THE happenings of our days are supplying strong arguments that the prophecies of the Holy Scriptures are coming to their realization. Better information means better preparedness.
THE SMOKE OF THE ANTICHRIST is not available in book stores. The distribution of this book is carried out by the goodwill and ingenuity of its readers who wish to be the "fragrance of Christ for God" (II Cor. 2, 15), by sharing the light of Christ with their fellow men, in this age of general confusion brought into the world by "the world rulers of this darkness" (Eph. 6, 12).
"The Smoke of Satan entered the Church." Paul VI, 1972
"All the earth followed the beast in wonder." (Apoc. 13, 4)
Father J. Vida Elmer was born in Hungary in 1912. He was ordained for the Catholic priesthood in 1936. After his ordination, he served as religion-teacher in one of the public schools in the city of Szeged; then, in different country parishes in Hungary as assistant pastor and administrator.
In 1956, the Russian army defeated the Hungarian freedom-fighters. Cardinal Mindszenty, who after eight years of imprisonment could enjoy four days of freedom, took refuge at the American Embassy in Budapest, Hungary. That time, about 300,000 Hungarians fled the country. Among them was Father Vida Elmer. He came to the United States in 1957. He found employment in the Catholic Diocese of Albany, NY. Thanks to the Latin language, he was able to offer the ancient Latin Mass to the American faithful without any difficulty whatsoever.
In 1964, however, when the Vatican II reforms began to proliferate, he asked and received permission from his own bishop in Hungary that he might go into voluntary retirement.
In 1974, a group of traditional Catholics approached Father Elmer with a problem. The members of that group could not accept the un-Catholic innovations in the Church. Several of them stopped going to church. They said, however, if Father Elmer would serve them with the True Mass and Sacraments in the old way, they would gladly resume the practice of their Catholic religion. Father Elmer complied with their request. From that time, up until the present day, he has been serving this traditional group without interruption, offering them the blessings of the true Catholic religion.
On July 2nd, 1987, the Feast of the Visitation of the Blessed Virgin Mary, Father Vida received the episcopal consecration from the hands of the Most Reverend Bishop, Robert Fidelis McKenna, O.P. in the Chapel of Our Lady of the Rosary, in Monroe, Connecticut. Fr. Vida died in 1993.
Father J. Vida Elmer, the author of this work, is one of the approximately 65 priests in the United States adhering to the public celebration of the traditional Latin (Tridentine) Mass and ministering to the needs of the remnant faithful, alienated from their parishes by the changes following the Second Vatican Council. For the past nine years he has been shepherd for the "traditionalists" in the area of Albany, N.Y. at their house-made-chapel of St. Michael in (significantly) Bethlehem, N.Y.
And as the great Father of the Church St. Jerome retired to Bethlehem, where Christ was born, to study and translate the Scriptures, so Father Vida, retiring from the Albany Diocese and the Conciliar Church (as a Vatican prelate himself has named it), has pondered those same scriptures over the years - prayerfully, as his writings show - and despite the demands of his pastoral duties has written prolifically in the cause of the beleaguered remnant. To date he has published 60 articles (monographs) of which this booklet is the fruit. Many of them have been broadcast on the radio and printed in newsletters.
Father Vida may be said to be twice a refugee - the first time in 1956 when he escaped from the Communist recapture of his native Hungary to Austria and later to this country, and the second in figuratively taking flight from the postconciliar Church. As this little treatise shows, the shadow of the Antichrist is there to be seen. "When you see the abomination of desolation, spoken by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place - let him who reads understand - then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains" (Matt. 24:15). Those who have read Father Vincent Miceli's recent book The Antichrist may particularly profit from the bolder strokes here of Father Vida's pen.
Father Robert McKenna, O.P.
On April 25, 1982, a full-page advertisement appeared in The New York Times and in several other newspapers in major cities of the world announcing the coming of "THE CHRIST" within two months. According to the ad, this "CHRIST" would speak to mankind through a worldwide television and radio broadcast. His message would be heard inwardly, telepathically, by all people in their own language. From that time, with his help, mankind would build a new world. His presence in the world would prevent a third World War.
We know from the Scriptures that before the second coming of Christ, the Antichrist will appear on the scene. Catholics who are well versed in their religion could easily discover that the description which appeared in the ad was fitting the Antichrist rather than Christ.
According to raw estimates, somebody spent at least a quarter of a million dollars for the above advertisement. Thus, we cannot dismiss the ad as a practical joke. We can assume that it was a serious attempt to pave the way for the advertisers' "modern man . . . with love for all humanity."
By this time, however, everybody is able to recognize that the bold promise of the above ad did not come true; the Antichrist did not take over the leadership of mankind - at least not publicly. Something or somebody has restrained him, at least, for a while.
The question of the Antichrist reminds us that we are all involved in a struggle where spiritual forces and armaments are engaged in a tremendous conflict for the victory of good or evil in this world and in the world to come. "Our wrestling is not against flesh and blood, but . . . against the spiritual forces of wickedness on high" (Eph. 6, 12). The struggle is mainly spiritual, nonetheless real.
What is that mysterious spiritual force which has been able to restrain the Antichrist from the beginning of Church history up until now?
The well advertised book on The Antichrist by Fr. Vincent Miceli, S.J. gives you a detailed documentation about the present devastation of the Church. However, it does not recognize the fact that Satan could not claim these "victories" for himself as long as the invincible spiritual barrier against evil has been present in the Church. Also, Fr. Miceli failed to convey the significance of the prophesies given us by Our Lady of LaSalette in 1846. Among others, here is the sentence which still seems unbelievable to many Catholics today: "Rome will lose the faith and become the seat of the Antichrist."
The purpose of this brief treatise is to show the reader the real cause of the tragedy. THE SMOKE OF SATAN entered the church only after Paul VI had removed the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass from the Church, and introduced in its place the "New Order of the Mass" for the cult of man.
Rev. J. Vida Elmer
Bethlehem, N.Y. January 1983
Nowadays there is much talk and speculation about certain prophecies of the Bible which refer to the coming of the Antichrist before the end of the world. In his second letter to the Thessalonians, St. Paul the Apostle says the following: Before the end of the world arrives, a general revolt (apostasy) against God will take place, and "the man of sin will be revealed, the son of perdition, who opposes, and is lifted up above all that is called God, or that is worshipped, so that he sits in the temple of God, showing himself as if he were God" (2 Thess. 2, 3-4).
This person would be the Antichrist who, with the help of Satan, will have great influence over people, will make signs and false miracles to seduce those persons who have no respect and love of truth - the truth which has been revealed by God. "Therefore God shall send them a misleading influence, that they may believe falsehood, that all may be judged, who have not believed the truth, but have preferred wickedness" (Ibidem, 10-11).
From this you can see how important it is to have and hold the truth, to love the truth, to proclaim the truth. The modernist sophism does not recognize truth, only opinions. However, personal opinion is not enough for salvation. You need the truth, as Our Lord said: "The truth shall make you free" (Jn. 8, 32).
It is a dangerous situation for the soul when millions of people accept the modernist error which says: There is no absolute truth; everything is relative, every individual has the right to see things from his own viewpoint, everybody is free to pick and choose what is suitable for his enjoyment. However, the fact remains that without truth there is no salvation. ". . . whoever does not believe, will be condemned" (Mk. 16, 16).
St John the Apostle also had prophesied about the Antichrist. He said: "Dear children, it is the last hour, and as you have heard, the Antichrist is coming" (I Jn. 2, 18). "For many deceivers have gone forth into the world, who don't confess Jesus as the Christ coming in the flesh. This is the deceiver and the Antichrist" (2 Jn. 7). In the Book of Revelations he said the following: "All the earth followed the beast in wonder" (Apoc. 13, 4). "And there was given to it authority over every tribe and people, and tongue, and nation. And all the inhabitants of the earth will worship it, whose names have not been written in the Book of Life . . ." (Apoc. 13, 7-8).
