Palmarian Church and Clemente Domínguez y Gómez Beliefs, Heresies and Practices Exposed

Palmarian Church (overview)

The “Christian” Palmarian Church of the Carmelites of the Holy Face, commonly called the Palmarian “Catholic” Church, is a small schismatic self-professed traditional Catholic Church with its own appointed “pope”, bishops and priests centred around El Palmar de Troya, Spain.

The Palmarian Traditional “Catholic” Church says that it has 60 bishops, 70 nuns and 2,000 followers.

Since 1983 the Palmarian Church has drastically reformed its traditional rites and its liturgy, which previously had been styled in the Tridentine form. The Palmarian liturgy was reduced to almost solely the Eucharistic words of consecration. The See of El Palmar de Troya has also declared the Real Presence of the Virgin Mary in the sacred host and the bodily assumption into heaven of St. Joseph to be dogmas of the Catholic faith. By 2000, they had their own version of the Bible, revised by Domínguez on claimed prophetic authority. For these and other reasons, other traditionalist and self-professed Catholics consider the Palmarian Church to be heretics.

Speaking of similar heretics and schismatics of his own time – the “Old Catholics” – Pius IX says:

Pope Pius IX, Graves ac diuturnae (# 4), March 23, 1875: “They [the faithful] should totally shun their religious celebrations, their buildings, and their chairs of pestilence which they have with impunity established to transmit the sacred teachings. They should shun their writings and all contact with them. They should not have any dealings or meetings with usurping priests and apostates from the faith who dare to exercise the duties of an ecclesiastical minister without possessing a legitimate mission or any jurisdiction.”

Pope Pius IX, Graves ac diuturnae (#’s 1-4), March 23, 1875: “… the new hereticsthese schismatics and hereticstheir wicked sectthese sons of darknesstheir wicked factionthis deplorable sect… This sect overthrows the foundations of the Catholic religion, shamelessly rejects the dogmatic definitions of the Ecumenical Vatican Council, and devotes itself to the ruin of souls in so many ways. We have decreed and declared in Our letter of 21 November 1873 that those unfortunate men who belong to, adhere to, and support that sect should be considered as schismatics and separated from communion with the Church.”

Obviously if one must “totally shun” their religious celebrations and their buildings, then one also cannot attend non-Catholic services, funerals or weddings for any reason, let alone to pacify friends, relatives or co-workers and give non-Catholics the false impression that non-Catholic lives can lead to salvation or that non-Catholic weddings are pleasing to God.

Pope Pius XI, Mortalium Animos (#9), Jan. 6, 1928: “Everyone knows that John himself, the Apostle of love, who seems to reveal in his Gospel the secrets of the Sacred Heart of Jesus, and who never ceased to impress on the memories of his followers the new commandment ‘Love one another,’ altogether forbade any intercourse with those who professed a mutilated and corrupt form of Christ’s teaching: ‘If any man come to you and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into the house nor say to him: God speed you(II John 10).”

The Palmarian Church regards Antipope Paul VI and his predecessors as true popes, but hold, on the grounds of claimed apparitions, that the “Pope” of Rome is excommunicated and that the position of the Holy See has, since 1978, been transferred to the See of El Palmar de Troya (see antipopes).

The cathedral of Palmar de Troya

The heretical and schismatical Palmarian self-professed Catholic Church has had three “pontiffs” since its break from the similarly heretical and schismatical Vatican II sect; Clemente Domínguez y Gómez (“Pope” Gregory XVII) declared himself pope in 1978 until his death in 2005, Manuel Corral (“Pope” Peter II) succeeded Domínguez in 2005 and led the church until his death in 2011. He was succeeded by Sergio María (“Pope” Gregory XVIII) who was elected by conclave in 2011.

In his capacity as “Pope” Gregory XVII, Domínguez called the Vatican II sect a false church and declared “Pope” John Paul II excommunicated. In addition “Pope” Gregory XVII also “canonized” Francisco Franco, Josemaría Escrivá de Balaguer and Christopher Columbus and declared Paul VI a martyr saint.

It must of course be understood by the reader that the “Popes” of the Palmarian Church – as in the case of the Vatican II sect – are antipopes (not true popes) and that this organization is a cult and sect.

Statements of Beliefs From El Palmar de Troya Archidona


The Archidonian Palmarian group (Archidona, Malaga, Spain) formed in 2000 was due to the expulsion of 16 cardinals and five nuns. They were expelled by Domínguez for diverse reasons. The predominant reason for the expulsions was due to Domínguez's belief that there was "a church within a church" planning to overthrow or assassinate him. One cardinal, Cyril María, was expelled due to the controversy over the new edition of the Bible. The group in Archidona has since almost disbanded and there remains four or five. They presently call themselves "independent" Palmarian priests. They believe that the see of Peter is once again vacant.

The following is this sect's statements of beliefs:

“What we believe [from a Palmarian website]...

1.  We believe in the One, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic and Palmarian Church.

2.  We believe that, due to the apostasy[1] of the Roman Catholic Church [they are referring to the Vatican II sect], God, in His infinite Wisdom, Power and Providence, has saved His Church through the transfer of the Holy See of Peter from Rome to Palmar de Troya.

