In perfect conformity to the official Acts of the Second Ecumenical Council of the Vatican...

Mgr Luciani [later Pope John Paul I] retained his devotion as well as his faith in the privileges and prerogatives of the Virgin Mary, founded on the teaching of the Fathers, the Doctors and Magisterium of the Church.

Whilst many bishops read with an indifferent eye the blasphemies of Modernists who denied Mary’s perpetual virginity, Mgr Luciani firmly defended this signal privilege of the Immaculate Mother of God. For example, in his Homily of 12 September 1969:

“Her virginity, during both conception and childbirth, is a miracle that surpasses the laws of philosophy and biology: we profess it by an act of faith, based on God’s evidence […].

“Matthew and Luke expressly say that Jesus was born ‘of the Holy Spirit’. Can one go along with the ‘Dutch Catechism’ and interpret this phrase as follows, namely that Jesus, unlike any other person, is the son of the prophecies and promises inspired by the Holy Spirit over the centuries preceding His coming? Doubtless one can, but only on this condition: that in company with the Gospel, in company with the antique Symbols of the faith and the Magisterium of all time, we add that Jesus was engendered without the intervention of man and that He ‘was born of the Virgin Mary.’ ”

“The preface of the Blessed Virgin expresses it thus:

‘Father, through the working of the Holy Spirit, Mary didst conceive Thy only Son; and, ever intact in Her virginal glory, didst shine forth over the world the eternal light, Jesus Christ, Our Lord.’

“This is the style employed by the Fathers who, to tell us how Jesus came forth from His Mother’s womb, leaving it intact and without causing His Mother any inconvenience or suffering, all had recourse to the following examples: Christ came out of the sepulchre and appeared to His disciples gathered in locked rooms; a ray of light passes through crystal without breaking it; thoughts pass from one mind to another.”

The quotation on which Mgr Luciani ended his homily shows that he had noted down and retained Pius XII’s most explicit words concerning the Virgin Mary’s Universal Mediation of Grace:

“If Peter holds the keys of the Church, Mary holds the keys of God’s Heart; if Peter binds and unbinds, Mary also binds with chains of love; She also unbinds with the art of forgiveness. If Peter is the Guardian and Minister of Indulgences, Mary is the magnanimous and skilful Treasurer of the Divine favors. Those who wish for Grace and yet have not recourse to the Virgin Mary to accomplish their journey, are wanting to fly without wings.”

Janet Smith denies Virginity in Birth

Janet Smith responds to Alice von Hildebrand’s critique of Christopher West

Lima, Peru, Oct 22, 2010 / 01:04 am (CNA).-

Smith also discussed the debate surrounding whether or not dwelling on the details of Christ’s birth displays an inordinate curiosity.

“Von Hildebrand’s response to West’s likening the birth of his son to the birth of Jesus is curious. She believes it is incorrect to think that Mary may have expelled a bloody placenta. Pregnant wombs have placentas,” Smith wrote. “Did not Mary’s? Would it be wrong to think it might have been bloody? Christ’s body was covered with blood when he died, was it not? Scripture itself makes reference to Mary’s womb and breasts; is the placenta really so objectionable that it could not be mentioned?

·         Louis Tofari 1 comment collapsed CollapseExpand

Our Lady did not expel a placenta; the Virgin Birth (hence, no blood) was miraculous and did not take place in the normal manner. Such has been related by numerous saintly writers and theologians.

Replying to Louis Tofari

Dear Mr.Tofari,

The "virginitas in partu" (virginity in giving birth) is not just a "pious tradition"...it is a Catholic Dogma "de fide divina et catholica" - which must be believed by "Divine and Catholic faith," infallibly proposed by the ordinary and universal Magisterium; whose denial on the part of Janet Smith is therefore - formally heretical and presumably malicious: she cannot be excused on account of ignorance. The specific contents of this Catholic dogma are as follows: non-rupture of the physical virginal integrity (I omit the biological term "ex reverentiam"); the absence of labor pains; AND...the "sine sordibus" - the absence of the biological accidents of natural birth: placenta, umbilical cord, etc. Janet Smith's blasphemous expression, "...pregnant women (sic-!) have placentas," just indicates her degree of hatred for Our Lord Jesus Christ and his Most Holy and Immaculate Mother...[cf., Pius XII, in Mystici Corporis: "...it was a miraculous birth." Vatican II: "..whose birth not only did not diminish his Mother's virginal integrity, but augmented it;" repeated by John Paul II in his catechetical and Marian discourses...]

