Tag: ACBC

How does a prelate become a Freemason?

Published on by anonymouscath3 Comments

From ‘Unholy Craft’by Arnaud de Lassus

In Italy, in 1999, a book was published anonymously entitled Via col vento in Vaticano and, according to the editor the French version, “would have come from a group of high-ranking Vatican dignitaries who chose to break the law of silence.”

It is a collective work describing various disorders affecting the Holy See. The chapters are not all of equal value and some call for serious reservations. Chapter 18, The Smoke of Satan in the Vatican, deals with Freemasonry and, in four very interesting pages, explains the process used to entice prelates to affiliate to the craft.

There is a real novitiate for recruiting ecclesiastics to the Masonic order. Among ecclesiastics, there is a certain category of men in which Masonry seeks possible collaborators; these must combine certain gifts: keen intelligence, a great desire for advancement, ambition, quickness to understand and to pretend to understand nothing, willingness to serve and, if necessary, a good physical presence and a pleasing face.

When a young ecclesiastic meets these criteria … it remains only to engage him by titillating his pride.

The author insists on the secrecy of the operation which is a consideration of its success:

In this first phase it is absolutely necessary that the designated candidate remains in total ignorance of what is being set up around him. The Masonic technique requires to be revealed progressively, so that the associate discovers the secret society’s aims only gradually, as the superiors think fit.

The first contact is made as naturally as possible. An invitation to an accomodating embassy for a national festival, unexpectedly meeting someone who claims to be delighted to have met him, a prelate who asks him for something and shows his gratitude. Then comes the phase of compliments and flattery: What a treasure, such kindness, such keen intelligence … You deserve better – you are wasting your time. Why don’t we address each other less formally? …. Then one enters the phase of future prospects: I know such a prelate, such a cardinal, such an ambassador or such a minister ….I’ll willingly put in a word for you; I’ll say you are someone who deserves higher responsibilities ….

At this stage, the proposer immediately realises whether the interested party has taken the bait.

The process thus described will continue for several years, always in secret.

Gradually, the promises made are fulfilled. The pre-selected candidate notes that these were not in vain and believes it is his duty to be grateful to the friend whom he regards as his benefactor. During this time, his career progresses very smoothly without encountering any difficulties. Brilliant prospects in the service of the Church appear before him and he begins to see a position which would suit him rather well.

Then, when fired with ambition and vanity, the naive prelate has at hand the evidence of his effortless advancement, which he hasn’t yet fully grasped, and when other promotion to higher levels still beckon – it is at this stage that the explanatory phase arrives.

The recruiters explain to the candidate that:

  • If he has attained such wonderful positions, it is thanks to the discrete support of the Masonic order and its friends
  • He is free to continue to collaborate with this order, which will ensure his advancement continues.

In this very delicate phase, it is up to the prelate, in crisis, to decide which choice to make.

The desire to continue to advance, the excitement of knowing one is being introduced into the Masonic group, the fear of unavoidable revelations should he refuse to join, or, on the contrary, the vacuum he can already feel around him, the fraternal exhortation of some dignitary to go ahead, as he himself has done formerly: In a word, all this ends up convincing the prelate to follow the path mapped out for him by others without him being aware of it.

The higher one’s position, the more likely one is likely to be gripped by the fear of losing the high position one has attained. One abyss opens after another. One seeks to justify oneself.

Many prelates, thus compromised, end up by giving in and become members of the Masonic apparatus and under obligation to obey its instructions.

Thus, once infiltrated into his ecclesiastical setting, the brave Masonic novice’s first duty is to maintain his credibility by keeping his promises and, if necessary, to cast, as poseurs and hypocrites, the prelates of the place he has infiltrated.

Skilfully hooked, the new Freemason then becomes a pawn in the secret lodge’s sphere of action and is added to the others already there. His rise can now continue unabated towards the top with the help of other ‘brothers.’

This is a remarkable process, founded on secrecy, which can easily last ten years and which can be implemented by disciplined, well trained …. and patient personnel. It is undoubtedly used not only in the Curia, but just as much in the secular and ecclesiastical worlds.

Two general remarks can be made following the observations which have been made on Masonic infiltration within the Curia and on the process used for that purpose.

The presence of Freemasons in key positions in the Church explains to a great extent the doctrinal and disciplinary deviations of these last forty years. It is particularly clear in the case of liturgical reform.

As for the process that is used to produce Masonic prelates, it is very important to understand it and to make it known, because it obviously loses its effectiveness when it is known.

In conclusion, let us remain alert to the Masonic question. It is one of the keys to the current crisis, political as well as religious and, as Pope Leo XIII said in the encyclical Humanum genus,it is necessary ‘to tear away the mask from Freemasonry and to let it be seen as it really is.‘

Let us remain alert and keep faith in the Church; we know that the gates of hell will not prevail against Her.

The Church is truly a supernatural society, truly holy. The Mystical Body of Christ, the Bride of Christ, of unblemished fidelity, in the image of the Virgin Mary. Without exception, throughout the centuries, and until the end of the world, ‘She is Jesus Christ, given and communicated. That and nothing else.’