3.  We believe that in December of 1975, the Order of Carmelites of the Holy Face was established by Divine mandate.

4.  We believe that by Divine Providence, Archbishop Peter Ngo Dinh Thuc conferred the Sacrament of Orders on several members of the said Carmelite Order and the same members were then consecrated Bishops by the same Archbishop Thuc, with the authority given to him by Saint Pope Pius XI.

5.  We believe that God had directly conferred the Sacrament of the Papacy on Bishop Ferdinand in the city of Santa Fe de Bogotá, in Colombia, who took the name of Gregory XVII and established his See in Palmar de Troya, Seville, Spain.

6.  We believe that the Holy Palmarian Council 1980-1992 is a fully legitimate and, indeed, holy council of the Palmarian Catholic Church, having been assisted by the Holy Ghost throughout its existence and that the same council is dogmatic, and its teachings are binding on all members of the Mystical Body of Christ and all else who desire eternal salvation.

7.  We believe that Pope Gregory XVII had eventually lost all authority as Pope, Bishop and member of the Catholic Church due to his personal heretical beliefs which led to his falling into other most grave errors, including the confecting of a heretical “bible” called the “Sacred History” or “Palmarian Bible”.

8.  We believe that the Bible or Sacred Scriptures that the Catholic Church has been using for the last 16 centuries, is and always will be the one, true Bible and that it is infallibly free of errors as defined by the Holy Council of Trent and reaffirmed explicitly by Pope Leo XIII (Providentisimus Deus), Pope Benedict XV (Spiritus Paraclitus) and Pope Pius XII (Divino Afflante Spiritu).

9.  We believe that a Pope is infallible in his teachings to the entire Church on faith and morals, as long as he hasn’t lost that infallibility and authority through personal sins of heresy, as is indicated in canon 188.4 of the Code of Canon Law of the Catholic Church (of the year 1917) and taught by Pope Innocent III:

10.  "It is necessary to obey a Pope in all things as long as he does not go against the universal customs of the Church, but should he go against the universal customs of the Church, he need not be followed." encyclical--De Consuetudine

11.  We believe that from the moment that Pope Gregory XVII had fallen into formal heresy: all laws, declarations, teachings, announcements, proclamations and prohibitions by Pope Gregory XVII and anyone in communion with him are to be considered as doubtful. Therefore, they are not binding since he has no papal, episcopal, sacerdotal or Christian authority whatsoever, nor do those who are in communion with him. Exempt are those who, by invincible ignorance, are not aware that he has fallen into heresy. This teaching is mentioned above in points 9 and 10 and is supported by the authority mentioned in each point.

12.  We believe that under normal circumstances, a Pope has the authority to name his successor, which is to say that, after the pope’s death, once the position has been accepted, the Bishop named becomes the legitimate pope.

13.  We believe that since Pope Gregory XVII had fallen into formal heresy before naming his successor, the act of naming his successor was and is absolutely invalid. In addition, the bishop named as Pope Gregory’s successor is not able to accept the position of pope, since having accepted the heretical “Palmarian Bible”, he is also in formal heresy, and therefore not a member of the Church since that time. We believe that in the true Church, One, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic and Palmarian, the See of Peter is vacant until, through Divine Providence, another pope is elected from within the bosom of the same.

14.  We believe that when a member of the true Church apostatizes, other members of the Church who are in a position to do so, not only have a right, but an obligation to communicate with the apostate out of true charity and love for the purpose of helping the apostate return to the true faith, as is taught in numerous episodes in the Gospel as well as other Catholic sources.

15.  We believe that family members of a legitimately excommunicated member of the Church have the right and obligation to communicate with the excommunicate in order to help him/her repent of his/her grave error in order that the excommunication be lifted and he/she can take advantage of the sacraments and graces of the Church, as is taught in the Moral Theology of the Catholic Church.

16.  We believe that, with the special Providence of God, and poor correspondence to grace by ourselves, we remain members of the very same Order of Carmelites of the Holy Face, in company of Jesus and Mary, which was established in December of 1975 for the purpose of the continuity of the true Church, which includes necessarily, the apostolic succession.”

Claim to the papacy

Gregory XVII (15 August 1978 - 22 March 2005)

Following the death of Paul VI in 1978, Domínguez claimed that he had been mystically crowned pope by Jesus Christ in a vision. He took the papal name "Gregory XVII", and appointed his own cardinals.

Clemente claimed visions, prophecies, stigmata and other sacred wounds, he also lost his eyeballs in a car accident and was blind from 1976 until 2005 when he died.

Comments of ex-members:

“All I know of Clemente … is that his mother is not a follower of her son & described him as "disturbed" to the Spanish media.”

“All funding came from donations, several people were very rich & gave vast amounts, I heard of one Boston woman who in her will left millions (I'm not sure of the exact figure but I think it was somewhere between 10-20 million, I could be corrected on that figure though).”

“At their height one could only imagine the amount of money they brought in, as well as the Basilica, statues, robes etc; Clemente & his closest confidants went out almost every night & spent thousands on having a good time, apparently one restaurant in Seville added an extension specifically to accommodate them.”