Alfredo Cardinal Ottaviani, the Pro-Secretary of the Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office of the Inquisition during last five years of the pontificate of Pope Pius XII (he continued in the Holy Office and in its successor in the post-Conciliar Church, the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith until his retirement on January 8, 1968), was an unflagging foe of the concept of "religious liberty" being promoted by an unapologetic Americanist, Father John Courtney Murray, S.J. He wrote a a masterful treatise against this lie of Modernity that was popularized first and foremost in the supposedly "free" United States of America:

“Here the problem presents itself of how the Church and the lay state are to live together. Some Catholics are propagating ideas with regard to this point which are not quite correct. Many of these Catholics undoubtedly love the Church and rightly intend to find a mode of possible adaptation to the circumstances of the times. But it is none the less true that their position reminds one of that of the faint-hearted soldier who wants to conquer without fighting, or of that of the simple, unsuspecting person who accepts a hand, treacherously held out to him, without taking account of the fact that this hand will subsequently pull him across the Rubicon towards error and injustice.

“The first mistake of these people is precisely that of not accepting fully the "arms of truth" and the teaching which the Roman Pontiffs, in the course of this last century, and in particular the reigning Pontiff, Pius XII, by means of Encyclicals, Allocutions and instructions of all kinds, have given to Catholics on this subject.

“To justify themselves, these people affirm that, in the body of teaching given in the Church, a distinction must be made between what is permanent and what is transitory, this latter being due to the influence of particular passing conditions.

“Unfortunately, however, they include in this second area principles laid down in the Pontifical documents, principles on which the teaching of the Church has remained constant, so that they form part of the patrimony of Catholic doctrine.

“In this matter, the pendulum theory, elaborated by certain writers in an attempt to sift the teaching set forth in Encyclical Letters at different times, cannot be applied. ‘The Church,’ it has been written, ‘…takes account of the rhythm of the world's history after the fashion of a swinging pendulum which, desirous of keeping the proper measure, maintains its movement by reversing it when it judges that it has gone as far as it should...’

“From this point of view a whole history of the Encyclicals could be written. Thus in the field of Biblical studies, the Encyclical, Divino Afflante Spiritu, comes after the Encyclicals Spiritus Paraclitus and Providentissimus.  In the field of Theology or Politics, the Encyclicals, Summi Pontificatus, Non abbiamo bisogno and Ubi Arcano Deo, come after the Encyclical, Immortale Dei."

“Now if this were to be understood in the sense that the universal and fundamental principles of public ecclesiastical Law, solemnly affirmed in the Encyclical Letter, Immortale Dei, are merely the reflection of historic moments of the past, while the swing of the pendulum of the doctrinal Encyclicals of Pope Pius XI and Pope Pius XII has passed in the opposite direction to different positions, the statement would have to be qualified as completely erroneous, not only because it misrepresents the teaching of the Encyclicals themselves, but also because it is theoretically inadmissible.

“In the Encyclical Letter, Humani Generis, the reigning Pontiff teaches us that we must recognize in the Encyclicals the ordinary magisterium of the Church: ‘Nor must it be thought that what is expounded in Encyclical Letters does not of itself demand assent, in that, when writing such Letters, the Popes do not exercise the supreme power of their teaching authority. For these matters are taught with the ordinary teaching authority, of which it is true to say: He who heareth you heareth Me. (St. Luke 10:16); and generally what is expounded and inculcated in Encyclical Letters already belongs for other reasons to Catholic doctrine."

