the uncle of Mary Queen of Scots, took upon himself the responsibility to attend Trent to prevent Protestant innovations. This very important event in France has been completely censored from education in France and elsewhere. Cardinal Charles de Guise, besides being brother to the King, was also a strong and handsome man with a forceful and reverent character who was admired by the people and hated by the Satanists.
A new duty was imposed upon him on May 10 with the arrival at the council of a brief letter from Mary, Queen of Scots. (7) In it the Queen explained that because of the “troubled times” (inuria temporis) she had been unable to send prelates or envoys to the council. She said that the ‘Cardinal of Lorraine [de Guise], my beloved uncle,” would inform the council in detail about her situation and about the depth and constancy of her devotion to the Holy See. After Masarelli read the letter aloud, de Guise in a long oration did as he was enjoined and informed the assembly of the dire situation in Scotland and England. The incident served as a sharp wake-up call to members of the council from the Mediterranean countries that the Protestant terror in northern Europe, referred to today as ‘the Reformation’ was getting closer to their territory.
p.215: “For three hours de Guise held the attention of his audience as he developed his theme: the church had to break with nomination by secular rulers, and let itself be guided by principles found in the early church, which was election of bishops by people and clergy. In this, he voiced the opinion of many French bishops and theologians at the council.
He met immediate resistance, but continued to insist that the bishops be elected by their clergy, as in the early church, and though he was a Cardinal himself, he complained that not a single article concerned reform of the Cardinals.
After the massacre at Blois, France was nominally ruled by a boy-king but in fact by Queen Catherine who accepted Protestant precepts and sought an impossible conciliation between what was essentially Satanism and Christianity, though this was not generally understood at the time, or so it seems. The elimination of royal nomination rights which had been guaranteed the French crown in 1516 by the Concordat of Bologna became a necessity for the protection of Catholicism under a Protestant Queen who had achieved power through a massacre of the family which had most strongly defended the Catholic faith.
The opposition deceitfully sought the elimination of all old restrictions that had formerly prevented the possibility of infiltration of the church by Satanists. One method of infiltration was through marriage into powerful Catholic families.
p.225: Among Christians the rituals surrounding marriage had gradually evolved through the centuries from family observances conducted in the home. Bit by bit priests began to play a part, at the invitation of the parents or the spouses, to bless the couple or the ring or the marriage chamber or the bed. The church itself became ever more interested in having priests present to ensure that the consent was free and that the spouses were not close blood relatives. By the twelfth century at least part of the marriage rituals had in some places begun to be celebrated inside the parish church. Even at the time of the council, however, practices differed widely across Europe(36) The final decree affirmed the validity of marriages without the parents’ consent. This was essential for the crypto-Jews to infiltrate Catholic families through clandestine marriages and through forced marriages, as the monarchies became Protestant one by one. At the time, the main concern was the practice in England of forced marriages for the sake of stealing hereditary property from the victim.
- 232: The original Article 35 addressed other abuses occurring at the time of the Protestant terror. Addressed to “Catholic princes, whom God ordained to be the protectors of the faith and the church,” this article insisted on the exemption of the clergy from secular courts and jurisdictions. It forbade rulers to impose taxes on the clergy, to confiscate church property, or to prevent the publication of edited papal or episcopal documents by requiring Papal authority. It insisted on the immunity of the church building from incursions by secular police or military personnel. These were traditional claims but never before marshaled in such a coherent fashion. The article said nothing about ruler’s rights to nominate higher clergy. All of these precautions were reduced to one paragraph in the final, much weakened version.
- 234: …After the massacre at Blois, DeGuise added that the situation in France had become so desperate that half of the French bishops had already left Trent for home and that he himself could not possibly stay beyond the December Session. The result was a massive production of legislation, much of which, though of considerable importance, received no discussion on the floor of the council. Originally running several pages, Article 35 was reduced to one paragraph, its number changed to 20 and it consisted of nothing more than an exhortation to do the right thing, with no penalties for not doing so. It was Ferdinand and Philip’s envoys who applied heavy pressure to Morone to tone down the document.
DeGuise also praised the religious orders (such as SSPX) for their ministries in France and for their courage and steadfastness, to the point of martyrdom, in the present religious conflict. He said they should keep their privileges of independent action, and also condemned the practice of forcing young girls to enter convents against their will.
De Guise absolutely insisted that France had to have a decree from the council, not the pope, on the veneration of images because of the council’s greater authority in France, which is where the decree is most urgently needed.
The decree on Indulgences was short. It declared that they had been in use in the church “from the most ancient times” and anathematized those who asserted that they were useless or who denied the church’s power to grant them. Indulgences can be seen in the use of ‘sin offerings’ in the Old Testament. Then, after enjoining that their abuse had been a cause of great scandal he ordered bishops to stamp out all ‘superstition, ignorance, irreverence and all other abuses’ connected with them.
