Putin wprost o NWO, pedofilach i satanizmie: będziemy bronić chrześcijańskich wartości.

Putin wprost o NWO, pedofilach i satanizmie: będziemy bronić chrześcijańskich wartości.

Przemówienie świąteczne Prezydenta Rosji Władimira Putina zostało całkowicie przemilczane przez tzw. „zachodnie” media. Poniższy fragment tłumaczy dlaczego….

Putin(…) Kolejne wyzwanie dla rosyjskiej tożsamości jest związane z procesami, które można obserwować poza granicami Rosji. Są to polityka zagraniczna, moralność i inne aspekty. Widzimy, że kraje euro-atlantyckie (w tym Polska-admin) podążają drogą, która zaprzecza czy wręcz wyklucza ich korzenie, wliczając w to korzenie chrześcijańskie, które tworzą bazę Zachodniej Cywilizacji.
W tych krajach podstawa moralna i wszelkie tradycyjne wartości są odrzucane – narodowe, religijne, kulturalne – nawet tożsamość płciowa jest odrzucana i relatywizowana.Taka polityka traktuje wielodzietną rodzinę na równi z partnerstwem homoseksualnym, a wiara w Boga jest równoznaczna wierze w szatana.

To nadużywanie i wyolbrzymianie politycznej poprawności w tych krajach prowadzi do tego, że należy poważnie rozważyć możliwość legalizacji partii, które będą mieć na celu propagandę pedofilii.
Wielu obywateli państw europejskich w rzeczywistości wstydzi się swoich religijnych przynależności, a nawet boi się o nich mówić. Chrześcijańskie święta i uroczystości są likwidowane, czy też ich nazwy są „neutralnie” zmieniane, tak jakby ktoś się miał wstydzić świąt chrześcijańskich. Tą metodą ukrywa się głębsze moralne wartości tychże uroczystości.

Kraje te próbują narzucić siłą ten sam model na inne kraje, globalnie. Jestem głęboko przekonany, że jest to bezpośredni sposób na degradację i prymitywizację. To prowadzi do głębokiego demograficznego i moralnego kryzysu na Zachodzie.

Jaki może być lepszy dowód na moralny kryzys społeczeństwa niż utrata jego funkcji rozrodczości? Niemalże wszystkie rozwinięte kraje zachodnie nie mają wystarczającej rozrodczości by się utrzymać na tym samym poziomie, nawet z pomocą migrantów.

Bez wartości moralnych, które są zakorzenione w Chrześcijaństwie i innych światowych religiach, bez reguł i moralnych wartości, które się ukształtowały i rozwinęły przez millenia, ludzie nieuchronnie utracą swoją godność.

I myślimy, że prawa i naturalna jest obrona tych moralnych wartości.

Należy respektować prawa każdej mniejszości do samookreślenia, ale jednocześnie nie można dopuścić do tego by prawa większości nie były respektowane.

W tym samym czasie gdy ten proces następuje na poziomie państwowym, na poziomie międzynarodowym zauważamy próby stworzenia jednobiegunowego i jednolitego modelu świata, w którym usuwane będą instytucje prawa międzynarodowego i suwerenności narodowej. W takim jednobiegunowym, zunifikowanym świecie nie będzie miejsca na suwerenne państwa. Taki świat potrzebuje tylko wasali.

Za: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Apmy9H9YVPo

Advertisements
Posted in Uncategorized | 9 Comments

(Fictitious) Open Letter of All SSPX Priests to Bishop Fellay

Kim, czym jest NOWE Bractwo Piusa X w tym w Polsce?

https://zascianekporusza.wordpress.com/2017/10/13/kim-czym-jest-nowe-bractwo-piusa-x-w-tym-w-polsce/

Kim jest Pan Gajowy Marucha?

https://zascianekporusza.wordpress.com/2017/09/21/kim-jest-pan-gajowy-marucha/

-admin

 

(Fictitious) Open Letter of All SSPX Priests to Bishop Fellay

Having read Bishop Fellay’s subversive Cor Unum letter of June/2017, we noted not a single voice of opposition from the 600+ priests of the SSPX dispersed throughout the world.  Even so recently as six years ago, such a letter would have caused such a firestorm within the Society, that Bishop Fellay’s survival of the forthcoming General Chapter would have been endangered. 

But today, not a word.

Those days seem so long ago!

Consequently, Sodalitium Pianum took it upon itself to create a fictitious response which might have come from the SSPX clergy in better days.

Open Letter to Bishop Fellay from All Priests and Bishops of the SSPX

June/2017

Greetings Your Excellency-

You will understand that we are shocked by the recent letter you sent to us in the June/2017 Cor Unum, which is subversive of the security of our apostolate, and of our fidelity to the Catholic Faith.

Your letter begins by noting “some troubles which have broken out in our Fraternity in recent months,” but in acknowledging this, you do not look to the cause, but only to the effect (i.e., the “troubles” of which you yourself are the cause).  Apparently, you would administer an aspirin to smother the symptoms, rather than addressing the disease which produces them.