Archbishop Comensoli, won’t you ever learn?

Published on by anonymouscathLeave a comment

Catholics gushing over Archbishop Peter Comensoli’s recent slightly-bishopy comments about the sacking of Essendon’s CEO, should perhaps have remained a little more circumspect. One pro-life comment maketh not the man!

For those who may not know, Andrew Thorburn was sacked from his position as CEO of the football club due to his supposedly conservative Christian worldview. (Thorburn’s rather colourful – and less than Christian – past seems to escape the notice of the majority of commentators.)

Premier Dan Andrews continued the public pile-on, then our favourite Bishop put in his two cents worth and was suddenly hailed as the new JPII.

Comensoli’s statement was released via the Melbourne Catholic website on October 5th, then later republished in mainstream media. That was only three days before the annual March for the Babies, so it would have been reasonable to expect that the Lion of Melbourne would lead his flock of pro-life warriors through the streets to boldly protest the scourge of abortion. The Greek Bishop certainly did. And Protestant pastors, bless their hearts, were out in force. A few Catholic priests dotted the landscape, in low-key fashion.

But sadly, Archbishop Peter was nowhere to be seen. Whether the good prelate had a prior engagement, or whether he was simply putting his feet up in front of the fire at Gembrook, is something unknown to this author.

However, a pattern began to emerge after it was confided to me that His Grace was, on two separate occasions, invited to celebrate Mass for a pro-life group on October 22nd, and not only did he not acquiesce, but he did not even respond.

So, to recap Archbishop Comensoli’s track record, he:

* allows pro-abortion Dan Andrews to receive Holy Communion at a State Funeral

* employs a pro-abortion feminist in his inner circle

* doesn’t attend his Archdiocese’s biggest pro-life event of the year

* won’t celebrate Mass for dedicated Catholic pro-lifers (and impolitely won’t even answer them)

So …… maybe he’s not very pro-life after all. At least, not in any meaningful way.

But believe it or not, the comments above aren’t really what this article is about. That’s just my preambular gripe. This article is actually about an upcoming Mass to mark 175 years since the Archdiocese of Melbourne was established. In a nod to Melbourne’s multi-cultural society, the Mass features music and prayers from various nations – a Filipino Lamb of God, a Torres Strait Islander Great Amen, a Croatian Psalm, and so on it goes.

The opening hymn was specially written for the anniversary, but – get this – it was composed for the combined 175th anniversary of the Anglican and Catholic Dioceses of Melbourne. It’s a catchy little ditty about God and justice and a treaty. There’s a didgeridoo solo to make the point even clearer.

The Mass setting, including the cosmopolitan hymns and prayers, is an entirely new one called The Melbourne Mass – also jointly commissioned for the 175th anniversary of the Anglican and Catholic Dioceses of Melbourne by both churches! Yes, for use in both Catholic and Protestant churches!

Mind-boggling. (On a lesser note, how much did this – the composition of a Mass – cost the Archdiocese?? It would not be cheap. No wonder parishes are being consolidated.)

Now remember, it wasn’t long ago that Archbishop Comensoli, whilst casually suppressing a few local TLMs, said that it was incumbent upon him and all of his priests to offer the Mass worthily and decorously. And yet now he has gone ahead and had a sacrilegious Mass composed for himself and his heretical Anglican buddies.

Archbishop Comensoli, won’t you ever learn?

A couple of Melbourne’s Anglican “bishops’ – they are biological siblings. Reminds one of the old adage, “the family that schisms together, chrisms together.”

Coleridge wants all his priests to worship Mother Earth.

Published on by anonymouscathLeave a comment

In typical Masonic fashion, Archbishop Mark Coleridge of Brisbane is busy focussing on the things of this world, rather than those of eternity. Last May, even before the woeful and pantheistic Plenary Assembly, +Coleridge wrote to his priests announcing that the entire Archdiocese would be implementing the Pope’s Laudato Si’ Action Plan. This “Action Plan” is nothing other than the Catholic version of the United nations Sustainability Goals – not that it’s really possible to worship both God and the environment.

Here is the text of the letter Archbishop Coleridge wrote to his parish priests:

This week you will receive a video of my homily for Pentecost Sunday, June 5th. You might consider playing it at Masses on the day. June 5th is also World Environment Day, and the Archdiocese of Brisbane’s Laudato Si’ Action Plan will be uploaded to the Laudato Si’ Action Platform, which is the result of a collaboration between the Holy See’s Dicastery for Promoting Integral Human Development and almost 200 Catholic bodies and organisations worldwide.

The Plan commits the Archdiocese to seven years of action under seven goals: response to the cries of the earth, response to the cries of the poor, ecological economics, living a sustainable lifestyle, ecological education, ecological spirituality, community empowerment and resilience.

We are not starting from scratch. Much hard work has been done to respond to the cries of the earth and the cries of the poor for many years in parishes, schools and agencies. This Plan will build on the hard work that has been done already.