At the close of the council De Guise stepped forward to lead the assembly in a litany of acclamations celebrating all those associated with the council since its beginning, a litany that began with the three popes who presided over the Council of Trent, but included by name Charles V, other rulers, the legates and so forth down a long list.
- 249: It became clear that reconciliation with the ‘Lutherans’, in the beginning a primary goal at least for the emperor, was an impossibility. There was no compatibility between Protestant and Catholic doctrine and belief, for Lutheranism was conceived to be a destroyer of Catholicism by very definition, and Protestant doctrine was designed to be the Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing. For if anyone had truly comprehended it, they would have recognized it as pure Talmudic Judaism which is, in essence, Satanism, the worship of the human as God.
This book by O’Malley, which I purchased in a Catholic bookstore, considers the lack of reconciliation with Lutherans as a ‘failure on the part of the council’. This is an example of the extent to which Protestants and Jews have infiltrated the church. Nothing could be further from the truth or more anti-Catholic. In fact, it was only the presence of Cardinal Charles de Guise which put a stop to the plans of the crypto Jews to merge Catholicism into Satanism, which would have, of course, caused the destruction of Christ’s One True Church. Everything that Cardinal De Guise worked so heroically to prevent at Trent, was adopted at Vatican II and afterwards.
- 251: The Cardinal of Lorraine and the French bishops returned to France intent on seeing the council’s decrees made operative, but the deeply troubled political situation precluded an early and easy acceptance. Paoli Sarpi’s ‘Istoria’ is a pro-Catholic book that was translated into the major European languages and had numerous editions. The question raised was, ‘Was the council acting freely, or were the members either under duress or duped by secret agents or forced to retire after the massacre at Blois, thereby diluting opposition to the Satanists?’
All three popes who convoked the three periods of the Council of Trent, Paul III, Julius III, and Pius IV successfully repulsed every effort by the council to undertake ‘reform of the head’. Pius IV made concessions. For some ritualistic reason, the sharing of the Eucharistic cup was very important to the Satanists, and resisted by the true Catholics. Even Duke Albrecht V of Bavaria, after being allowed the sharing of the cup, withdrew it after 7 years. It was last allowed in Bohemia in 1621, withdrawn by Clement VIII. The Satanists also sought marriage for the clergy, but this was recognized as a threat to the Church hierarchy and potential for much intrigue and outside influence. The Satanists who were already inside the clergy simply continued to have children out of wedlock anyway, thus increasing the number of secretly anti-Catholics within the church.
The Satanists and Protestants insisted that a person can save himself through his own efforts, without special grace from God as a prerequisite. The Catholics believe that we must seek God’s grace first, through the sacraments, and only then can we be rightly guided in our efforts at good works. This was the key doctrinal difference between Catholic and Protestant, according to this book by O’Malley. But instead of keeping this concept simple, it was stretched out into pages of very careful language.
Meanwhile the Satanists introduced the ‘sound bite’, an advertising slogan of few words: “Scripture alone, faith alone, grace alone.” And thus was opened the first door to the alone-ness that has overcome society and is now the weakness that might be our downfall were it not for God’s loving mercy. The arguments began almost immediately, since they could not have been avoided by any means, being a strategy of the Satanists to further chip away at the edifice of Christ’s Church.
However, thanks to De Guise, the Council of Trent had the effect of increasing the strength of the Sacraments, especially the Eucharist. There was a resounding re-affirmation that under the forms of both bread and wine the sacrament contained ‘truly, really and substantially the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ together with his soul and divinity, and therefore the whole Christ’, and in this lies the heresy and horror of accepting the host in the hand which is a way of diminishing reverence for it. Also, with Satanists now illegally occupying the Vatican, one has no way of knowing if the host, whose recipe is that for Jewish matzo balls, might not contain trace elements of human remains. This will shock only those who are not acquainted with Satanic and Talmudic ritual.
The result of re-affirmation of the holy Eucharist was that after the Council more Catholics voluntarily began to receive the Eucharist more frequently than once a year, the requirement laid down in 1215 by Lateran Council IV, and not changed in Vatican II.
The Council of Trent also affirmed the apostolic origins of the sacrament of Penance or Confession in the form it was practiced beginning in the Middle Ages, that is, as a private self-accusation made to a priest, who prescribed the penance to be performed in reparation for sins and imparted absolution. This affirmation strengthened the Sacrament of Penance.
It is today misunderstood that forgiveness can occur without making reparation for sins, but reparation is a necessary part of the Sacrament. In other words, some steps must be taken to alleviate any suffering caused by the sin. This was in accordance with the ancient tradition of the sin offering of cattle which would be accepted and blessed by the High Priest and then cooked by the Levites to be shared with the community as described in the Old Testament. One can see that this type of penance kept the tribe well-fed and healthy, and thus better able to maintain a strong army to defend the community, and a healthier society for increasing the population. It is no wonder that this particular practice was chosen by the Satanists for condemnation. The sin offerings of wealthy individuals consisted of money and property that further strengthened the Catholic Church and aided in its propagation. The resulting absolution came to be called an indulgence, and abuses of it were condemned at Trent.