By recalling to us that the statutes reserve the addressing of Roman relations to the Superior General, we see in it a control measure designed to snuff out any opposition to the ralliement.  We recall that before the ralliementbecame public, Society priests regularly wrote and spoke on the matter of Roman relations, without opposition from Menzingen or the various District headquarters, for the most part.  Obviously, you do not want a contrary voice to highlight your treachery, and hence your appeal to this rule.  But since the moral virtue of obedience is subordinate to the theological virtue of faith, we calmly disregard your appeal to it, and execute our duty to shepherd the faithful by recalling to them from the pulpits, from the bulletins, from conferences, and articles, why signing a deal with unconverted Rome will imperil their souls.

What madness has possessed you that Your Excellency has lost sight of the clear and present danger to the Faith in Rome?  Only a fool would be persuaded (as your letter expects us to be), that there is a new climate in Rome which somehow wants Tradition (even as it persecutes it?).

Regarding the recent letters of our colleagues in France, we are greatly perplexed -and angered- that you would recount to us the 2006 General Chapter declaration’s decision that “bringing to public light a dispute with authority is grounds for dismissal from the Society.”  Fr. Rioult has “brought to light” your secret dealings with Rome, and the agreement to “proceed by stages toward a practical accord” with the modernists, and we cannot but wonder if the 2006 statute you refer to was perhaps one of these “preparations” (designed to smother opposition when the time arrived for you to show your true subversive intentions).

But per Your Excellency’s admonition, we do take your warning seriously, and recognize that those who possess the fortitude to oppose this treacherous reorientation are likely exposed to the danger of expulsion: Your Excellency has readily resorted to this tactic (which Fr. Pfluger rejoiced in as a “purification” of the SSPX in his Flavigny conference to the Brothers).  We fully understand that you must rid our Fraternity of opposition before Rome will accept your signature.  This is common sense.

But Heaven forbid that we should be cowards under the guise of prudence or obedience, while our sheep are led by you to the Roman slaughterhouse!

You tell us that we are only imagining we are defending Tradition.  Yet how closely our observations regarding the ralliement matched those of Your Excellency, in Letter #63 (et al)!

Talleyrand!

You pretend it is our opposition which weakens the Fraternity by fracturing its unity, rather than your reorientation of it in preparation for the Prelature.  Rank dishonesty!  Was it not Your Excellency who explained to Benedict XVI (modernist) that you were willing to endure heavy opposition and division for the sake of reaching a practical agreement, when you sought an explanation for Rome’s last minute rejection of the Declaration you signed?

YOU are the cause of the disunity in the Society, a consequence of having left the prudential path of Archbishop Lefebvre (and we all know how it will end).

It has not gone unnoticed, however, this focus Your Excellency has, on unity over doctrine (a hallmark of the conciliar church which you are already dissolving our Fraternity into).  But this does not surprise us: The bishop you expelled to facilitate your betrayal has already observed that “the crisis in the SSPX resembles in all aspects the crisis in the Church after Vatican II.”  A separate response could track all these similarities, but to what end?  Your Excellency has already stated his determination to Rome to plow ahead, regardless of the rupture it causes in the Society.

Yet you presume to lecture us on disrupting the unity of our Society?

Your Excellency will forgive us then, when we smirk at your disingenuous assertion that “it is impossible to use an evil and unlawful means without causing damage to the common good” which rather tends to condemn Your Excellency, and not us.

As for your “Five Points” recalling the nature of our relations with Rome, we perceive in them signs of Your Excellency’s own modernist infection (no doubt caused by too frequent visits to the leper colony):

In point #1, Your Excellency makes a couple troublesome statements:

Firstly, you allege that the crisis in the Church began at least as far back as the time of Pope Leo XIII.  What kind of nonsense is this?  There was no crisis at that time because the authorities suppressed the revolutionaries, whereas today they are in collusion with them.  In fact, they are them!

You will forgive us if we suspect in Your Excellency’s words an attempt to stretch the crisis back to the 1800’s so as to exonerate the Second Vatican Council, and avoid identifying it as the cause of the present crisis.

Rome has taken the same posture for the last 50+ years, and this is precisely why the crisis worsens daily.

Later in the same paragraph, Your Excellency says “these errors, called false interpretations…”  Why not call them errors simply?  Why reduce them to mere “false interpretations?”  Did not 2 years of staged doctrinal discussions (the promised videos of which we have yet to see, six years after the fact!) clearly show these to be errors?  This equivocation clearly betrays the intellectual confusion (at best) in Your Excellency’s mind (or heart?) as to whether these errors are really errors properly so-called.  Perhaps it is like Your Excellency recalled in the CNS interview years ago, that people really don’t know what the Council actually taught?  Perhaps only the illumined understand these are not really errors after all (even though your own negotiators clearly thought so!)?

In point #3, Your Excellency rightly recalls that Archbishop Lefebvre’s prudential position regarding Rome is what saved the Society (and the faith of all time), yet today you freely leave it, on the specious pretext of “changed circumstances” (for the better) in Rome?  What mad man would believe this?  Rome has never been more mired in modernism; there is not a single conciliar bishop or cardinal in the entire world who professes, unambiguously, and without equivocation, the faith of all time.  No, not even your modernist friends like Bishop Athanasius Schneider, et al.  All these men are men of Vatican II: Pozzo, Burke, di Noia, Hoyos, etc.