Throughout the history of the Church, these and other prophecies caused speculations regarding the time of the Antichrist. With the calamitous events in the world today, these speculations have been intensified. Lectures, books, films are appearing in our days dealing with the subject of Antichrist.
Among others, there is the much publicized book of Fr. Vincent Miceli, S.J., The Antichrist. The author collected in his book the several prophecies of the Old and New Testaments which can give us enlightenment in the questions connected with the arch-opponent of Christ.
Fr. Miceli, like a good doctor, gave us a detailed diagnosis of the sickness of the Church today, but - unlike a good doctor - he failed to prescribe the proper medicine for the cure. Roger McCaffrey, President of "Drama of Truth" (Fr. Miceli has a prominent role in it) said: "Our goal is to expose Christianity's enemies . . ." As I can observe, Fr. Miceli goes along with the statement as long as those enemies can be found outside of the Church. The enemies inside, however, are another matter for him. He demonstrated with many examples the prevailing doctrinal heresy and moral decay in the (Conciliar) Church; but he was very careful not to point out those persons who were responsible for the terrible destruction of the Church, and whose removal from their offices would be a pre-condition for recovery. For doing such a thing he would have to expose the bishops and popes of the Conciliar Church whom he still regards as his ecclesiastical superiors. Exposing them would be very hazardous to his well-established career in that same Church.
His solution was, therefore, compromise; as it is always the solution of those in the Conciliar Church who love the truth, but not as much as they love their career. Fr. Miceli exposed the crime, but shielded the criminals. His covering-up toward his readers was the advice: Pray hard, and God will take care of everything - implying by this that you should not actively oppose the criminals. That is precisely what the criminals want: no opposition of any kind.
It is part of the treason when a Catholic scholar is cognizant of the treason, knows the traitors, but does not wish to convey his knowledge to the people that they might defend themselves against the criminals.
The present discourse does not intend to give aid or comfort to the enemy within the Church. Let the people know who are the traitors, where to direct their righteous indignation, and where to start the cleaning-up job.
The first question that many people put forward in this Apocalyptic age is: whether the time of the Antichrist is near, or we have already entered it.
We cannot answer this question with a positive YES - only with a MAYBE.
One thing is sure, however. When the Antichrist will appear on earth nobody, or almost nobody will recognize him as Antichrist. He himself will carefully conceal his identity. He won't certify himself saying, "I am the Antichrist. I am coming!"
- Then, how would his coming be?
Naturally, by deception. Under the protection of a satanic smoke-screen he will operate in the name of Christ. He will appear as a legitimate leader. "He gives himself out as if he were God" (2 Thess. 2, 5). He will enjoy great popularity, and a multitude will hail him as the greatest leader of mankind. "All the earth followed the beast in wonder" (Apoc. 13, 4).
We cannot know it for sure until the "man of sin", "the son of perdition will be revealed, whom the Lord Jesus will slay with the breath of his mouth" (2 Thess. 2, 8). It might be an illegitimate pope or a series of such popes.
One might think of the Antichrist as atheistic Communism, or Vatican II. However, since scriptures talk about the Antichrist as a person, we can regard Communism, or Vatican II as a gigantic satanic smoke-screen which in the hands of the Antichrist serves as a tool for deceiving mankind.
- Is the trap of deception, then, inevitable to most of us?
Not necessarily. Our Lord has given us enough grace and discerning power to recognize the traps of the Antichrist, and to avoid them.
One of the marks that alert Christians can detect around the Antichrist is popularity. Since the Antichrist cannot please God, he must please people. An unpopular Antichrist cannot be successful. He must employ means which make him pleasing to the crowd. In contrast to this, all the Apostles of Christ wanted to please God, not men. St. Paul says: "If I want to please men, I cannot be a servant of Christ" (Gal. 1, 10). St. John the Apostle says: "Every spirit that severs Jesus, is not of God, but is of Antichrist, of whom you have heard that he is coming" (I Jn. 4, 3).
- How can the Antichrist sever Jesus?
By falsifying His doctrine, i.e., the traditional teaching of the Church, and by removing the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass from the Church.
When Martin Luther severed himself from the Church, and he was to destroy the Church, he - certainly on the advice of the evil Spirit - knew what to do. He said: In order to destroy the Church, we have to destroy the Mass.
When Paul VI removed the ancient Sacrifice of the Mass from the Church, he revealed himself as a tool in the hands of Satan.
Divine providence has provided Christians from the beginning with three invincible shields against the "fiery darts of the evil one." These are the Word of Christ, the Sacrifice of Christ and the Mother of Christ. Satan cannot fool people who keep these three shields.
The tragedy of our age is that most of the people have failed to keep these shields. Thus, they have allowed themselves to become victims of Satanic deception. Without this whole-scale deception, without popular support the Antichrist could not carry out his plans; he could not put himself in the temple of God; he could not put himself above all the doctrines of the Church, and above all worship, that previously was reserved for God.
In 1962 Pope John convened the Second Vatican Council with the excuse the Church needed modernization, or - as he called it - "aggiornamento." He convinced himself that he would be the chosen prophet to launch this project of updating the Church. Probably because of this sweet illusion, he did not realize that behind his plan the trap of Satan was hiding.
When Pope John proclaimed his "aggiornamento" as the supreme law of the Church, to all practical purposes, he lifted himself above all the defined doctrines of the Church. No wonder that the secular newsmedia elevated him to the highest degree of popularity.
Then, instead of opposing communism, as his predecessors had done, Pope John XXIII stretched out a helping hand toward it - again in the name of "aggiornamento." While Catholic bishops, priests and laypeople were suffering imprisonment, torture and death by the hands of communists, Pope John invited to the Vatican, and received with full decorum, Adzhubey, a high-ranking official in the Kremlin, the son-in-law of Khrushchev, the communist dictator of Russia.
This rupture with the past of the Church entailed serious consequences. The friendly reception did not stop the persecution of Christians in Russia, but gave a big boost to communist parties in the West. People in the world have noticed the changing winds - at the Italian national elections which followed the Adzhubey visit, the Italian Communist Party gained one million more votes than it had received at the previous election. The one million vote package was a gift from the pope to communism, and a blow to the Christian government of Italy - from which blow that government has never been able to recover. No wonder that the secular newsmedia catapulted John XXIII to the highest realms of human popularity. He became their idol - the noble, gentle, saintly, lovable darling of the world. But for the Church he and his Council were a disaster.
Through the manipulations of Modernist infiltrators, the Council passed several ambiguous resolutions (some writers call them "time-bombs") which, later in the hands of liberal committees, were used for changing the Catholic religion into a Protestant sect.
Pope John, convoking the Council, told us that he acted under the inspiration of the Spirit. But today, seeing the disastrous consequences of that Council, we can be sure that his inspiration did not come from the Spirit of God.
Every dedicated Catholic will readily admit that this terrible destruction of the Church in the wake of Vatican II could not happen without the manipulation of Satan. Pope Paul VI himself testified to this when he said: "The smoke of Satan entered the Church." (We are free to assume that he meant: heresy, immorality, revolt against God.)
- How could the smoke of Satan enter the Church? How could Satan gain influence and spread his poisonous errors inside the Church, if not by deception?
The guardians of the true faith: priests, bishops and especially the Pope would never allow satanic errors to enter the Church, were not these errors disguised in innocent looking attire.