All seven goals are important but a commitment to ecological spirituality and ecological education is fundamental.

The current Plan is focused on action for the next twelve months. Various Archdiocesan agencies will take responsibility for the actions included in the Plan, but parishes will be provided with their own resources and opportunities, as well as support to take their own action locally.

In addition, parishes wanting to explore the possibility of developing their own Laudato Si’ Action Plan will be offered support to do this. If your parish does not have the capacity to develop its own Plan at this stage, support can be offered to assist you to build a commitment over time according to local needs and circumstances.

In this troubled time, the whole of humanity faces major social and environmental challenges. The Church has a part to play in facing these challenges, and we have a unique contribution to make. I strongly urge you to look at the Archdiocesan Laudato Si’ Action Plan and to make the most of the opportunities offered to parishes as the Plan is implemented. You can find out more information about the Laudato Si’ Action Plan at laudatosiactionplatform.org.

….

As we approach the day of Pentecost, may the Holy Spirit, working through us, renew the face of the earth.

Mark Coleridge, Archbishop of Brisbane. May 30, 2022.

Readers will note that “ecological spirituality” is the Archbishop’s priority as well as the “ecological education” needed to brainwash pewsitters into accepting this hogwash.

Where’s the Action Plan for solid catechesis? The Action Plan for eliminating liturgical abuse? For weeding out the sodomites from within the clergy?

They don’t exist, of course. Instead, all the Church’s energies will be put into promoting the worship of Mother Earth. But this should come as no surprise. The climate change Trojan Horse is merely the latest in a long line of campaigns launched from within the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church because there is no other way to weaken Her than through infiltration.

But the sustainably-sourced gates of hell will never prevail against Her.

Spooky start to the Plenary Council?

Published on by anonymouscathLeave a comment

Now, am I just imagining it or did something rather spooky take place during that quaint little pagan ritual preceding the Plenary’s Opening Mass?

You’ve probably already seen the video – an indigenous woman opened proceedings with an acknowledgement of the Cathedral site’s previous inhabitants, who were of course, itinerant and somehow forgot to mention those other former residents of the area – the Irish, English, Italian, Chinese, Polish, Tongan, New Zealand and so on who helped build our nation.

She went on to lecture the Catholics present about their need to learn from Aboriginal spirituality. Just as she mentioned that she was stolen from her family by the “Catholic Church” – note, not by members of that Church, who may well have been rescuing the unfortunate woman from a life of abuse – the altar cloth blew up quite noticeably, before falling back to its former vertical position.

“Listen to what the spirit is saying.”
“No, seriously. Listen.”

The video of the livestream can be found here (spookiness at around the 12 minute mark). Of course, I may be being too imaginative. (One can get away with such things on an anonymous website, after all.) Perhaps it is the talk of “male and female spirits” that has me on edge. I can imagine all those Plenary participants being exposed to demons, and then returning to the chanceries around the country with some (extra) evil spirits in tow. Or maybe it is the thought of all that smoke, “wafting through the entrance” to the church, which has been offered to devils instead of the pleasing scent of incense which should have risen up to honour the Holy Trinity.

There is another question to be asked: precisely who would even want to watch a livestream of the Plenary’s Masses? The entire event is completely irrelevant to most Catholics, who have far more important things to do than watch their hard-earned offerings being squandered on an unholy talkfest.

Just in case anyone was in doubt about the order being established at the 2nd session: the Plenary candle was lit FROM the smoking ceremony flame. That makes the PAGAN light the SOURCE of CHRISTIANITY’S light.

In her little speech, the woman makes the unusual claim that her DNA “predates Australia.” Well, it’s likely that the DNA of many people contains genetic markers that are older than that.

But, consider this: one needs to retrace only twenty generations to find that we all have ancestors in common. And another fifteen generations takes us all back to a common family.

So Adam and Eve being our common parents, we are all of the same family. My ancestors just happened to have come via Europe. And they brought some pretty fine technology, culture and philosophy along with them. Perhaps that is the acknowledgment that needs to be promulgated from now on – although I have a feeling the Plenary won’t get behind that idea. It’s simply too Christian..

Instead, the PC (political correctness) Assembly seems committed to implementing its predetermined agenda, come hell or high water. And with all those demons invited onto the sanctuary, hell is what it’s most likely to get.

No red hats for Aussie bishops

Published on by anonymouscathLeave a comment

There has been weeping and gnashing of teeth around Australia’s chanceries ever since the Vatican announced the creation of twenty-one new cardinals. Poor old Great South Land of the Holy Ghost missed on securing a single new red hat. (In all fairness, the Holy Ghost probably left these fair shores a few years ago, after being coopted by Plenary members wanting to forge ahead with their Brave New Church.)

It seems that as progressive as our bishops may be, as willing as many of them are to stoop to the heterodox levels of this papacy and openly embrace Bergoglio’s synodal dream, nothing can persuade him to take notice of Australia and bestow a Cardinal upon us.

But it is not for want of trying.