Another practice targeted by the Satanists was the use of Latin for church rituals. What Satanists don’t like about Latin is that it prevents them from deviously mistranslating the liturgy, which is precisely what was done as soon as the use of the vernacular was introduced by independent bishops after Vatican II. Christ condemned scribes more than any other group.
Another victory of the Council of Trent was the decree calling for a seminary in every Diocese, which was to be free to poor boys and charge tuition to the wealthy. This set the pattern for free education world-wide, administered by the Catholic Church. Our present free-education is now administered by Satanists. I urge all Catholics to inform themselves about the Sex Education being forced onto the public and Catholic schools in Ontario. It is not only shocking, but it is only the beginning and the ultimate goal of Common Core which is being deviously introduced this year in all public schools. It won’t stop in Ontario.
The Tridentine profession of Faith was a binding oath for all teachers and priests, an obligation that remained in force into the twentieth century. It was meant to prevent variations in teaching.
The Creed consisted of three parts: first, simply the traditional Nicene Creed, accepted by all main-line Christian churches and sung or recited at Mass every Sunday, the second a summary of specific doctrines decreed by the council, the third an affirmation that the holy Catholic Apostolic Church is the mother and mistress of all churches and a profession of true obedience to the bishop of Rome, the successor of Saint Peter, Prince of the Apostles and the Vicar of Jesus Christ.
The Catechism of the Council of Trent or the Roman Catechism published under Pius V in 1566 was firmly grounded in the council and contained all that had been traditional within the Church. For example:
“Many of God’s actions in the world are attributed especially to the Holy Spirit, giving us to understand that they arise from the boundless love of God toward us; for as the Holy Spirit proceeds from the divine will, inflamed as it were with love we can comprehend that these effects that are referred particularly to the Holy Spirit are the result of God’s boundless love for us. Hence it is that the Holy Spirit is called Gift, for by a gift we understand that which is kindly and gratuitously bestowed, without reference to anticipated remuneration.”
The council also dealt with false translations of the bible. A favorite of the Satanists, mistranslations had multiplied which forced the Church to implement controls which are now called ‘censorship’, a bad name that it doesn’t deserve. Considering that membership in the church and obedience to its rules is voluntary, this so-called censorship, in a truly pro-Catholic book, could as easily be portrayed as holy guidance in order to avoid error and bad influence. Many people now realize that Protestant and Jewish mistranslations of scripture, the Scofield Bible for example, have successfully mobilized Christian military support for terror regimes, real-estate theft and genocide of fellow Christians in the Middle East, based on bogus scripture.
Pope Sixtus V published his revision of the bible in 1590. In 1592 it was republished by Pope Clement III with over 3,000 ‘corrections’, declaring it unalterable and known as the Clementine edition. I have no idea where to find this bible today other than as a very expensive collector’s item. The lack of access to a true translation of scripture to English is a huge fault within the Catholic Church right now. We need access to correct information.
“When Pius IV confirmed the council’s decrees, he forbade the printing of commentaries or notes on them without explicit permission of the Holy See. Known as the Imprimatur, this one precaution has successfully protected Catholics from the type of misguidance that Muslims and Protestants are constantly subjected to by their devious leadership, in the form of misleading commentary and mistranslation of scripture.
On August 2, 1564, the Congregation of the Council was established to interpret the Decrees of Trent and continued to function for four centuries until 1966. The present collapse of the Catholic Church since 1966 illustrates the wisdom of having kept such control of Catholic doctrine. The intention of censorship was to eliminate superstitions, redundancies, scribal errors, and other inappropriate elements that had crept into the texts over the course of time. Anyone who proposes an end to this ‘censorship’ or imprimatur within the Catholic Church is highly suspect.
The missal of 1570, published under Pius V was not a new liturgy, but rather a reliable text that conformed to the best and oldest manuscripts and printed editions. The text itself is less important than the bull promulgating it, which ordered the universal adaptation of the Roman Rite unless another rite had prevailed in a given region or institution for over two hundred years. The bull forbade that anything ever be added to this edition, removed from it or in any way changed. The Tridentine missal was considered part of the Tridentine corpus. It was assumed that Latin would remain in use.
The Pope emerged from Trent with greater authority than ever, but so did the Sacraments, and this only through the intervention of De Guise. Every Pope since then has had the full understanding that the intent of the reformers was to transfer power to Bishops at the expense of the Pope. Therefore, true popes have avoided councils.
It wasn’t until 1869, when a council was called to meet at the Vatican, that the Gregorian chants were illegally replaced by the Psalms. The Psalms of David are beloved by the Jews who consider themselves to be the Tribe of David, as does their powerful mafia which operates in the United States, based in the city of Chicago. They see their special mission to take over Jerusalem within the text of certain Psalms of David. My reference for this information was a series of conversations with a famous professional assassin who was a member of this mafia, an elderly Jewish man who confided in me shortly before his death.