It was necessary for Satan to devise a disguise, attractive enough for contemporary men, through which he could carry his poisonous smoke into the inner circles of the Church. Satan is a good psychologist. He knows that modern men worship progress in sciences. He knows how everybody in our society wishes to keep up with progress and adapt himself to the latest developments in housing, schools, medicine, travel, entertainment, etc. which is in itself all right: e.g., you do nothing wrong if you trade in your old car or refrigerator for a new, more efficient one. (But it would be different with your Catholic religion!)
Thus, Satan, in the idea of AGGIORNAMENTO, offered an irresistable appeal to the pride of modern men, including churchmen. With the offer came a suggestion, that if AGGIORNAMENTO is useful in material things, it should be useful also in spiritual things. The AGGIORNAMENTO, therefore, was offered as a blanket-cover to all the phases of human life - material and spiritual.
Here lies the trap, the deception for human souls. If you are unable to discover this trap, you will necessarily fall victim to Satan. Nobody is immune to this danger, not even the Pope. Also (you can bet on it) Satan will reach for the top prize, which is the seduction of the Pope. Then, through obedience to the Pope, he can gain practically the whole Church. The infallibility of the Pope does not protect him from falling into sin, if he does not protect himself by using the ordinary means of sanctification.
This is exactly what happened. Satan deceived the pope. The Pope deceived the bishops, with a few praiseworthy exceptions. The bishops deceived the priests, again with a few praiseworthy exceptions. The priests deceived the people, again with a few intellectual exceptions.
Those who belong to the privileged exceptions are the building blocks of the REMNANT CATHOLIC CHURCH - as St. Paul said: ". . . at the present time there is a remnant left, selected out of grace" (Romans 11, 5).
This REMNANT CATHOLIC CHURCH carries on the true doctrine, the true Sacrifice of the Mass and the promise of Christ that the Gates of Hell shall not prevail against His Church.
In June 1980 the Vatican decided to learn how many and what kind of people in the Church were determined to keep the immemorial Latin Mass against the New Mass. Thus, Cardinal Knox sent out an inquiry to all the bishops of the formerly Latin Rite. Interesting to note that the bishops did not bother to poll the people for their choice. They sent in their answers to the Vatican Survey without learning the wish of the people.
Among the several comments that the bishops sent to the Vatican, there was one of particular interest to us. One part of the report said that most of the traditional Catholics have an "uncommon level of culture." In plain English it means that the majority of traditional Catholics possess an intellectual capacity which is higher than the average educational level.
Indeed, these are the people whom the ecumenical brainwashers could not poison with the heresy of Modernism. (Survey printed in NOTITIAE, Dec. 1981.) These are the people who do not worship the beast of the Antichrist. These are the people whose names are written in "the Book of Life" (Apoc. 13, 8).
These people were able to discover that AGGIORNAMENTO was a satanic trap which did not bring progress, but degradation to the once great Catholic Church. The corruption came from the top. John XXIII let himself be fooled by an evil spirit. It cannot be otherwise. Seeing the terrible consequences which came upon the Church from this Council, we are sure that these did not come from the Holy Ghost; they came from another spirit whose name is Satan.
- What was the point at which John XXIII committed his fatal mistake?
His mistake was that he did not heed the advice of the Apostle St. John. He did not check out the spirit which brought him the so-called "inspiration." St. John the Apostle in his first letter to the disciples gave an explicit warning regarding inspiration. He said:
"Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God; because many false prophets have gone forth into the world. By this is the spirit of God known: every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh, is of God. And every spirit that severs Jesus, is not of God, but is of the Antichrist, of whom you have heard he is coming, and now is already in the world." (I Jn. 4, 1-3).
According to this teaching John XXIII should have submitted his inspiration to the judgement of those who were experts in the knowledge of discerning the spirits. But he did not do it. Actually, some Cardinals expressed their concern that this was not the time to convoke a General Council which might produce some undesirable consequences. But Pope John did not listen to them. He went ahead with his plan. He convoked the Second Vatican Council which opened its sessions on October 11, 1962. The blanket concept of AGGIORNAMENTO blinded the Pope and bishops, as the satanic plan was put into motion.
A sound Catholic mind will understand that AGGIORNAMENTO (modernization) is justified in material things, where God has given mankind the task: "Subdue the earth" (Gen. 2, 28). But AGGIORNAMENTO is absolutely impossible in the realm of truth as revealed by God. Whoever makes an attempt to do it, will not bring forth progress, but destruction. Exactly that was what happened to the Church in the wake of Vatican II; an unparalleled destruction in her entire history.
Pope John did not live long enough to see the terrible consequences of his mistake. He died on June 3, 1963.
It was, then, the job of his successor, Paul VI, to continue the "autodemolition" of the Church. In that endeavor - no doubt - he proved himself as the greatest expert in the history of the Church.
To this end he offered two specific
1.) In the Church he replaced the cult of God with the cult of man.
2.) He removed from the Church the Sacrifice of the New and Everlasting Covenant, i.e., the Immemorial Sacrifice of the Mass.
Both of these changes were absolutely necessary if somebody wanted to prepare the way for the Antichrist.
In October 1965, Paul VI visited the headquarters of the United Nations Organization in New York City, where he declared the Communist dominated organization as "the last hope of mankind for peace." By this he publicly denied Jesus Christ who said: "I am the way, the truth and life . . ." (Jn. 14, 6). "Peace I leave with you; my peace I give to you; not as the world gives do I give to you" (Jn. 14, 27).
Paul VI had also conveniently forgotten what St. Peter the first Pope said, that beside the name Jesus "there is no other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved" (Acts 4, 12).
Paul VI evidently had more faith in the godless UN than in Christ; that is why he said that the UN is "the last hope of mankind for peace." Of course, such a pronouncement, no doubt, earned him a great deal of popularity among the newsmedia and among the Catholic masses brainwashed by the newsmedia.
When Paul VI has repeatedly heralded the "cult of man," the glory of man, as the highest ideal for progress, he literally put man "above all that is called God." (2 Thess. 2, 4).
The angelic song said: "Glory to God in the highest . . ." The ancient Psalm said: "Praise the Lord, for he is good: sing praise to our Lord, for he is gracious; it is fitting to praise him" (Ps. 147, 1). And again: "Glorify the Lord Jerusalem; praise your Lord O Sion" (Ps. 147, 12). "Praise the Lord from the heavens, praise him in the heights; praise him all you angels . . . Praise him sun and moon; praise him all you shining stars. Praise him you highest heavens, and you waters above the heavens" (Ps. 148, 1-3).
Let us listen now to Paul VI. At the time of the first moon-landing, you could read in the OSSERVATORE ROMANO (the official newspaper of the Vatican) untiring praises of man coming from the mouth of the Pope.
"Honor to man, honor to thought, honor to science, honor to technique, honor to work, honor to the boldness of man, honor to the synthesis of scientific and organizing ability of man, who unlike other animals, knows how to give his spirit and his manual dexterity these instruments of conquest. Honor to man, king of the earth, and today Prince of heaven" . . .
It is interesting, however, to remember that while Paul VI was heralding the glory of man, those astronauts traveling in space found it appropriate to read aloud a quotation from the Bible praising God, the Creator of heaven and earth. But Paul VI was more fascinated by the achievement of men than by the work of God. He said: "Man both is giant and divine, in his origin and in his destiny. Honor therefore to man, honor to his dignity, to his spirit and to his life." (To the Fathers of the Council on Dec. 7, 1965.) "We also, more than anyone else, have the cult of man."
It was the ancient serpent in the Garden who first offered his service for promoting the cult of man. He said to Eve: If you listen to me, and do what I suggest, "you will be like God" (Gen. 3, 5).