First in line is of course, Archbishop Mark Coleridge. He makes no secret of his support for the union of sodomites, for the unholy jab and for every Modernists’ current pet project, Synodality. Coleridge even preempted the Synod on Synodality with his Plenary Council – our own attempt to reform the Church in a Masonic mould. Coleridge’s love of indigenous spirituality and his Gnostic ramblings made him seem like a good bet in the Red Hat stakes.

But Archbishop Timothy Costelloe gave him a run for his money, choosing as his new office a former Freemason lodge, and opening his cathedra for the purpose of jabbing unsuspecting passers-by with experimental gene serum. Now that he’s in charge of the Bishops Conference, he is in a position to do serious damage to the Australian church. Maybe that’s why Rome didn’t want his time spent on petty Cardinal duties.

However, Bishop Vincent Long looked as though he would be perfectly suited as a Bergoglio Cardinal – he has so much in common with McCarrick and McElroy, along with a love for James Martin and all things Jesuit. Remember, Long promised to keep children safe from predatory behavior while exposing them to predatory teachers using his anti-Catholic school curriculum – that sounds like something that would really appeal to Rome these days.

It is an open secret that Archbishop Peter Comensoli considered himself in the running for a Cardinalate, and his track record certainly looked promising. He even managed to arrange a photo op with Bishop Bob – although there are some who think Bergoglio wouldn’t have been impressed by that.

Bishop Bob with our own Archbishop Comensoli.

Of course, there once was a time when orthodoxy and a stint at Sydney’s St Mary’s Cathedral was a guaranteed pathway to the red hat, but these days of relativism, nothing is certain. Perhaps prelates who were once reliably solid in their theology have something to learn from daring to make their move to the Other Side. Abandoning the unborn babies by wholeheartedly endorsing the medical treatment created through the use of their dead body parts does not impress God, nor it would seem, has it impressed the Pope.

But then, maybe His Holiness had a very good reason for deciding not to appoint any new Cardinals from Australia: since he’s planning on racking up a fair number of carbon miles in the near future, maybe he simply decided that the Australian Church could do a little ‘offsetting’ and languish without any decent leadership for a few more years.

Pope: “I will save the environment by jetting all over the world, preaching about saving the environment.” Al Gore: “Who am I to judge?”

New ACBC head has Modernist form

Published on by anonymouscathLeave a comment

It is with great regret that I inform you, dear readers, that the new head of the Australian Catholic Bishops Conference will be none other than Archbishop Timothy Costelloe of Perth. Archbishop Costelloe is no stranger to these pages, of course. His dedication to corruption, Modernism and COVID jabs is second to none, and it is fitting that he plans to take advice on his new role from the former president and fellow progressive, Archbishop Coleridge.

The ACBC’s media blog reported Costelloe’s glowing remarks about Coleridge:

“It was Archbishop Coleridge who guided our response beyond the Royal Commission, represented the Church in Australia at the global summit on sexual abuse and steered the bishops through a pandemic and a host of other challenges. Archbishop Coleridge has been a calm and considered leader locally and in the global Church and will be a trusted adviser for me in this new role.”

Sounds like the Australian Church has a bright (illuminated?) future ahead of it.

Costelloe also noted that the Church, of which he is a Prince and for whose members he was ordained in order to “preach, teach and sanctify”, still has a few things going for it – none of which, unfortunately, are spiritual benefits. He said:

“The Church in this country is an immense contributor to our society, through our parishes, our schools, our hospital and aged care, our social services and countless other ministries. As we continue to contemplate how we live out the Gospel in this age, including through the Plenary Council, I look forward to working with my brother bishops and the People of God to carry forward Christ’s mission.”

So, just another CEO of just another NGO, implementing the SDG’s of the UN and WEF. If that isn’t enough TLA’s (Three-Letter-Acronyms) for you, then here’s another:

IHS. It represents the Holy Name of Our Lord Jesus Christ, Redeemer of the world, Who was crucified and died for our sins that we may have eternal life.

May the same Lord Jesus Christ restore His Church and replace His Holy Name on the lips of all lost shepherds – those who seem to have forgotten the role for which they are so handsomely paid and for which the price of betrayal is eternal damnation.

Australia’s Bishops want Protestants to teach them how to be Catholic?

Published on by anonymouscathLeave a comment

Yes, you read that correctly. Since Protestants have been doing “synodality” far longer than we Catholics have, we need to study them to see how it’s done.

Or something like that.

Here’s what the Australian Catholic Bishops Conference put out this week:

To help better understand the place of synodality in the Catholic Church, ecumenical leaders will attend national Uniting and Anglican gatherings this month to see how synodality works in those communities.

The global Synod on Synodality has encouraged engagement with ecumenical and interfaith groups as part of the process leading towards the gathering in Rome in October 2023.

Cardinals Mario Grech, general secretary of the Synod of Bishops, and Kurt Koch, president of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity, recently said: “Conscious of our need for the accompaniment and the many gifts of our brothers and sisters in Christ, we call on them to journey with us during these two years and we sincerely pray that Christ will lead us closer to him and so to one another.”