In point #5, Your Excellency needlessly points out to us that Archbishop Lefebvre never wanted to separate from the Church, as though our continued resistance to the conciliar reforms was tantamount to precisely such a separation.  This is more revealing of Your Excellency’s thinking, than ours.  For our part, we have no need of being told this.  But for your part, you seem to fear this imagined danger (and the scrupulous propaganda you permit to drip from the pens of Fr. Simoulin, Schmidberger, Pfluger, Nely, Robinson, et al reinforces this suspicion).

The implicit argument is that the position of the SSPX for the last 29 years has been schismatic.  You won’t come out and say it, but you fear it.  Neither can you avoid the conclusion (as you do later) by appealing to changed circumstances: Has not Rome always been ready to approve the Society, if only it would comply with Roman demands (as it has been doing all throughout this long ralliement process, at least since the 1997 GREC meetings)?  Did not the modernist Rome of the 1970’s tell Archbishop Lefebvre that one Novus Ordo Mass, and all would be forgiven?  Did not the modernist Rome of the 1980s/1990’s tell Archbishop Lefebvre that one act of humility and apology from Archbishop Lefebvre to John Paul II, and everything would be rectified?

Yes, Your Excellency, we perceive in you the belief that the Society is schismatic, and a consequent desperation to solve that “abnormal canonical situation.”  In this, you have fallen into the same legalism which causes all once-traditional communities to “run to Rome” (as you once wrote).

Could you not simply resign, and “reconcile” yourself?  Or, do you perceive an imagined duty to take as many as possible with you into Rome, to assuage your scrupulous conscience, for having lead a group of illegal priests who have been administering invalid confessions and marriages since at least the suspensions of 1976?

Your Excellency considers that a line of conduct regarding Roman relations was proclaimed at the 2006 and 2012 General Chapters, without, however, mentioning that the latter contradicts the former!  Instead, you attempt to deceive, pretending that 2012 is the further development of 2006, as though contradiction could be development!

The principles do not change, but the circumstances can change.  We do not disagree.  But we do perceive that in the reality of the situation in Rome and in our Society, it is the principles which have changed, and the circumstances have remained the same!  The principle of action from the 2006 General Chapter was that there will be no practical accord with unconverted Rome.  The circumstances were (and still are) that Rome remains mired in modernism, and actively promotes it throughout the universal Church.

If in good faith, Your Excellency is so delusional that he can neither perceive nor admit this reality, then Your Excellency is clearly not competent to safely guide our Fraternity through this crisis, and we demand that you (and all those who share your delusion or non-comprehension throughout the various District offices) resign his/their position(s) immediately.  Such blindness cannot but lead us into the rocky shoals, upon which we may already be stranded.

Your Excellency states that “for nothing” do we want to leave this line of action by which we recognize the authorities in the Church, but refuse their errors.  We quite agree, but notice that Your Excellency is doing precisely that in such measure as your branding campaign tends to stop refusing the Roman and conciliar errors.  It is an intermediate step along the pathway to acceptance of those errors: First we stop combating them, and this, combined with a continuous emphasis on respecting Roman authority, over time, causes us to begin accepting the errors (after all, nobody is any longer telling us they are errors!).

If I could attend a meeting of the Grand Orient Lodge of Freemasonry, I would imagine precisely such a strategem to subvert, then capture, Tradition.

Your Excellency uses an interesting way to describe the traditional position of our Society: “We affirm our submission to legitimate authority, and we almost systematically refuse to follow it.”  This description, accurate so far as it goes, almost seems like a criticism, as though in refusing “systematically” to follow authority, we are at fault for doing so.  This in turn implies a denial of the “systematic” way in which the conciliar revolution has been implemented throughout the universal Church, in liturgy, catechetical instruction, sacramental rites, canon law, etc.

Has Your Excellency lost his grasp on the breadth and seriousness of the crisis in the Church?  It seems so.

At last, Your Excellency -we hesitate to say it, but we must- shows himself a traitor in declaring that “it is a false and very dangerous approximation to say ‘we do not need a delegation for marriages;’ ‘supplied jurisdiction for confessions is enough for us…’”  Implicit in this condemnation is an acceptance of the opposite proposition: “It is true to say that we need conciliar delegation for our marriages;” “supplied jurisdiction for confessions is notenough for us.”  How can our priests and faithful but wonder about the validity of their past sacraments with such nonsense coming from Your Excellency?  And leaving aside that issue, how can Your Excellency pretend that there is nothing dangerous about subjecting the control of marriages to diocesan authorities?  We see in the Pastoral Guidelines of Cardinal Muller that the norm is that conciliar authorities will give the delegation, and receive the consent of the marriage parties, with the SSPX priest performing the Mass later.