Yes, the cult of man is the best preparation for the way of the Antichrist.
The second largest piece of demolition work made by Paul VI was the removal of the Sacrifice of the Mass from the Church, which has had the built-in power to restrain Satan and his Antichrist.
In order to remove the ancient Sacrifice of the Mass, Paul VI with the help of six Protestant ministersÄfabricated a new liturgy for the cult of man. He called it the Mass of the New Order. (Novus Ordo Mass.) Then, he proposed it to the Church for acceptance.
The acceptance was less than enthusiastic. A lot of people have expressed their displeasure by dropping out of church-attendance. But those who remained, accepted the man-made forgery without much reluctance. This phenomenon can be explained only with the successful satanic deception which has been guaranteed for the Antichrist. "All the earth followed the beast in wonder." (Apoc. 13, 4.)
The Catholic world was told that all these changes were done according to the wish of the Second Vatican Council. Which is simply not true. Vatican II has never - I repeat "never" - ordered a new Mass. However, the Council was not without fault. The sin of Vatican II consisted in passing several ambiguous declarations ("time-bombs") which opened the gates to every kind of abuses, sacrileges, immorality, that Paul VI labelled as the "smoke of satan." It was a great victory for the Antichrist when religious errors (although not claiming infallibility for their "pastoral council") were approved by the very leaders of the Church. Paul VI rightly said (maybe unwittingly) that "the smoke of Satan has entered the Church."
Here I want to deal with the often heard plausible defense of Vatican II, which says, that it is impossible that 2500 bishops who signed the declarations would be in error, and only the one or two, who did not sign, would be right.
This is the often used method which wishes to decide the validity of a dogmatic truth by the number of votes cast for it. In fact, such an argument has never been valid. At the time of the French Revolution, the French Parliament unanimously voted for the proposition which said: "There is no God!" - Did God then cease to exist? - NO! - In 1973 the Supreme Court of the United States overwhelmingly voted for legalizing abortion. Did they - by this - cancel the Fifth Commandment of God which says: "Thou shalt not kill"? - NO, the Commandment stays.
Christ said that those who did not believe all that He had revealed to us, will be condemned. Christ established His only Church to guard this Divine Revelation. Now come 2500 bishops of the Council, and under the hypnotizing influence of AGGIORNAMENTO they sign a declaration, which says that other religions are also good for salvation.
- Did they, by this, cancel the previously revealed divine truth?
- No! Not at all. These men might condemn themselves to eternal fire, but they cannot annul the truth of Christ, which says that "outside of the Church there is no salvation".
Satan does not have the truth. Therefore, he must have the numbers. He lined up 2500 bishops and a Pope against the truth of Christ. With this impressive number he seduced almost all the Church. This is one of those lying wonders (2 Thess. 2, 9) which Satan is allowed to perform in order to deceive those who do not love the truth. Very few people could neutralize the brutal force of this number, and keep themselves on the side of truth. The beast of the Antichrist "was allowed to wage a war with the saints, and overcome them" (Rev. 13, 7).
Here you might feel a certain degree of despair, and say:
- If the signatures of 2500 bishops are not enough to establish truth, then how can we know where the truth is, where the error lies?
We have received from Our Lord two foolproof methods to recognize the truth, but neither of them includes the concept of majority votes.
When traditional Catholics try to demonstrate the doctrinal and practical errors of the Second Vatican Council which brought forth a new, non-Catholic religion, most of the people trapped in the new religion dismiss the arguments of traditional Catholics with the saying:
- It is impossible that 2500 bishops and a Pope would sign a document which contains error. God would never allow 99.9% of His Church to fall into error.
This is their conviction. The reality, however, is different. Certain documents of the Council signed by the bishops and Pope Paul VI, do contain religious errors. (This has nothing to do with the infallibility of the Pope, because it was declared in the beginning that this Council would be only a "pastoral", and not "dogmatic" Council.)
First I want to show you why majority votes cannot decide religious truth. Then I will tell you of two foolproof methods which can reveal to you where the truth of God is.
It is not only possible, but in fact we have Scriptural prophecies telling us of times when the majority of the people will be blind to the truth; instead they will follow false teachers. St. Paul the Apostle writes to his disciple, Timothy the following: ". . . there will come a time when they will not endure sound doctrine; but having itching ears, will heap up to themselves teachers according to their own lusts, and they will turn away their hearing from the truth and turn aside rather to fables." (II Tim. 4, 3-4)
The same Apostle said to the Romans:
"Do you not know that the Scripture says in the account of Elias, how he lodges complaint with God against Israel? "Lord, they have slain thy prophets, they have razed thy altars, and I only am left, and they are seeking my life."
But what does the divine answer say to him? - "I have left for myself seven thousand men, who have not bowed their knees to Baal." (3 Kings 19, 18)
"Even so, then, at the present time, there is a remnant left, selected out of grace." (Rom. 11, 2-5)
St. John the Apostle says in the Apocalypse (13, 7): The beast of the Antichrist "was allowed to wage a war with the saints and overcome them." "And it leads away the inhabitants of the earth, by reason of signs which it was permitted to do . . ." (13, 14) - And here is the question of Our Lord: "When the Son of Man comes, will he find, do you think, faith on earth?" (Lk. 18, 8)
In these prophecies the bishops of the Church were not exempted from the possibility of falling into error either.
Several bishops at the Council got the uneasy feeling that the trend of the Council was a going away from Sacred Tradition of the Church. Yet they, too, (with one or two exceptions) signed the final documents in spite of the ambiguities and errors contained in them.
How can you explain something like this: Signing a document against your better judgement? There was no torture or physical threat against them.
However, at the Council there were at least two compelling forces which heavily influenced the bishops for signing their names to the documents.
One was the apparent left-leaning bias of John XXIII and Paul VI.
The second element was the psychological influence of the majority which was blinded by the slogan of AGGIORNAMENTO.
As for the first reason: Pope John XXIII more than once interfered with the free discussions of the Council, whenever his help was needed to rescue certain liberal propositions from defeat by conservative-minded bishops. Paul VI did the same. Thus, "Vatican 2, which should have been the anti-Communist Council, as the Council of Trent was anti-Protestant, was taken over by the Liberals and became the instrument for the destruction of all the moral and spiritual barriers against Communism." (Archbishop Lefebvre: I ACCUSE THE COUNCIL, pg. IX.)
The most significant and enduring help for the Liberals throughout the sessions of the Council was the invitation of Protestant observers by John XXIII.
- How did this help the Liberals?
- By putting upon Conservatives an unusual psychological handicap.
The traditional and official designation of those who deviate from the Catholic Faith is the word "heretic". But in the presence of those invited heretics, the Fathers of the Council could not use the traditional expression, because they did not want to embarrass the Protestant observers, or the Pope himself who invited those observers. Thus, instead of the word "heretics", they were compelled to invent a new, equivocal expression which they found in the words "separated brethren." This was the first of the many ambiguous expressions which have surfaced in the discussions.
The trend was to prevent any clearcut dogmatic definitions to be passed. Any attempt to do such a thing was drowned in the muddy waters of long, ambiguous, complicated sentences and paragraphs which often stated something good in the beginning, only to deny it in the other part of the sentence.
E.g., in the "Decree on Ecumenism" the Council says (Chapter II, par. 8.) that common worship with members of other religions is generally ruled out, "yet the gaining of needed grace sometimes commends it."
In the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy (par. 36) you can read the first paragraph which says that the use of the Latin language is to be preserved, then, you read the second paragraph which allows, in certain cases, the use of the vernacular. It is like saying to somebody: This is the rule to be observed, but if you find some good reason to ignore it, you may ignore it, and set your own rules.