ACBC Media blog May 4th.

So let me get this right: to learn how to be better Catholics, we need to learn from Protestants. Right.

Maybe we should send our teenagers to carjacking school to make them better drivers? Or send our daughters to Marie Stopes to make them better mothers? (Oh, I forgot – Archbishop Comensoli has already tried something like that.)

The article goes onto say that the Australian Synod of Bishops committee is sending “key ecumenical leaders” (Catholics) to the Uniting Church’s Assembly and to the Anglican Synod, which are both being held this month. This is where some of your hard-earned church-offerings are ending up, friends: sending Catholics to take notes from the Protestants.

One of the participants is a Fr Trainor, a priest from Adelaide. He said that “One of the key lessons I’ve learned is that open and friendly dialogue is at the heart of communion in faith …. The core of our communion is Baptism, which leads us to see each other as sisters and brothers in faith.”

So which is it, Father? Is it Baptism or is it “dialogue” that is the basis of our alleged communion with heretical churches? It matters not – neither would pass the Syllabus test, would they?

One good thing could come of this kind of meeting, though. If Catholics hear from their Protestant peers about the numerous difficulties involved in being a married priest, or the practical challenges of being a female priestess, or the lack of acceptance for (God forbid) an openly sodomite bishop, they just might have second thoughts about their own radical plans for the Church.

But until then, be prepared for more of this nonsense as the increasingly irrelevant Plenary movement morphs into the far more fashionable Synodality movement.

At least that’s what the Bishops are trying to convince us of, anyway.

More cringeworthy Synodality from the ACBC

Published on by anonymouscath2 Comments

Australia’s Catholic Bishops Conference must have decided that the patronising non-Catholic gibberish it inflicted on us for the Plenary Council wasn’t enough – still too many Catholics actually attending Mass, perhaps? No, apparently we need even more condescending advice, even more irrelevant talking points, all embellished with that infantile logo which has found its unfortunate way onto the promotional materials for Bergoglio’s “Synod on Synods.”

You all know what I think about that logo.

The more imaginative among you may see Van Gogh’s haystacks being blown around by the Holy Ghost as a disenfranchised crowd (from “the margins”, no doubt) turns its back on the Sun of Righteousness.

But I see a tiny, defenceless child being sucked from its mother’s womb, in order to make a toxic gene serum for the world’s fearful, clueless citizens who were encouraged by their fearful, clueless bishops.

Either way, the whole thing is a farce.

Who can actually repeat that title with a straight face? A “Synod on Synods”, indeed! It is like something straight from Lewis Carol.

We don’t see issuing from St Peter’s a (sorely-needed) “Catechism on Catechisms”, do we? Should the Holy Father compose a “Litany of Litanies”? Or should he offer a whole mass of Masses (Latin, of course!)?

Now, to be fair, John XXIII did effectively achieve an anathema on anathemas. And until recent times, the Church was known for Her tradition of tradition. But that was all in the dim, dark, unenlightened past. Now we have the Modern Methods.

We have scientific instructions that explain the way in which we should conduct our conversations, our dialogue. From the ACBC:

“Speakers work in a clockwise direction. The facilitator may nominate someone to
start, then participants can share one after the other.
• Everyone speaks for two to three minutes about what happened during their
reflection time.
• Begin with the phrase: “In my reflection today…”“

It is a brave participant who would dare to move in an anti-clockwise direction.

Survivors enter the Second Round, where a different phrase is used:

“This round will be shorter than the first. Speaking order is clockwise, as before.
• Everyone speaks for one to two minutes.
• This is an opportunity to answer questions like:
• What consoled me or struck me as I listened to my companions?
• What did I hear? What did I feel? What was the Spirit saying to me/us?
• Was I especially touched by a particular sharing?
• Begin with the phrase, “In the group I heard…and it left me feeling…” “

Dear Lord. What was the Spirit saying??

That the bishops need to be accountable to all those Catholics who are now out of work because they refused the vex? I could imagine the Holy Ghost saying that.

Or that He backed Pius V all the way when that good man announced the fate of anyone who tried to do away with the Traditional Mass?

Just ask Paul VI; he learned a bit about God’s wrath and it wasn’t very pleasant.

Consequences? [Source here.]

I know I’ve gotten off track but it is embarrassing to read what those highly-paid Catholic bureaucrats come up with when they’re working on their favourite mess: reimagining the Church.

“Discernment”, cringey prayers, cringey graphics and cringey sharing-groups from triple-jabbed ecumaniacs. Do they realise how irrelevant they are? We are over it.

Oh. There’s one more thing the Spirit might say if anyone concerned about their credibility was ever to listen to Him: if you must engage in a heterodox Modernist talkfest, then at least make the effort to get the name of your own country right.

Who needs the Stasi when we have the bishops?

Published on by anonymouscathLeave a comment

Another Australian bishop has been throwing his pandemic-acquired weight around, this time in sunny Queensland. Mark Coleridge, Archbishop of Brisbane, has decided to collaborate with the tyrannical state government by forcing his priests to get vaxxed or risk losing their faculties.