If at present Rome is permitting the delegation to go to Society priests, is it not only to calm the storm?  An exception to the Rule (which is only to be implemented “insofar as is possible”)?  Do you think in a few years (presuming the SSPX has not already officially sold out by then) this clever Roman implementation of these Pastoral Guidelines will still be giving the delegation to Society priests?  Of course not!  By then, SSPX priests will no longer trust their supplied jurisdiction, and psychologically depend on receiving the delegtion, even when the Pastoral Guidelines begin to be implemented as they were intended: With the conciliar priest receiving the consent of the faithful.

Just as in all other areas of the ralliement, the Romans progress gradually, with patience (as they continuously explain to you!), and only expect further steps over time.  But Your Excellency knows and understands just as well as us, that the day is coming when conciliar reception of vows in SSPX chapels will be widespread and “normal.”

Your Excellency is in a state of open collusion with our enemies, because Your Excellency does not perceive them as such, but as friends.

Insanity!

But our mouths fall wide open when we read Your Excellency endorse the Ecclesia Dei movement, which our Founder condemned as betrayers!  Consequently, you too are a betrayer for endorsing betrayers!  How can we avoid recognizing this?  The same excuse is always offered by the defectors from Tradition: “Imagine the good we could do.”  It was condemned in Dom Gerard by the priests of Campos, who later fell for it, and were condemned by…Your Excellency (who, falling for it today, is condemned by us).  And the contradiction is supposed to be glossed over by a pretended change in circumstances?

Yet Bishop de Galarreta acknowledged at Albano (late 2011) that there have been no substantial changes in Rome which would justify ours!

Is the fact that Rome is offering more supposed to demonstrate that the heretics want us to fight their heresies?  That they want Tradition?  Get real!

Consequently, we do not perceive the voice of the Good Shepherd in your strange reasonsings, which seem to come more from the wolf than the shepherd.  Quite honestly, Your Excellency, you sound more like the Superior General of the Fraternity of St. Peter, than of the SSPX, in arguing along these lines.

The arguments you are making have always come from Ecclesia Dei quarters.  Why not say that you believe Archbishop Lefebvre was wrong, instead of making a fool of yourself by hiding behind a transparent untruth that circumstances and conditions in Rome are improving such that now is the time for an agreement (something you said back in 2001, 2012, and 2017).

“Rome is always getting better,” we are to believe, while the opposite is manifestly the case.

Certainly, your words relativizing supplied jurisdiction demonstrate that you have lost faith in the excellent and impregnable apologetics with which the SSPX has justified recourse to it over the last 40+ years in the exercise of the apostolate.  When did that happen to you?  Decades ago?  Why must we be made to share your scruples?  Would it not suffice for you simply to go back to Rome with your like-minded lieutenants?  Or, have your Roman captors trapped you with spiritual blackmail, withholding your “spiritual pardon” until such time as you completely betray the fort of Tradition?

And this “slow evolution of conservative circles” you witness, what of it?  There have been circles of conservatives since the Council itself!  Your Lordship has lost sight of the fact that both liberals and conservatives (i.e., more reserved liberals) are no different than the Jacobins and Girondins in the French Revolution: Both supported the revolution, with the only difference being the Jacobins (e.g., Bugnini, Congar, Kasper, Kung, Francis) wanted to go farther and faster then the Girondins (i.e., Benedict XVI, Athanasius Schneider, Pozzo, Burke).

But does not +Athanasius Schneider support and organize ecumenism?  Does not ++Burke think to defend marriage based upon the doctrine of JPII, and in reliance on post-Vatican II theology, and in a way which carefully avoids attacking that hellish Council?  Does not BXVI pretend that the pre- and post-conciliar magisteriums can be reconciled through Hegelian dialectic and the synthesis of opposites (i.e., the hermeneutic of continuity)?

Your “growing conservative movement” is largely illusory, except to the extent that it is populated with former traditionalists like yourself.  But were it ever to become a reality, it would present a greater danger to souls for its errors being the more difficult to identify.  Pick your poison.

As for the many alleged Nicodemus’s within the Ecclesia Dei communities who believe the position of Archbishop Lefebvre is correct, does not their very presence within those compromised and captured communities demonstrate the opposite?  They have not at all understood, much less agreed with, Archbishop Lefebvre.  Their reasoning, position, and doctrine, is completely based on legalism, placing -like Your Excellency- canonical “regularity” above the primacy of doctrine, and willing to let everything else fall by the wayside (even the Mass), so long as the Roman stamp of approval be retained:

They have accepted religious liberty (as Your Excellency implicitly did in the CNS interview); they declare there are no errors in the documents of Vatican II (Your Excellency says we accept 95% of it); they celebrate the Novus Ordo (Your Excellency is reported to have stated in Rome that had Archbishop Lefebvre seen the new Mass celebrated that way, he never would have opposed it); they practice ecumenism (Your Excellency promotes the GREC meetings, and the forthcoming tardcumenical Catholic Identity Conference); etc.

Has Your Excellency noticed that you now seem to have more in common with Ecclesia Dei than with the SSPX?