This kind of legislation has continued in the post-Conciliar Church, too.
When this anti-Church took over the Catholic schools. the first thing to be thrown out was the Baltimore Catechism. A false Church cannot stand precise definitions. It thrives on ambiguities, confusion, and on personal choices. This has always been characteristic of the Protestant mentality: to pick and choose articles of Christ's revelation that you like, and dismiss the others that you don't like. This is the "pro-choice policy" that several members of the new Church apply to the practice of artificial birth-control and abortion.
The left-leaning bias of John XXIII and Paul VI was one of the compelling forces which pressured the bishops into signing the ambiguous declarations of Vatican II.
The other element of pressure came from the example of the overwhelming majority of the bishops who were already infected with the magnetizing slogan of AGGIORNAMENTO.
When you are a member of a great body of a certain community, like the Council was, you are most probably carried away by the main stream of the ongoing ideas, regardless of the fact whether those ideas are good or bad. In order to resist the force of the stream (when it goes in the wrong direction), you need to have an exceptional intellect and the grace of the Holy Ghost, which would enable you to put the happenings of the present in the perspective of the past and future. Since only a handful of those bishops demonstrated having this kind of discerning power, - these few exceptions were easily dismissed by the absolute majority. They were labelled old-fashioned, narrow-minded reactionaries, enemies of progress, enemies of AGGIORNAMENTO.
One can visualize the pressure falling upon the few intellectual members of the Council who would hesitate to give their signature to documents of dubious value. When more than 2000 bishops signed certain documents, those hesitating individuals were swept away by the sheer power of numerical majority. They did not want to be unpopular by defying the majority. This was the way Satan achieved triumph over truth, by the blinding influence of sweet popularity.
Seeking popularity is a dangerous thing for the human soul. It usually leads you into religious error. That is why St. Paul the Apostle said: "If I were still trying to please men, I should not be a servant of Christ" (Gal. 1, 10).
In searching for the truth of God, a majority vote is not the way to decide whether a proposition is true or false. However, there are two considerations that you should not dismiss. One is the SACRED TRADITION of the Church; the other is a particular advice of Our Lord who said: You will know the tree by its fruit (Mt. 7, 16).
As for TRADITION: Whichever doctrine grows organically from Sacred Tradition, is true; whichever proposition cannot be reconciled with Tradition, is false. It is error, it is heresy, even if 3000 misguided bishops would vote for it.
The second measure says: As you recognize the tree by its fruit, you can recognize doctrinal error by its bad consequences. In our post-conciliar era we have plenty of bad consequences.
We were told by John XXIII that one of the aims of the Second Vatican Council was to gain back the "separated brethren," i.e., the different Christian, but non-Catholic denominations. Had Vatican II been a good tree, inspired by the Holy Ghost, and the Pope heralded, it certainly would have brought forth good results for the Church and for the immortal souls.
- What has been the result?
After twenty or so years of effort and experiments with novelties, we did not gain back any single Protestant group; but the Catholic Church has lost half her church-going people, has lost 15,000 priests, 100,000 nuns, countless schools, convents, church-buildings; and what is more important and most deplorable: the post-Conciliar Church has lost the purity of doctrine, and lost the true Sacrifice of the Mass, which has always been the heart of the Church, the most important means of salvation.
Nobody can expect me to believe that all these came about under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost. The truth is, that all these came about through the manipulation of Satan, or by his Antichrist, who in our days gained freedom to roam about in the vineyard of the Lord - after the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass was removed from the Church, and therefore no spiritual force remained for restraining Satan.
One significant failure of Fr. Vincent Miceli's book The Antichrist was the lack of understanding that a Church which has outlawed, in practice, the Sacrifice of the Mass, and substituted in its place the "assembly of God's people," cannot be the true Church. It is an anti-Church, the Church of the Antichrist.
If you have eyes to see, you can recognize that in the wake of Vatican II all the doctrinal and moral safeguards of the Church-teachings were thrown overboard, and consequently the respect for the sacred and holy things disappeared, and an unprecedented flood of ignorance and immorality engulfed the previously religious society of the Church - then you have good reason to suspect that we have already entered the time of the Antichrist, and the last events in the tragedy of mankind are rapidly approaching.
Sin always existed in our world (except the short duration of innocence in the Garden). But it had been called sin and not virtue. It was something to be ashamed of, and not to boast about. Today, sin demands equal rights, even superior rights, over virtue. Homosexuals and lesbians are publicly boasting about their "life-style." In some of the Novus Ordo churches they are treated with special dignity. Their "life-style" is accepted even among some priests and nuns. In October 1982, Archbishop William D. Borders of Baltimore, during a "Mass" for Catholic homosexuals, told his audience to appreciate "the reality that you are members of the total community of God's people on a pilgrimage" in the world.
In 1981, the Catholic bishops of the State of California urged Catholic voters to defend the "equal rights" of the avowed gay people (Maryfaithful, 1982).
At the same time when it comes to the question of abortion, Christian groups in this country complain that in their endeavor to save the lives of innocent babies, they get little or no help from the hierarchy of the Conciliar Church.
In our society theft and bribery became a socially accepted way of life: e.g., it was quite natural, even a smart thing to do, for an updated Vatican priest to smuggle into this country stolen art treasures from Italy (News item, March 1982).
I wonder, if the Prophet Isaiah had, in his vision, seen the sordid affairs of modern banking systems like those of the Ambrosian Bank with close connections to the Vatican Bank - when he said the following:
"How the faithful city has become a harlot, she that was full of justice!! Righteousness lodged in her, but now murderers. Your silver has become dross, your wine mixed with water. Your princes are rebels and companions of thieves. Everyone loves a bribe and runs after gifts." (Is. 1, 20-3).
This is the morality of many in today's society. Catholics who were educated in the situation ethics of the Conciliar Church are not exceptions, either.
Since the time of Sodom and Gomorrah, sin has never displayed such arrogance as it does today. This is another bad fruit of Vatican II. "The man of sin" is really working behind the scenes (2 Thess. 2, 3).
A bad tree should be cut down and thrown into the fire. Vatican II should be put out of business, should be condemned officially as a Council of swindlers.
Here comes an unjustifiable objection from the part of millions of Catholics who might say: "I don't care if the Pope is good or bad; as long as he sits in the chair of St. Peter, my duty is not to criticize him, but to obey him. Obedience is a Catholic virtue and the surest way to salvation."
As it is with all errors, this saying also contains a certain amount of truth. It is true that obedience is a Catholic virtue, but only if it is based on a valid reason. Obedience without intellectual consideration is called blind obedience. Blind obedience is justified only toward God.
When ABRAHAM was ordered to sacrifice his son Isaac, he dealt directly with God. He decided to obey, conquering his natural reluctance. This was an act of blind obedience toward God.
The case of ST. PETER was different. When he and the other Apostles stood before the Sanhedrin, Caiphas was the chief priest, therefore he was like the "Pope of the Old Testament Church." This "Pope of the Old Testament" ordered the Apostles not to preach any more in the name of Jesus; and to make his order more effective, he had the Apostles beaten. That was the time when ST. PETER answered the chief priest with the statement which reverberates through all the history of the Church, giving clear guidance to us even in our post-Conciliar confused age. St. Peter said to the chief priest:
- "We have to obey God rather than man." (Acts 5, 29).
The intellect of ST. PETER found no basis for obeying a command which was against the will of Christ; even if that command came from the "Pope of the Old Testament." The true love of Christ had left no other choice for ST. PETER than to disobey the unjust order of the chief priest who, in this confrontation, represented the Antichrist.
If we want to save our soul, it is necessary to know the chief enemy of our soul, and put on an effective resistance to him.