The Catholic Premier of Queensland, Annastacia Palaszczuk, affectionately known as “Stasi,” has found a willing ally in the Archbishop of Brisbane. Like Daniel Andrews and his “good Catholic grandfather”, Palaszczuk has fond memories of her Polish grandparents with their “eight photos of Pope John Paul II in the living room.” Also like Daniel Andrews, Palaszczuk is left-wing, pro-abortion, pro-euthanasia and has been autocratically bullying her subjects into following a raft of COVID mandates, including barely-voluntary vaccination.

While the two State Premiers have much in common, it is remarkable to likewise observe some similarities between Archbishops Coleridge and Comensoli: the latter fancies himself to be the Australian incarnation of John Paul II, while the former was, at one stage, the Polish Pontiff’s speech writer. But unlike JPII, neither Archbishop seems to have the strength nor the will to stand up against their secular leaders’ repressive regimes.

Despite demanding that his priests are double-vaxxed with toxic gene serum by December 15th (“Clergy not doubly vaccinated are failing in their duty to care for the faithful”), the good Archbishop states that he respects his priests’ consciences.

“I too have a conscience”, says he. At least, that’s what he tries to convince them of in his four-page letter, reproduced below.

For the time-poor, the short version is: “You have to listen to me since I am the CEO of the Archdiocesan Corporation.”

The CEO, whose hobbies include holding Zoom meetings with his staff of one.
The Stasi, seen here throwing a totally innocent Illuminati-inspired hand signal.

Yes, that’s right. The Archdiocese of Brisbane is a Corporation, so as well as owing obedience to their Ordinaries, priests must also now submit themselves to medical trials at the behest of their CEOs. From the letter:

“I recognise that having a vaccination, including the COVID-19 vaccination, is a matter of personal choice. However, I am the sole member and officer of the Archdiocesan Corporation which in civil law is the employer of Archdiocesan staff, including those working in parishes. I am therefore bound to take seriously compliance with health directions. Further, I have a legal obligation to ensure that the Archdiocesan Corporation meets its workplace health and safety obligations….“

Oooohhh. Civil AND legal obligations. But no moral ones?

The Archbishop goes on to make some sophistic claims about his duty to protect his priests, his priests’ duty to protect their parishioners and everyone’s duty to protect unborn babies from medical experimentation – oops, sorry! – he didn’t actually write that last bit because Australian bishops no longer believe in minor obligations like upholding Catholic teaching.

Coleridge did include some extracts from Canon Law which is always guaranteed to make a prelate look more credible. The fact that those Canons are twisted and misapplied is neither here nor there. (He is a CEO with Obligations, remember!)

Just take a look at the penalties Coleridge has prepared for the non-compliant priests, who are, no doubt, some of his most holy and orthodox men: the cessation of their public ministry or worse – suspension of their faculties.

“In circumstances where a priest or deacon has not complied with paragraph 1 above by 15 December 2021, I will be asking that he voluntarily stand aside from pastoral duties in his parish and from all pastoral ministry until he has been fully vaccinated. Should a priest or deacon in such circumstances decline to stand aside voluntarily, I will need to consider the temporary suspension of faculties until he fully complies..“

Does the Archbishop not realise that unvaccinated Catholics (and probably many vaccinated ones) have no problem at all with being ministered to by an unvaccinated priest? The letter continues with a tirade about medical exemptions, and makes no provision for conscientious objection – or for objecting to His Grace’s conscientiousness!

Now, it really comes as no surprise that Archbishop Coleridge has agreed to do the government’s bidding. As President of the Australian Catholic Bishops Conference – that same Bishops Conference which in 2017 approved Catholics to be Freemasons – he is more than familiar with handshake deals and fraternal cooperation. Coleridge is not even averse to using Brisbane’s churches for sexually-explicit entertainment or from pushing an heretical agenda at his pet project, the Plenary Council.

However, there may be just a little hope for Brisbane’s faithful, unvaccinated priests. It seems Archbishop Coleridge can sometimes be quite lenient when it comes to his pastors breaking the law – at least, it depends on what kind of law is being broken. If it is something on the scale of child sex abuse, he seems to be able to turn a blind eye. He can even enlist help from his pal Cardinal Cupich when the need arises. But something tells me that his unvaxxed priests will not be so fortunate.

In case there’s any doubt left as to what kind of prelate we are dealing with, here’s Archbishop Coleridge’s take on “synodality.” Given that it was St Charles Borromeo who risked contracting the plague to ensure that all Catholics had access to the Sacraments, Archbishop Coleridge unironically uses the patron saint of facing-down pandemics to promote heresy, all the while shirking his own responsibility to safeguard the souls of his flock.

The hermeneutic is strong in this one.

coleridge-letterDownload

Australian Bishops’ Conference Officially Sanctions Freemasonry

Published on by anonymouscathLeave a comment
This article appeared on Life Site News back in December of 2019 – there doesn’t seem to have been any action taken by the Australian Bishops to date.
So What does that tell us?