In what way are these “Nicodemus’s” in agreement with Archbishop Lefebvre?  At best, while thinking to compliment your new friends, you are actually calling them cowards, as well as calling into question their honesty and integrity, by making this argument.

And were we not to raise our voice, we would be in danger of sharing the same fate [take note, SSPX priests!].

If Your Excellency thinks to see “an improvement on the conditions imposed on us by Rome,” we wonder what is the relevance or importance of what is being offered?  Archbishop Lefebvre said to Cardinal Ratzinger, “Eminence, even if you give us everything – a bishop, some autonomy from the bishops, the 1962 liturgy, allow us to continue our seminaries – we cannot work together because we are going in different directions. You are working to dechristianize society and the Church, and we are working to Christianize them.”

Why does this same state of affairs (i.e., working in opposite directions) today not concern you, as it did our Founder?  Shall you uncrown Him as well?  As the Jews said when they planned to murder Our Lord, “It is expedient that one Man die?”

Only an imbecile would fail to recognize that so long as the Society and Rome are working in different directions, there can never be any fruitful collaboration.  Consequently, if there is collaboration, it is because both sides are really working in the same (wrong) direction.  And Your Excellency’s endorsements of the Ecclesia Dei communities, and the allegedly allied “conservatives” in Rome, tell us all we need to know about which direction this collaboration is taking:

Your Excellency is steering our Society from Tradition into conservative conciliarism.

But to perceive that Rome is offering more, because they are “improving,” is to be in danger of solipsism.  Has not Rome itself admitted that their goal is to bring you around to the Council?  They must be well pleased with the progress YOU have made in this regard!  It is not antichrist Rome becoming more Catholic, but Your Excellency becoming more liberal, which causes you this delusional perception.

Rome has learned that the longer they withhold the Prelature from you, the more Your Excellency is willing to concede and compromise in order to attain it.  THIS is the reason for the infernal “coma” which robs the SSPX of a final death; a death which will surely come, but not before much more suffering.  The SSPX must atone for its former sins, you see, and the humiliating compromises Rome extorts will be our purgation, and their protection and security.

“Yes, yes, Cardinal Muller, we must take more time indeed; we must find this “deeper conversion” which is attained through these continual and too frequent contacts (and which is only arrived at upon total acceptance of Vatican II!).”

We raise our eyebrows at your claim that we need to wait and see if the Roman authorities will “confirm the relativization of the Council,” when it is the exact opposite that is happening: Your Excellency is relativizing Tradition, supplied jurisdiction, and the need to resist the Roman errors!

But to pretend that the Roman authorities have shown “benevolence” by ensnaring Tradition is almost to declare oneself an accomplice, working against Tradition from within, for its final destruction.

Contrary to Your Excellency’s belief that Tradition has much to gain from a practical accord with unconverted Rome, yet again, it is exactly the opposite which is true: The truth has nothing to gain, since it is already in possession of itself, but it does have everything to lose by repudiating the prudential advice of Archbishop Lefebvre, and subjecting itself to its enemies and manipulators, and if the SSPX has been in a state of qualitative decline since his death, it is precisely because the inheritance he left has been disregarded by those who think themselves to know better, such that the light is more and more being placed beneath the bushel basket.

We will all of us likely yet live to see the folly of that hubris.

Your Excellency will be remembered by history as the man who destroyed the SSPX.

Sincerely,

600 priests of the SSPX

 

http://sodalitium-pianum.com/fictitious/

Posted in Bishop Faure, Biskup Williamson, Kościół Walczący - Święta Tradycja, Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Setna rocznica fatimskiego cudu Słońca

 

100th Anniversary of the Miracle of the Sun at Fatima

100 years ago today, in the presence of Freemasons, naysayers, and devout faithful alike, Our Lady performed a public miracle in the presence of 70,000 people, to give credence to her private revelation to three Portugese children, in order that that her message and warnings for the Church and world would be heeded.

The sun came down from the sky, danced as a sphere, emitting dazzling colors across the landscape, instantly drying the clothes of all present (who had moments before been soaked by a rain shower), and the muddy ground upon which they stood, zig-zagged, and returned to the sky.

100 years after the fact, amazingly, the hierarchy of the Church has yet to comply with the request of the Mother of God to consecrate Russia to her Immaculate Heart, and the Church and world have suffered much because of it.

On this auspicious date, we wish to inspire fidelity in all to the requests of Our Lady, and encourage you to read the amazing 3-volume masterpiece of Br. Michael of the Holy Trinity (once recommended by Bishop Williamson not only as the greatest work on Fatima, but also the best history of the 20th century), titled:

The Whole Truth About Fatima

Our dire world situation, and the crisis in the Church,are inextricable without fidelity to Our Lady’s request for the Pope and bishops of the world to consecrate Russia to her Immaculate Heart.

So long as they refuse, the Church and world will continue to sink into the muck and mire of neo-paganism, and prepare the stage for the advent of the Antichrist.

Meanwhile, some amazing photos and newspaper coverage of the Miracle of the Sun:

http://sodalitium-pianum.com/100th-anniversary-of-the-miracle-of-the-sun-at-fatima/

 

Posted in Kościół Walczący - Święta Tradycja, Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Konferencja Biskupa Williamsona w Kanadzie – 2017 rok.