St. Paul the Apostle said: "Our wrestling is not against flesh and blood, but . . . against the spiritual forces of wickedness on high . . ." (Eph. 6, 12). With this he indicated to us that every age in human history has to take up the fight, and choose between Christ and Antichrist.
This was literally the case during the more than 200 year old Roman persecution. Those early Christian martyrs who were dragged before the pagan judges could have avoided torture and death if they would burn incense before the statue of Caesar. That time, Nero, Diocletian and the other tyrants had represented for them the Antichrist. Christians had to choose between them and Christ; between temporal life and eternal salvation.
In the 1920s, Catholics in Mexico were confronted again with the same problem. Either they bowed their heads before the godless Freemason government, or risked the loss of their lives. The glorious martyrs defied the modern Antichrist and, for the sake of Christ, they accepted torture and death. Facing the firing squad, their last message to this world was:
- "Viva Cristo Rey!" (Long live Christ the King!)
The bloody persecution of Catholics was repeated in a bigger scale in Catholic Spain. During the 1936-37 civil war, Communists slaughtered bishops, priests, nuns, religious and lay people by the tens of thousands. Finally, the army of General Franco defeated the Communist forces, and opened a new era of 40 years of peace and general prosperity for Spain. General Franco conducted the business of government according to the principles of the Catholic State. This, however, caused a headache to the Popes of the Second Vatican Council. General Franco became a bulwark not only against open Communist aggression, but also against the subtle Communist threat that has emanated from the declarations of Vatican II.
It has never bothered the Council or the post-Conciliar Church that Mexico, for example, with a population 95% Catholic, is maintaining a Constitution which denies civil rights for Catholics (I bet many people here in the United States would be surprised on hearing that, in today's Mexico, Catholics cannot have their own churches, schools, newspapers, etc.). But the post-Conciliar Church is quite happy witnessing that, after the demise of General Franco, the influence of the "Spirit of Vatican II" has changed the Catholic State of Spain into a secular State where Christ should be satisfied with sharing the rights granted to every religious or irreligious organization. We know from history that in such cases the usual procedure is to bring about a gradual shrinking of the "share" of Christ, until the State becomes thoroughly secularized, i.e., brought under the rule of the Antichrist.
Pope Pius XI explicitly condemned atheistic Communism as "intrinsically evil" and the worst persecutor of the Church. However, neither Vatican II nor John Paul II has ever done it. On the contrary, the "Declaration of Religious Freedom" passed by Vatican II demanded equal rights for all kinds of religions (without defining what the word "religion" means). Thus, the above document has become an implied condemnation of the concept of the Catholic State where Christ would be recognized as Supreme Ruler not only over individual souls, but also over any governmental body. To sum it up: Vatican II dethroned Christ in order to make room for the Antichrist in this world.
If there were no other signs (as there are) such a maneuver would be enough to detect the presence of a prevailing evil influence at Vatican II. When you hear the expression "the Spirit of Vatican II," remember it is the Evil Spirit which has nothing to do with the Holy Ghost. Years ago, Archbishop Lefebvre was an earnest and rightful critic when he said that the failure of Vatican II to condemn Communism is enough reason to condemn the Council itself. Many sincere traditional Catholics regret that he speaks differently, today.
What is the reason for the change? It is everybody's guesswork. It might be forgetfulness which usually comes with old age. It might be some secret deal with the Vatican. The Archbishop himself did not explain to us any of the possible reasons. The fact that we observe is that the sharp critic of Vatican II, as he was in 1976, does not refuse the Council today.
Although, "the Spirit of Vatican II" has not changed a bit, the Archbishop is willing "to accept the Council . . . according to the norms of tradition, according to the norms of theology." (Interview on May 3, 1982; printed in The Angelus, June 1982, pg. 3.) We remember (even if he does not) that it was exactly the norms of tradition and theology which justified him in condemning and rejecting Vatican II.
The existence of the Antichrist forces all of us to take a stand. We have to take our part in the struggle against the "man of sin" (2 Thess. 2, 3). In this war there is no room for dialogue, for compromise. "He who is not with me, is against me" (Lk. 11, 23). Once you have put on "the armor of God" (Eph. 6, 11), you are not supposed to compromise with evil.
I have to call it compromise when "traditionalist" lecturers, besides prayer, cannot (or dare not) recommend any concrete steps against those highranking persons who are responsible for ruining the Church. In fact, what these compromising lecturers want is that you continue to support - morally and materially - the destroyers of the Church, i.e., the minions of the Antichrist.
These compromising lecturers are still under the spell of "the Spirit of Vatican II" which has induced the bishops to enter into dialogue, and compromise with evil errors. In the spirit of AGGIORNAMENTO, John XXIII invited Protestant observers and even the emissaries of the Communist government in Russia to come and sit in the sessions of the Council.
This unusual arrangement was a clear rupture with the past of the Church. This was nothing less then defying the teachings of Our Lord and His Apostles, who had absolutely forbidden any negotiations with doctrinal and moral deviations.
When Paul VI pushed out from the Church the Immemorial Sacrifice of the Mass, replacing it with a man-made Protestant service - he actually removed from the Church a supernatural power which effectively restrained Satan from taking over the world.
In the second letter to the Thessalonians, St. Paul told his disciples that the mystery of iniquity had already started its work in the world, but there was something and somebody who had restrained it (2, 7). As long as this restraining force is present in the Church, the Antichrist will not be revealed to the public. It is interesting to recognize that, in the 6th verse of the letter, St. Paul reminds his faithful that they know what is withholding the "man of sin," the "son of perdition." In the following sentence St. Paul uses the pronoun "he:" "he who withholds the man of sin," ". . . until he is gotten out of the way."
- What is this mysterious entity to which the Apostle could refer as "what" and "he" at the same time? - Can it possibly be any other than the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, whereas it was on the Cross of Calvary - Christ is the High Priest offering the Sacrifice, and He Himself is the Immaculate Victim of the Sacrifice?
Christ and the Cross, the Sacrifice of the Cross and its daily renewal, the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, is the one who has restrained the "man of sin," the Antichrist, and has prevented him from taking over the world.
Then, in 1969 came the great sacrilege, the removal of the Holy Sacrifice from the Church. With this sacrilegious act Paul VI removed the only obstacle in the way of the Antichrist. The substitution he brought in, the Novus Ordo Mass, is a liturgy for the cult of man. It is not an obstacle, but rather an invitation to the Antichrist. No wonder that on the coat-tail of this sacrilege, the flood of religious ignorance and an unheard measure of immorality inundated our contemporary world, as it never happened before.
Today, people attending the New Order Mass (NOM) are practicing - either knowingly or unknowingly - a religion which is not Catholic any more. This new religion cannot be reconciled with TRADITION, i.e., with the teaching of Our Lord and His Apostles. This unbelievable success in deceiving hundreds of millions of Catholics cannot be explained by mere human planning. Behind this spiritual devastation Satan has been working.
When Judas betrayed Jesus, the Scripture said about him: "The devil has already induced Judas Iscariot . . . to hand him over" (Jn. 13, 2). The betrayal of Jesus was achieved by the teamwork of Satan and Judas. So has been the betrayal of Catholic TRADITION by Satan and Vatican II. Today, hundreds of millions are pleased with the un-Catholic innovations.
- How has the teamwork been set up between Satan and man?
Somehow similar to the way God intended to set up cooperation between God and man through the Incarnation of the Second Person of the Holy Trinity. We believe that Christ is both human and divine. Through the Incarnation the Divine Person assumed human nature. Thus, Jesus Christ has two natures; a divine nature from eternity, and a human nature from the moment of Incarnation in the womb of the Blessed Virgin Mary.