From Life Site News

Back in July, I wrote an article for The Remnant on a Queensland priest who publicly admits to having been a Freemason for more than a decade. While that is shocking enough, the most disturbing part of this story was that the priest claims to have a letter from the Australian Catholic Bishops Conference, giving permission for Catholics to become Masons. This permission was said to be based on the erroneous conclusion that ‘Australian’ Freemasonry is somehow different from any other form of Freemasonry.

As my previous article explained, the communications officer for the ACBC Secretariat  responded to my query with this statement:

“The Australian Catholic Bishops Conference has exchanged private correspondence with officials from the Freemasons in recent years. Fr. Costigan’s writings do not accurately reflect the contents of that private correspondence nor any policy of the Conference.”

As will become clear, that statement might be technically true, but in no way explains the reality of the correspondence’s contents.

Hiding in plain sight

Multiple phone calls and emails to Archdioceses over several months rendered little fruit – only independent Catholic news sites and the Freemasons themselves seemed interested in Fr. Costigan’s conflicting loyalties. However, a careless social media post led to the discovery of the letter online, along with the letter from the Freemasons which originally sparked the ACBC’s response.

That letter was written by the former Grand Master of Northern Territory/South Australia, Stephen Michalak to Fr. Stephen Hackett, the ACBC Secretary, in 2016. In it, Mr. Michalak sought to clarify the Catholic Church’s position on its members becoming Freemasons.

Mr. Michalak is himself a Catholic, as were the Grand Masters of Queensland and Western Australia at that time.  In his letter, Mr. Michalak expounds on the supposed virtues of Masonry, while also admitting that the Church maintains its ban on Catholics being members. He speaks of his ‘long-standing friendship’ with a former Vicar-General of Adelaide, who advised him to contact then Vicar-General, Fr. Philip Marshall.

Fr. Marshall advised him to obtain the agreement of all of the Australian Grand Masters before contacting the Church, and suggested to Michalak that he then write to the ACBC ‘seeking pastoral resolution to the present challenges as well as outlining a pathway for Catholics who are Freemasons to full participation in the sacramental life of the Church.’

Mr Michalak concluded his letter by stating his hope that Roman Catholic Freemasons will eventually be allowed to receive the sacraments without being in a state of sin.

Fr. Hackett’s response

The response from Fr Hackett is dated July 2017, exactly one year after Mr Michalak sent his enquiry. This time was needed, he writes, in order to consult with the Bishops Commission for Canon Law, the Bishops Commission for Doctrine and Morals and the Bishops Conference itself.

Without any explanation other than an acknowledgement of Mr Michalak’s glowing report of Masonry, Fr. Hackett expresses his satisfaction that ‘Australian’ Freemasonry’ is not hostile to Catholicism. However, if this is truly the case, then it is reasonable to ask why this assessment has never been made public or revealed to be the official stance of the ACBC – even though, as Fr. Hackett alleges below, the Bishops Conference came to that conclusion in 1984. Surely, if a thorough investigation involving multiple apparatus of the ACBC and which took a year to complete had actually taken place, then it would behove the Secretary to publicly disclose this fact, and to allow the mysterious 1984 directive to be promulgated.

But there is more.

Fr. Hackett goes on to imagine the Church and the Masons working in a ‘spirit of harmony’ which would be ‘informed by circumstance, need and opportunity.’ He then makes the following alarming and frankly, false, statement:

“Perhaps most importantly for Catholic members of Freemasonry, I can reiterate a directive first made by the Bishops Conference in 1984 and affirmed this year. No penalty attaches to Catholic membership of the Masonic order. The involvement of Catholics in Freemasonry is foremost a moral matter which should normally be dealt with personally and pastorally in the local parish. I suggest that where a local pastoral response is not consistent with this expectation and liturgical-sacramental participation is made difficult or refused, that this might be referred to the local vicar general or to me.

I will raise issue of Catholics and Freemasonry during the annual meeting of Archdiocesan Vicars General, next due to be held in May 2018, to ensure that they are familiar with the preferred approach of the Bishops Conference.”

Fr Hackett’s excuse – that the secrecy is necessary in case there are some Australian lodges which are hostile to the Church – does not hold water, since he provides no criteria by which to judge ‘hostility’ and given that the Church condemns all Masonry in any case.

“No local authority has the competence to derogate from these judgements”

In case there is any doubt as to the Church’s constant teaching on Freemasonry’s incompatibility with the Faith, a summary of the most recent Vatican directive on Masonry is given below. This was the 1983 Directive on Masonic Associations from the Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and it was issued after the Code of Canon Law was changed in that same year, omitting the charge that Catholic Freemasons incur ex-communication. That revision had caused confusion amongst Catholics who in some cases assumed that there was no longer any penalty attached to their holding Masonic membership. Then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger felt compelled to issue the Directive in order to dispel confusion about Freemasonry. According to the 1983 Directive:

1.    The Church’s negative judgment on Masonry remains unchanged, because the Masonic principles are irreconcilable with the Church’s teaching.