 

 

Conference by Bishop Williamson

 

A conference given by His Excellency Bishop Williamson in April 2017 at St. Joseph Defender of the Church chapel in Aldergrove Canada.  He was invited there by Father Girouard. The attached documents were given to the parishioners and these notes were referred to by +W frequently. Therefore, in order to get the most out of the conference, please read the documents carefully and refer to them while watching.
Part 1
https://youtu.be/3rYQrqcESM8 

Part 2
https://youtu.be/18AQs0HfpOQ

Schemas 
http://tinyurl.com/y72nsnnl

Many thanks to the kind parishoners of St Joseph’s chapel for sharing this.

God bless you
Posted in Biskup Williamson, Uncategorized | 1 Comment

Ksiadz Morgan opuszcza Angielski SSPX

 

 

Fr Morgan escapes the Titanic

Image result for fr morgan sspx
The news that Fr Paul Morgan has eventually decided that “enough is enough” is music to the ears of many. A highly respected priest amongst his peers it is hoped that his courageous move may encourage others who have the same concerns.
His move to (at present) the traditional capuchins means that the two most senior English SSPX Priest’s (along with Fr King, and not forgetting H.E Bishop Williamson) have shown enormous courage by not allowing themselves to think of their own comforts over truth.
Posted in Biskup Williamson, Kościół Walczący - Święta Tradycja, Uncategorized | Leave a comment

“Mój Kościół nie miesza się do Polityki”

„..cztery grupy…..Wykończyć Andrzeja Leppera… ….trzecia grupa to Kościół Liberalny..” – A. Lepper

Ostatnie godziny przed śmiercią Leppera. Kierowca lidera Samoobrony przerywa milczenie

https://zascianekporusza.wordpress.com/2017/09/05/ostatnie-godziny-przed-smiercia-leppera-kierowca-lidera-samoobrony-przerywa-milczenie/

DMWX80-X0AADtw6

https://polakortodoks.wordpress.com/2016/08/09/cztery-grupy-wykonczyc-andrzeja-leppera-trzecia-grupa-to-kosciol-liberalny-a-lepper/

 

Posted in Uncategorized, Wróg Polski, Zdrajcy Świętej Tradycji | Leave a comment

Czyja Rosja?

Semperparatus said

 

Podsumujmy fakty…w okresie od dojścia do władzy Putina(2000 rok) do dzisiaj…władze rosyjskie:
1.Dopuściły i nadal dopuszczają do ludobójstwa na własnym narodzie(co najmniej tolerowanie,jeśli nie popieranie obecnie obowiązującej ustawy aborcyjnej…czego skutkiem jest śmierć w łonach matek ok.25 milionów maleńkich Rosjanek i Rosjan(ok.1,5 mln rocznie)
2.Zdradzają swoich(realnych albo potencjalnych) sojuszników…np.Libia w 2011 roku ,Donbas-2014,KRL-D-dzisiaj
3.Zwalczają autentyczną narodową opozycję na własnym terenie…
4.Dopuszczają do wielkiej imigracji kolorowych(szczególnie z azjatyckich republik b.ZSRR)…na swoje terytorium
5.Prowadzą ugodową politykę wobec syjonizmu…zarówno na arenie międzynarodowej jak i wewnątrz kraju(Chabad Lubavitch)
6.Tolerują mafię Rotszylda na terenie Rosji…(Bank Rosji do tej pory jest w rękach te rodziny)
7.Mimo realnych…możliwości…nie niszczą(wraz z Chinami)dolara jako waluty światowej…a poprzez to-samych USA
Taką listę można by-zapewne-jeszcze znacznie przedłużyć…
A więc…podejrzewam…że Rosja(zresztą Chiny też) pełni rolę tzw.”dobrego”gliny…w zaaranżowanym przez diabolicznych władców tej planety…przedstawieniu…mającym na celu…wybicie większości populacji świata…a pozostałych-zamienieniu w niewolników szatańskiego systemu…Bo przecież to ZŁY jest władcą naszego upadłego świata…nieprawdaż?(Łk.4,1-13)

Filomena said

 

 

Tak to wyglada na zewnatrz, na pierwszy rzut oka. Inaczej jest jesli przeanalizujemy to co sie dzieje. W kazdej skomplikowanej sytuacji, gdzie istnieje jakas grozna sila, ktora chce sie pokonac trzeba mierzyc sily na zamiary. Nie sztuka wygrac jedna czy druga bitwe, ale sztuka wygrac wojne. Wygranie bitwy nie gwarantuje wygrania wojny. Czasami lepiej pare bitew przegrac, albo nawet zaakceptowac rozejm niz ostatecznie przegrac wojne.