Satan's characteristic is to ape God. He would like to have some kind of incarnation. However, he cannot assume human nature although, he can take possession of a human person. Thus, a spiritual entity, Satan, will exercise command over a human person who, then, will execute the satanic commands in this world. Talking about the Antichrist, we want to indicate the cooperation of the two persons: Satan and his employee, who is a human being.
One of the identifying marks of the Antichrist (as I mentioned before) is the popularity that surrounds him. It is an absolute necessity for him to have followers in overwhelming numbers. It is not enough if somewhere he gains the simple majority, which would leave a minority of large percentage in existence. It would not be enough for the Antichrist.
- Because a strong minority, having the truth in its possession, could easily undermine the position of the Antichrist by unmasking him. But if he has 99.9% of the crowd among his followers, the truth that the minority would hurl against him could be laughed off, because of the insignificant number of those who profess the truth.
A clearer picture of this idea can be seen at the so-called "elections" in Communist countries. Those dictators who would never have a chance in a free election have always managed to get approval by 99% or more of the voters.
The similarity can be observed with the "beast" of Vatican II. When the bishops started to dismantle the Church of Christ, and to substitute in its place the church of the Antichrist, they said they were democratizing the Church. But they have never asked the people if they liked the innovations or not. They have never had a popular vote on any important innovation. The un-Catholic reforms were brutally pushed down the throats of the people. When faithful Catholics expressed their dislike of the innovations, or even protested against them, they were undemocratically silenced and told: "You must obey the Council! You must obey the Pope!"
There is no need to cite here actual examples. You certainly remember several cases from your own experience, when this or that old priest, who wanted to remain faithful to the Catholic Tradition, was transferred from his large parish to a small community. Others were forced to go into retirement. Relatively young priests took over the large parishes in order to re-educate the parishioners as to accept the AGGIORNAMENTO, i.e., the adaptation of the Church to the Modernist heresy. - "All the earth followed the beast in wonder" (Apoc. 13, 4).
- How about the bishops? Why didn't they put up resistance in the defense of the Faith?
Some of them really tried to do that. But those good old bishops gradually died away. They were replaced with new-breed-priests. The few bishops who still preserved their traditional mind were caught in the web of "Collegiality." The individual bishops were required to follow the decisions of the bishops' conferences, and not their own convictions. E.g., when concerned parents were asking the bishop of the diocese to remove heretical teachers and textbooks from Catholic schools, the bishop assured the petitioners that there is no need to worry, the Catholic religion is still here in the schools; besides, the textbooks have been approved by the National Conferences of Bishops. The justified protest of the faithful against the all-encroaching heresy in the Church has been dismissed countless times by the same bishops who have promoted the heresy. They always managed to elude responsibility by covering themselves with the decisions of the bishops' conferences.
The reliance of the infallibility of the Church - Tradition has been replaced by the authority of the bishops' conferences. However, by this maneuver the bishops fell into their own trap. They explicitly rejected the concept of Vatican II being a "dogmatic" Council; by this they a priori removed from their decisions the stamp of infallibility, therefore, no Catholic is obliged to accept their decisions in conscience. Those decisions are not supported by the inspiration of the Holy Ghost; they are products of human wisdom or human foolishness, as the case might be.
Thus, finally it came true that the beast of Vatican II gained the support of 99.9% of the bishops. Those one or two lonely bishops who had the courage to stand up for Catholic Tradition, for the true Sacrifice of the Mass, were dismissed as rebels, fanatics, schismatics - without examining their arguments for the truth. In our modern, brainwashed, updated society people are not interested in truth. They respect success.
However, their success is temporary. Waiting for them at the end is destruction, damnation. Eternal success is assured only by truth, or we can say, by Christ who Himself is the truth. "The truth shall make you free" (Jn. 8, 32).
Even if 99% of the bishops deny Him, and set up a new Church, it would be a counter-Church, an anti-Church, which could possibly give temporary advantage to its members, promotion to the world, like the membership in Freemason lodges, but would be unable to provide them with eternal salvation. Outside of the true Church of Christ there is no salvation.
Reading the prophesy of the Bible, "All the earth followed the beast," - the question necessarily arises:
- During the reign of the Antichrist, where will the true Church be? Didn't Christ promise that His Church cannot be destroyed?
- That is correct. He did promise it. His Church cannot be destroyed, but it can be reduced in size, as it has already been in our days. Today, there are only a few people faithful to Christ; a few people who do not worship the beast, and "whose names are written in the Book of Life" (Apoc. 13, 8). These are the members of the Remnant Church, as St. Paul said: ". . . at the present time there is a remnant left, selected out of grace. . ." (Rom. 11, 5).
St. Athanasius put it this way: "Even if Catholics faithful to Tradition are reduced to a handful, they are the ones who are the true Church of Jesus Christ."
The mistake of many misguided Catholics consists in the feeling that belonging to the great majority is an insurance for salvation, because Christ they think, cannot condemn the majority. However, the words of Our Lord seem to indicate the opposite. Didn't he say: "Many are called, but few are chosen" (Mt. 20, 16)?
You are in a safer place if you are among the few who belong to the Remnant Church, whose members are "selected out of grace." In the Remnant Church you can enjoy the protection of the three invincible shields given us by God. These are:
The Word of Christ (unfalsified),
the Sacrifice of Christ (the unchanged, ancient Mass) and
the Mother of Christ (who will conquer all heresies).
- What will happen to the Antichrist? After he gets almost the entire population of the earth on his coattail, will his tyranny be permanent?
- Not at all! Today, Christ and His true followers are humiliated, despised, persecuted. Martyrdom also is possible for us, but it is not a defeat. It is a triumph.
St. Paul the Apostle says that in proper time "the wicked one will be revealed whom the Lord Jesus will slay with the breath of His mouth and will destroy with the brightness of His coming" (Thess. 2, 8).
At the time of the printing of the sixth edition of this booklet, there is a need to update it by registering here a few of the important developments which give evidence to the objective observer that the reign of John Paul II (JP2) is a continuation of the wrecking of the true Church of Christ.
From time to time we hear correct Catholic utterances from the lips of JP2. These provide excuses to some traditional Catholics to entertain an immature hope regarding the orthodoxy of the "Holy Father." However, words remain only words. Their main purpose is to cover up the conspicuous absence of good and proper actions.
The following few facts, among many others, will prove that JP2 has already passed the border which separates true faith from heresy.
(1) The Canterbury visit in May 1982, where he attempted to give equal status to the Anglican sect and the true Church of Christ.
(2) The common worship in the Lutheran Church of Rome in 1983.
(3) The visit in the synagogue of Rome in April 1986, where he declared that present day Judaism has equal value with Christianity, therefore there is no need for the Jews to convert to Christ.
(4) The "DAY OF WORLD PRAYER" on October 27, 1986, and the terrible desecration of the Tabernacle in the main church of Assisi, Italy.
If JP2 wishes to become a true Catholic pope he has to make a radical change of mind, which is not probable at this stage. Why?
Before him is an Augean stable full of the manure of heresy, and the wrongdoing is going on. The latest scandal (although it did not make the headlines in the papers) supersedes the previous ones. It constitutes a virtual sellout of the Catholic faith. On September 1, 1987, in Castelgandolfo, JP2 had a meeting with certain Jewish leaders who pressured him (How? That is another story . . .) to reform Catholic religious education according to the Jewish interpretation of history.
JP2 agreed. - According to the news, a papal document will be published (no deadline yet) with the assistance of Jewish scholars.
The document will form the basis of Church teaching throughout the world. In reality this means that in Castelgandolfo JP2 sold out the divine mission of Catholic religious education to the supervision of Jewish scholars. Such a thing never happened during the past two-thousand years!