2.    Catholics who join the Masons are in the state of grave sin and may not receive Holy Communion.

3.    No local ecclesiastical authority has the competence to derogate from these judgments of the Sacred Congregation.”

That last point, regarding a prohibition on local authorities to promulgate an alternative teaching on Masonry is very pertinent in this case. For in suggesting that the Australian Bishops Conference can administer a bespoke interpretation of the relationship between Masonry and the Church, Fr. Hackett is in clear violation of the CDF’s directive. Obviously, he has also violated the first point by suggesting that so-called ‘Australian Freemasonry’ can be reconciled with the Church, and the second by failing to advise Catholics who remain Masons that they are not to receive Holy Communion.

Fr. Hackett’s claim that the ACBC directive of 1984 approved Freemasonry after the CDF’s definitive proclamation hints at an arrogance that defies belief.

Freemasonry is an “instrument of Satan”

Fr. Hackett’s assessment of Freemasonry, in addition to violating the 1983 Directive, stands in contrast with that of the many popes, bishops and laymen who have denounced Masonry since its inception four hundred years ago. In fact, there have been more than twenty encyclicals and papal bulls written on this matter by the popes alone.

The most famous of these, Humanum Genus, was written by Pope St. Leo XIII in 1884. In it, Pope Leo wrote,

“We wish it to be your rule first of all to tear away the mask from Freemasonry, and to let it be seen as it really is; and by sermons and pastoral letters to instruct the people as to the artifices used by societies of this kind in seducing men and enticing them into its ranks, and as to the depravity of their opinions and the wickedness of their acts.

As our predecessors have many times repeated, let no man think he may for any reason whatsoever join the Masonic sect, if he values his Catholic name and his eternal salvation as he ought to value them.”

In 1985, American Cardinal Law specifically debunked the idea that Masonry could be acceptable even if ostensibly not hostile to the faith, when he said: “And even though Masonic organizations may not in particular cases plot against the faith, it would still be wrong to join them because their basic principles are irreconcilable with those of the Catholic faith.”

Bishop Athanasius Schneider, in a December 2016 talk, referred to Freemasonry as the ‘Instrument of Satan,’ reminding Catholics that St Maximilian Kolbe founded his Knighthood of the Immaculata in direct response to threats from the Italian Freemasons of his day. As Bishop Schneider pointed out, reiterating the Church’s constant teaching, Freemasonry’’s goal is “to eliminate the entire doctrine of God, especially Catholic doctrine.”

Former 32nd degree Mason, layman John Salza, is just as blunt. He states that “Freemasonry is a religion that is opposed to Jesus Christ and the Catholic Church. That’s the bottom line.”

The Bishops respond

FLI contacted Archbishop Anthony Fisher OP, Vice-President of the ACBC and Archbishop Julian Porteous for a response to our queries:

Archbishop Fisher stated via his private secretary that:

 … he has no recollection of this being discussed at the Bishops Conference. The 1983 Declaration on Masonic Associations from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith makes clear that Catholics who enrol in Masonic activities are in a state of grave sin and may not receive Holy Communion. Furthermore, the Declaration expressly says it is not within the competence of local ecclesiastical authorities to derogate from this.

Further, the Archbishop said that it is his understanding that while penalties have varied, the Church has never been in favour of Catholics joining any secret organisations with quasi-religious doctrines.”

Additionally, Archbishop Fisher’s secretary drew our attention to the 1937 Plenary Council for Australia which passed a decree that prohibited Catholics becoming members of the Freemasons.

Paul Hanrahan spoke to Archbishop Julian Porteous, FLI’s Patron, who would like to withhold any comment until he has had a reply to his letter to Father Stephen Hackett MSC, asking him for clarification, especially where he received the information he has quoted. He does however endorse the comments of Archbishop Anthony Fisher.

“For there is nothing covered, that shall not be revealed”

It’s quite ironic that attempts by Catholic clergy to undermine the Church by embracing Freemasonry were undone by that ‘secret’ society advertising the fact on social media.

One day, as Jesus has promised us, all such secrets will be laid bare. But in the interim before that fearful day, there are sure to be many more betrayals revealed.

In light of the ACBC’s failure to adequately defend the Church’s teaching on a matter as fundamental as Catholicism’s incompatibility with Freemasonry, it should also be asked how any sane Catholic could expect the upcoming Plenary Council to fare any better.

Unless information to the contrary is made known by the bishops, Catholics could well conjecture that there exists in Australia a cabal of the clergy who are involved in Freemasonry, a number that is possibly not insignificant.  Knowing the sad state of the Catholic Education system, the widespread incidence of heterodoxy in Australian parishes, unfettered homo-clericalism and its attendant abuse scandal, as well as the continued failure of anyone in authority to censure Fr Costigan – a spiritual work of mercy that is the obligation of every bishop – those fears would not be unfounded.

The offices of the Bishops Commission for Canon Law, the Bishops Commission for Doctrine and Morals, the Vicars-General and the Bishops Conference itself might be a good place to start looking.