Kiedy Putin przyszedl do wladzy Rosja byla juz w totalnym rozkladzie. Byla to totalna ekonomiczna ruina. Ludziom w ogole nie placono pieniedzy. Na Kaukazie znowu rozgorzal konflikt. Szykowal sie konflikt na Powolzu. Po kraju grasowaly roznorodne bandy wlacznie z islamskimi radykalami. Zabijaly lub porywaly ludzi. Putin zdolal opanowac sytuacje idac na kompromis z pewnymi grupami ludzi z ktorymi w innych warunkach pewnie by nie poszedl, wprowadzajac drobne reformy, drobne zmiany. Powoli wyprowadzil kraj z ruiny, opanowal balagan na Kaukazie, wstrzymal rodzacy sie konflikt na Powolzu i zaczal inwestowac pieniadze w armie i religie. Na dzien dzisiejszy wybudowano i odbudowano w Rosji ponad 33 000 cerkwi.

Juz w roku 2007 Putin zapowiedzial Zachodowi, ze Rosja nie podporzadkuje sie globalistom. Wtedy swiat zachodni nie wzial tego na powazne. A juz wtedy w rosyjskiej armii szla wielka modernizacja. Nikt jednak na Zachodzie o tym nie wiedzial ani w to nie wierzyl.

Przez caly tez okres Putin scigal sie z czasem. Wiedzial, ze predzej czy pozniej dojdzie do konfrontacji z Zachodem, ale lepiej by bylo zeby to nastapilo jak najpozniej. Do takiej konfrontacji trzeba sie dobrze przygotowac. Potrzebny byl czas. Wlasnie dlatego Rosja wycofala wojska z Gruzji w roku 2008. Wtedy jeszcze Rosja nie byla gotowa do konfrontacji z globalistyczna mafia. Rosja juz wczesniej wiedziala, ze na Ukrainie cos sie stanie i ze bedzie cos trzeba zrobic zeby zdobyc Krym.

Dlaczego Rosja nie zaangazowala sie konkretnie w Libie a na Ukrainie ograniczyla sie do zajecia Krymu i wsparcia Donbasu, ale tylko tyle? Dlatego, ze zeby zniszczyc monstrum, ktore dzis niszczy swiat i wywoluje wojny trzeba uderzyc tam gdzie jest jego kadlub a nie tam gdzie sa jego odnoza a ten kadlub jest tam, gdzie jest glowne gniazdo syjonistow, tym kadlubem jest Izrael. Zaangazowanie sie Rosji w wojne w Syrii, jej bliska wspolpraca z Iranem i grupami Hizbullah to najwiekszy cios zadany Izraelowi. Oczywiscie nie jest to zadna miara ostateczny cios zadany globalistom-syjonistom, ale jest to powazne podwazenie ich planow i mozliwosci.

Popatrzmy sie, co sie stalo. Globalistyczny projekt realizowany jest przez dwie nadrzedne sily, ktore sa doslownie bratem i siostra. Sa to amerykanski imperializm, ktory jest scisle powiazany z ideami syjonizmu. Glownymi ideologami amerykanskiego imperializmu sa neo-trockisci i syjonisci zwani neokonami. Ci ludzie totalnie opanowali amerykanskie rzady, caly system polityczny, ekonomie, banki, kulture itd. Do tej gry wciagneli dwie glowne sily podrzedne, dwa kluczowe bliskowschodnie panstwa: Arabie Saudyjska i Turcje. Arabia Saudyjska miala finansowac i propagowac swoj sekciarski islam znany jako wahabityzm czy salafizm, ktory mial zniszczyc wszystkie inne religie i wyprzec wszelki inny rodzaj islamu a juz szczegolnie perski szyityzm za pomoza tzw. dzihadu czyli swietej wojny. Turcja natomiast miala propagowac pan-turanizm czyli pan-turkizm. Jej glownym zadaniem mialo byc podburzanie wszystkich turko-jezycznych narodow Eurazji i Azji przeciw legalnym rzadom Rosji, Iranu i Chin. Scenariusz mial byc taki sam jak w bylej Jugoslawii. Zachodnie media krzyczaly by na caly swiat, ze biedne turko-jezyczne narody mordowane sa przez tyraniczne rzady Rosji, Chin i Iranu i trzeba cos robic by zapobiec ludobojstwu. Taki scenariusz mial prawdopodobnie rozegrac sie na Krymie.

Interwencja Rosji w Syrii nie tylko uratowala sama Syrie, ale wzmocnila pozycje Iranu na Bliskim Wschodzie – najwiekszy koszmar Izraela. W tym przypadku globalisci-syjonisci beda probowali zagrac jeszcze jedna karta – Kurdystanem. Ale tu sytuacja sie komplikuje. Projekt Kurdystan jest na reke Izraelowi, ale jest zupelnie nie na reke innym krajom w regionie a juz szczegolnie Turcji, bylemu sojusznikowi Izraela i Ameryki. W tej sytuacji dawni wrogowie: Iran i Turcja i na dodatek jeszcze inni staja sie sojusznikami.