If these public actions do not exhibit the presence of formal heresy, I don't know what would be needed to do that.
Tradition proves that a pope can become a heretic. Among other cases I can mention that of Pope Honorius I who reigned from 625 to 638. He did not teach heresy, but he favored those who did. Because of his support of the MONOTHELITE heresy, 45 years after his death a Church Council excommunicated him from the Church, and Pope St. Leo II (in 683) approved the excommunication.
If Pope Honorius I deserved the punishment of excommunication for his inclination to heresy, what will JP2 deserve for the wholesale liquidation of the Catholic faith? And what will those deserve who follow him, and cooperate with him in such a betrayal of the Church?
What makes the situation more tragic than ever before is that we have no official Church Council, free of heresy, which would make a correction.
Meanwhile life should go on. The true faith should be upheld (with or without Rome) by those few bishops and priests who have kept the Apostolic tradition, and are making use of it for the salvation of immortal souls.
The ecclesiastical event that received a wide publicity in 1988 was the consecration of four bishops by Archbishop MARCEL LEFEBVRE. But, this was not the first time that bishops were consecrated for the traditional Catholic faith after the Second Vatican Council. Mgr. NGO DINH THUC, the former Archbishop of Hue, Vietnam, who was given extraordinary faculties by Popes Pius XI and XII, consecrated a few traditionalist priests to the bishopric between 1976 and 1982. We call these new bishops the THUC-LINE BISHOPS.
Some of them did not live up to their Catholic responsibilities. Some of them did. Among these was Mgr. GUERARD des LAURIERS, doctor in theology and philosophy, co-worker of Cardinal OTTAVIANI. The date of his consecration was May 7, 1981. He died in France on February 27, 1988. While living, he consecrated three traditional bishops: One for Germany, one for the USA and one for Italy.
The THUC-LINE BISHOPS did not get as much publicity as the LEFEBVRE consecrations did. The reason for this, we can assume, were two factors: a) the long years of public controversy between Rome and Archbishop Lefebvre; b) the great number of priests ordained by Mgr. Lefebvre, and the growing influence of these priests among the Catholic faithful.
In 1988, Mgr. Lefebvre finally reached the decision (no doubt, his advanced age of 84 years was a great factor in it) that in order to secure the future existence of his Priestly Fraternity, he had to consecrate bishops with or without the permission of John Paul II. Indeed, on June 30, 1988 he consecrated four of his priests to the bishopric in Econe, Switzerland, without the permission of JP2. Because of this act of defiance, JP2 excommunicated Mgr. Lefebvre and his four new bishops, and all those Catholics who continue in their fellowship.
These recent events have left in the state of uncertainty and confusion many thousands of traditional Catholics. In the face of this "excommunication" they do not know what to do, whom to follow.
One of the rules of Catholic moral theology says that you are not supposed to act in a state of confusion or doubt which troubles your conscience. Before you would act, you have to clear up the principles involved.
During the years of controversy, Mgr. Lefebvre did not give his followers a consequent and clear statement. (One of his former priests characterized this as a ZIG-ZAG proceeding.)
The controversy between Modernist Rome and the Archbishop lasted for more than a decade. Recently, it seemed to come to a happy ending when the two parties (on May 5, 1988) signed an agreement on the question of episcopal consecration for the St. Pius X Society. This agreement, however, was repudiated by Mgr. Lefebvre on the very next day. He declared that he would go ahead with the consecrations on his own terms. He did, and he was excommunicated by Rome.
The crux of the matter lies in this: If Mgr. Lefebvre and his Fraternity assert (as they do at present) that JP2 is a valid pope, then his excommunication placed upon Mgr. Lefebvre (and his followers) is also valid. You cannot have it both ways. You cannot say that JP2 is a valid pope, but that his excommunication of the Archbishop is not valid, because it comes from a "weak pope". It would be a contradiction in terms. You can also put it this way: JP2 declared the excommunication, but Mgr. Lefebvre overruled it by declaring the excommunication null and void. I can ask: Is there anybody in the Catholic Church who has the power to overrule a validly reigning pope? The answer is NO! - If Mgr. Lefebvre or Father Schmidberger (the present head of the Fraternity) try to assume such a power for themselves, they obviously cannot remain in the Catholic Church.
Futhermore, by leaving this important doctrinal problem unsolved, they are trapping themselves in a web of contradictions. You might say: They tie themselves down with a Gordian Knot.
Another Aspect: The bishops of the LEFEBVRE-LINE do not want to acknowledge the existence of the THUC-LINE BISHOPS, although the THUC bishops came to the scene before Mgr. Lefebvre's consecrations on June 30, 1988. His excuse for defying the order of JP2 was that these new bishops were needed for the preservation of the traditional Catholic priesthood. To support the validity of such an argument they have to ignore the existence of the THUC-LINE BISHOPS, which is a nonsense attitude.
In order to extricate themselves from the above-named Gordian Knot, the members of the Fraternity have to use the argumentative sword of the late bishop GUERARD des LAURIERS who proposed a theory which says that there is a distinction between a material and a formal pope. (More explanation on this subject was provided in the January and February 1989 issues of Catholics Forever, - P.O. Box 283, Monroe, CT 06468).
To sum up the argument: If you regard JP2 as a valid (formal) pope, then you must accept his juridical sentence upon you as also valid. If you wish to deny the validity of his "excommunication" against you, you have to deny the validity of his claim to papal power. There is no other logical escape from the above-mentioned Gordian Knot.
In conclusion: As we can understand from his speeches and actions, JP2 is promoting the consolidation of all religions under the roof of a One-World-religion (or a New-Age-religion) which definitely would not be the religion of Jesus Christ.
 In the present discourse the pronoun "Pope" is used as people
commonly use it to identify a historical person without affirming or
denying the legitimacy of that person to his office.
 Quoted from the book The Destruction of the Christian Tradition by Rama P. Coomaraswamy, M.D. - Perennial Books, Ltd., London, 1981, Pg. 95.
 This was one of the two documents that Archbishop Lefebvre refused to sign.
"I am so glad to receive your books, Father, as six in our little group here in Indianapolis are anxious to have and read them . . . We are very grateful to you for writing this book that desperately NEEDED to be WRITTEN." M. G., Indianapolis
"Thank you, Father, for putting out a book that is so easily understood, and putting all the pieces of the puzzle together." M. H., Oregon
". . . The Smoke of the Antichrist. It is very enlightening as well as spiritually enriching, and I am very glad you had it printed. I wish to be placed on your mailing list . . . Your writings are so full of truth that we don't find elsewhere." C. K., California
"I have read Fr. Miceli's book and had the same reaction as you, Father, had. Why does he not recognize the cause of the world's evils and advancing darkness? . . . A child could make the logical connection . . ." R. M. H., Kentucky
"The Smoke of the Antichrist is a factual and well researched booklet . . . It is especially good for the traditional Catholic and the confused faithful who are trying to put the "puzzle" together. It is tremendous!" E. W., Iowa
"I have just finished reading your booklet The Smoke of the Antichrist. It is the very best thing I have read concerning the state of affairs today . . . If anyone still cannot see the truth and the errors in the so-called Catholic Church after reading your booklet, then there must be something wrong with them." C. A. McG., Indiana
"Two copies of The Smoke of the Antichrist arrived last Thursday and I read it the same evening. Here are my impressions: It is the Holy Spirit who speaks through you, his chosen instrument. This study is the last saving rope for many souls sinking into the abyss . . .! It is therefore our holy and most urgent duty to distribute it widely. As to the German translation, I have transmitted immediately one of the copies to the person most competent to do this . . ." H. H., Switzerland