“Because they are afraid of being accused of wanting to return to the Middle Ages, some of our writers no longer dare to maintain the doctrinal positions that are constantly affirmed in the Encyclicals as belonging to the life and legislation of the Church in all ages.  For them is meant the warning of Pope Leo XIII who, recommending concord and unity in the combat against error, adds that "care must be taken never to connive, in anyway, at false opinions, never to withstand them less strenuously than truth allows." - Duties of the Catholic State in Regard to Religion.

Letter to William Cardinal Levada, Prefect, SCDF

09/04/2012

His Eminience William Cardinal LEVADA, Praefectus

Your Eminence,

Please receive and review this <<Open Letter>> with all the gravity and seriousness which the subject matter, by its very nature, demands. The author, who is trying to remain anonymous,

[Note: even anonymous denunciations - as you are well aware - can possess probative canonical force, cf., 1961 Letter of Sacred Cong. of Religious to Superiors of Seminaries and Religious Orders] has already communicated with the Vicar General of the Diocese of Charleston via a third party; as well as sending an electronic mailing to the Bishop of Charleston via the “webmaster” of the Catholic Diocese of Charleston.

Unfortunately, none of this has not produced any canonical effect whatsoever - to the best of his/her knowledge - proportionate to the offense committed by the herein mentioned lay personnel involved in the public scandal.

The author hereby wishes to initiate the added step of a formal delation of the entire subject matter to the Sacred Congregation for the Faith.

Sincerely, 

Anonymous, a practicing Roman Catholic.

                             <<Matrimonia Satanica Sodomia>>

Open Letter to the Ordinary of the Catholic Diocese of Charleston,

AND the Faculty and Staff of Cardinal Newman High School, which

falsely claims to be “Catholic.”

The dissenting positions of so-called“practicing Catholics” within the

Diocese of Charleston are quite well known with regard to specific

moral norms: namely, Catholics who publicly admit the sinful

practice of contraception; and, even more to be

condemned, intrauterine and in-vitro artificial fertilization [Dr

Edward MOORE, Carolina Center for Fertility - CMG (04/09/12)];

sterilization by Catholic doctors [Dr HULECKI- no longer in

Columbia - vasectomies]; culminating in removal of nutrition and

hydration from unconscious or comatose patients in so-called

“Catholic” hospitals. [Sisters of Charity Providence follow “State

Directives on Elective Removal of Artificial Nurtrition and

Hydration” - CMG (04/09/12)]

To this may be added laity and even Deacons who remain active

members of local Masonic organizations. [Deacon Malcom

SKIPPER, Shriners - CMG (04/09/12)]

All of these persons continue to remain in good ecclesial standing and sacrilegiously partake of the Most Holy Eucharist on a regular basis.
This impiety is nothing new and has been cancerously eating at the
Church’s vitals for the last 35 or 40 years.

What is new and unheard-of is the more or less tacit and/or open

approval of the homosexual sub-culture and its corresponding public

manifestations by recent Bishops of Charleston, clergy, religious, and

laity who approve of the evil Vice of Sodomy, whether by

silence, evasion, or consent; and a notably feeble defense of the

objective moral order revealed by God and infallibly proposed by

the ecclesiastical Magisterium for twenty centuries, up to and

including, the Pontificate of Benedict XVI.

For example, the Synod of Charleston, promulgated in 1995 by the ultra-liberal and feminist-friendly Bishop David Thompson, states as follows: “…the Church in South Carolina is sensitive to the presence of homosexual persons in the life of the Church and civil society.”
This is absolutely equivalent to giving these individuals rights of citizenship in the Church and society which they do not possess as practicing homosexuals.

Their right of citizenship in the Church arises from their Baptism and Confirmation; their right of citizenship in society arises from this being the country of their birth. In these things, they differ
from none of the other faithful.

In the January 15, 2012 edition of The State newspaper, in the Section entitled, “Weddings and Engagements,” to the great sorrow and indignation of devout Catholics, many non-Catholics, and
even some (orthodox) Jews; one reads the following:

“A celebration of marriage (sic) was held on Saturday, January 14, 2012, at 2pm at the Reformation Lutheran Church in Columbia…Both of the grooms’ fathers served as best men, (this writer’s emphasis), as well as Mr. Robert Dale Watson…” (writer’s emphasis in bold).