Na dany moment mozna powiedziec, ze Putin obegral Izrael. Putin wygral bitwe, ale jeszcze nie wygral wojny. Ma przed soba jeszcze sporo bitew. Nastepna najprawdopodobniej szykuje sie na Ukrainie. Warto miec na uwadze, ze Izrael bral czynny udzial w awanturze na Ukrainie i liczyl, ze wciagnie Rosje w wojne na Ukrainie, ale Putin zawsze dziala asymetrycznie i zrobil inaczej. Wciagnal sie w wojne w Syrii i w ten sposob oslabil pozycje Izraela na Bliskim Wschodzie.

Ja wyglada sprawa z opozycja? Zalezy z ktora. Liberalna opozycja to oczywiscie totalny wrog Putina i nie tylko. To jeszcze wiekszy wrog Cerkwi. Oprocz liberalow sa tez tzw. nacjonalisci, ale tu zalezy o kim mowa. Wiekszosc antyputinowskich nacjonalistow – szczegolnie ich liderow – to ludzie zydo-pochodni. Co wiecej, wiekszosc tych nacjonalistow to roznego typu neo-poganie, ktorzy sa zagorzalymi wrogami chrzescijanstwa. Jesli ktos konkretniej przestudiuje ich wierzenia to zauwazy w nich zydowski slad, zauwazy ze niewiele maja one wspolnego z naszymi starymi slowianskimi tradycjami a sa mieszanka roznych zabobonow wlacznie z kabala i astrologia. Nic dodac nic ujac.

Sa jeszcze tzw. patrioci. Sa to ludzie prawoslawni, tradycjonalisci i monarchisci. Ogolnie popieraja Putina, bo – choc maja wiele zastrzezen do niektorych ludzi w rzadzie, szczegolnie do niektorych ministrow – to zdaja sobie z tego sprawe, ze nie wszystko mozna od razu zmienic i ze Putin nie zawsze moze isc na totalna konfrontacje ze swoimi przeciwnikami.

Bank Rotschildow ma duzo mniejsze wplywy w Rosji niz ma w Chinach. Przyjdzie moment, ze oslabnie calkiem. Gra sie jeszcze nis skonczyla.

Sprawa aborcji jest sprawa bolesna, ale nie jest to jedyna bolesna sprawa. Sam zakaz moralnego problemu nie rozwiaze, nie powstrzyma demoralizacji. Dzis mamy w Polsce zakaz aborcji a narod jest bardziej zdemoralizowany niz byl za tzw. komuny i coraz gorszy mamy stan demograficzny.

Problem aborcji oslabnie jak narod rosyjski stanie sie bardziej wierzacy, ale zeby do tego doszlo wiele jeszcze musi sie zmienic. Powoli ludzie ida w tym kierunku. Z roku na rok jest wiecej ludzi wierzacych, wiecej ludzi bioracych udzial w pielgrzymkach itd.

Ponadto na politycznej scenie Rosji pojawila sie nowa osoba,no nie calkiem nowa, bo znamy ja z Krymu. Jest to fenomenalna osoba, gleboko wierzaca, monarchistka, tradycjonalistka, ale wcale nie wrog Putina. Juz teraz cala liberalna sfora demonow syczy i kwiczy, i warczy i charczy na jej widok. Juz od ponad poltora roku liberalne media mieszaja ja z blotem, ale ona mediow sie nie boi, tak jak nie bala sie banderowcow czy mafii nakotycznych na Ukrainie. Jest nia byly prokurator Krymu pani Natalia Poklonska.

Posted in Rosja, Uncategorized | 1 Comment

Parafia i Kościół św Franciszka z Asyżu Olsztyn Kortowo – charyzmatyczne niebezpieczne msze.

 

Budynek kościoła o klasycznej masońskiej formie piramidy oraz pontyfikatu Jana Pawła II modernisty – łodzi

375239

Wnętrze posoborowego kościoła w pierwszym “błysku flesza” kamery jakby z ołtarzem, tabernakulum, witrażami ale po przyjrzeniu się odnajdujemy…, że zamiast Ołtarza Świętego jest stół; zamiast tabernakulum jest tylko coś … wbudowane w kamienne tło przypominające ogień piekielny. Wielki krzyż nad stołem jest zawieszony na jednej linie jak u wisielca; zamiast świętych witraży, widzimy modernistczny “artyzm” kolorowych szkieł; figura Św. Franciszka jest futurystyczną deformacja tej św postaci; wnętrze kościoła to hala budynku świeckiego a nie kościoła – Domu Boga.

Byłem tam i widziałem mszę, która była charyzmatyczną  , niekatolicką mszą.

Ostrzegam wszystkich studentów i mieszkańców Kortowa – chodzenie do tego budynku oraz uczestniczenie w charyzmatycznych mszach powoduje utratę wiary i jej tragiczne konsekwencje. 

 

 

DSC_7596_small

 

Doradzam, by budować Ołtarze Święte w nszych domach i tam przyjmować Świętych , Prawdziwych – Tradycyjnych Księży Katolickich:

Rozkaz Biskupa Williamsona

https://zascianekporusza.wordpress.com/2017/03/09/rozkaz-biskupa-williamsona/

JAPorusza

Posted in Uncategorized, Zdrajcy Świętej Tradycji | Leave a comment