“Mr. (Michael,not Robert) Watson is the son of Mr. and Mrs. George Ralph Watson (Athletic Coach - Emeritus of Cardinal Newman High School - not in original text)…He is a graduate of
Cardinal Newman High School…(sic)

Robert Dale Watson is an active Faculty/Staff member of Cardinal Newman High School which falsely - and therefore fraudulently - claims to “…form Students in the Catholic
Tradition.”

“Some people conclude that their tendency (i.e., homosexual

orientation or affect) is so natural that it justifies in their case

homosexual relations withinn a sincere communion of life and love

analogous to marriage…(cf., Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of

the Faith, PersonaHumana, Declaration on Certain Questions

Concerning Sexual Ethics, [1975], n. 8).

“…which at least implicitly would constitute an alternative to
marriage…even worse when dealing with ‘couples’ of the same sex, something unknown in the cultural histories of people and in law,
even if they are not presented as ‘marriage.’ ” (cf., Pontifical Council for the Family, Eucharistic Coherence of Politicians and Legislators, His Eminence Alfonso Lopez Cardinal Trujillo, October 7, 2005)

[for…]

“…homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered and can in no case be approved of. ” (cf., Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Persona Humana, Declaration on Certain Questions Concerning Sexual Ethics, [1975], n. 8).

Therefore, it is absolutely necessary that (Mr) Robert Dale Watson be immediately terminated from the employ of a Catholic institution which at least claims to be such…

If this is not done, the internal coherence (ad intra) and external Evangelical witness (ad extra) of the Catholic Diocese of Charleston is placed in serious doubt and peril…and all this to the grave detriment of the good of the Church -both local and universal;
as well as the glory and honor of God and the salvation of souls, which is the supreme law of the Church.

Adnexa

“The document Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship:A Call to Political Responsibility from the Catholic Bishops of the United States was developed by the chairmen, in consultation with the membership, of the Committees on Domestic Policy, International Policy, Pro-Life Activities, Communications, Doctrine, Education, and Migration of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB). It was approved by the full body of bishops at its November 2007 General Meeting and has been authorized for publication by the undersigned.
The Introductory Note was developed by the chairmen of the USCCB Committees on Communications; Cultural Diversity in the Church; Doctrine; Domestic Justice and Human Development; Catholic Education; Laity, Marriage, Family Life, and Youth; International Justice and Peace; Migration; and Pro-Life Activities.

The USCCB president and the nine chairmen were authorized to sign and release the Introductory Note by a vote of the Administrative Committee at its September 2011 meeting, and the Note has been authorized for publication by the undersigned.

Msgr. Ronny E. Jenkins, JCD
General Secretary, USCCB

“22. There are some things we must never do, as individuals or as a society, because they are always incompatible with love of God and neighbor. Such actions are so deeply flawed that
they are always opposed to the authentic good of persons. These are called “intrinsically evil” actions. They must always be rejected and opposed and must never be supported or
condoned.

“46. The human person is not only sacred but also social. Full human development takes place in relationship with others. The Family - based on Marriage between a man and a woman- is the first and fundamental unit of society and is a Sanctuary for the creation and nurturing of children. It should be defended and strengthened, not redefined or undermined by permitting same-sex unions or other distortions of marriage."

“The Holy Father called for “Eucharistic consistency” on the part of every member of the Church:

<< It is important to consider what the Synod Fathers described as Eucharistic coherence, a quality which our lives are objectively called to embody. Worship pleasing to God can never be a purely private matter, without consequences for our relationships with others: it demands a public witness to our faith. Evidently, this is true for all the baptized, yet it is especially incumbent upon those who, by virtue of their social or political position, must make decisions regarding fundamental values, such as respect for human life, its defense from conception to natural death, the Family built upon Marriage between a man and a woman, the freedom to educate one’s children and the promotion of the common good in all its forms. . . .(Sacramentum Caritatis, no. 83).>>