“There are also stories of Corral walking around with plastic bags full of bank notes, putting them through all their bank accounts, at this point it was not illegal to have several bank accounts in the same name, they are also tax-exempt as a religious organization, they had to remove the word Cult from their teachings to gain this title. They actually used to use the term in describing themselves.”

“Regarding the Car accident, there were 3 or 4 people in the car late at night, Clemente in the front passenger seat, when the car was overtaken by "demonic forces" and went off the road & hit a tree or pole, the glass from the shattered windshield lacerated Clemente's eyeballs & they had to be removed. The others in the car emerged unhurt as far as I know. Other than his loss of sight he had only minor injuries that healed quickly.”

“The whole thing is Vaticanized so that the faithful (who defected to Palmar in the light of Vatican II) would believe that Clemente was carrying on the "True Church" That’s how he hooked his followers.”

“As for the stigmata I totally agree with your observations, he's showing it off with pride for the onlookers & cameras. That particular wound came from the incident with the shard of glass that I mentioned earlier.”

“He wasn't too happy about his eyes though, he never got to see his mini empire for himself, he used to get drunk and go into depression over his blindness, I've been told.”

“On a last note he claimed to the Palmarians that the Virgin Mary appeared to him during Mass & for his great service offered him his eyesight back, but good oul' Clemente said No. He would wait a little longer for penance.”

“He offered everyone that they would be spared in the coming war with the Anti-Christ, where he would become a Military Leader & Emperor & lead Gods army to victory, take back Jerusalem, march into Moscow & convert them all to Palmar, Oh and of course, Moses himself would come down from the Planet of Mary to fight alongside him.”

Peter II (22 March 2005 - 15 July 2011)

Domínguez died in March 2005 whilst administering the Palmarian Easter Liturgy, supposedly while experiencing a vision. His church later declared him to be "Pope Saint Gregory XVII the Very Great". Manuel Alonso Corral, named in 2000 by Domínguez as his successor, succeeded him as Peter II. There was no Palmarian conclave for this election.

Peter II made no claims to visions but stated that the Antichrist was born in the year 2000. Palmarian doctrine indicates that the Antichrist will mock Christ and imitate him by making a public appearance at the age of 12 and begin his public life when he is 30 years old (source Palmarian Council).

Peter II died on July 15, 2011 after a long illness.

Gregory XVIII (Since 23 July 2011)

Peter II was succeeded by his Secretary of State, Sergio Maria, who took the name Gregory XVIII. Gregory XVIII is a Spanish veteran.

Rules of The Palmarian Church

The following rules were given by a former member of the Palmarian Church:

1. Woman may not wear trousers.

2. Shorts are banned.

3. It is forbidden to wear any shirt or similar garment with short sleeves.

4. Sleeves can only be rolled up for the duration of any work such as washing dishes etc.

5. Females must wear skirts no shorter than two fingers width below the knee. [Comment: If the words “two fingers width below the knee” mean that the skirt only reaches about 3 or 4 centimeters below the knee, this is utterly scandalous and unlawful, and a far too lascivious skirt. If the words mean that the skirt is about 2 decimeter below the knee, this is still too short.]

6. Tights are banned as they are classed as mens attire. Female teens and adults may only wear stockings, female children only socks.

7. Female babies cannot wear all in one baby suits.

8. Shirts and blouses must be buttoned to the neck.

9. You cannot play any sport that requires you to wear short sleeves or shorts.

10. Visiting beaches is banned.

11. All voting banned. e.g. Local and general elections, referendums etc.

12. Visiting and using swimming pools is banned.

13. Visiting night clubs is banned

14. Denim cloth is banned, therefore wearing jeans is banned.

15. Listening to popular / modern music is banned.

16. Watching boxing matches is banned.

17. Attending non-Palmarian religious services such as weddings, funerals, christenings etc is banned, for all non Palmarians even family.

18. Males are banned from dying or bleaching hair.

19. Males cannot wear ear jewelry or other face jewelry.

20. Receiving organ transplants is banned. [This is just plain stupid.]

21. Leaving or providing organs for transplant is banned.

22. All contraception is banned.

23. Disco’s are banned.

24. Later introduced in addition to rule 16, All functions associated with non Palmarian religious services such as wedding breakfasts, evening functions, i.e. social functions before or after, christenings, weddings, funerals etc are banned you cannot attend even if function is family or relatives.

25. Later above rule no. 5 was changed to increase the length of skirts below the knee from 2 to 4 or 5 fingers width.

26. Children must be told Christmas presents are from parents and not Santa Claus as he doesn’t exist

27. New Bible introduced, any copies of any other bibles must be burnt. This bible was authored in Spain and has many changes in comparison to the standard bible.

28. TV programs that have people or cartoon characters outside the Palmarian dress code may not be watched. In effect this is most television, it would encompass news, documentaries, etc. etc.[2; see note at the end of this page]

29. No social contact with any persons not dressed to the Palmarian dress code. This in effect means virtually all non-Palmarians.

30. Nobody allowed in the home if not dressed to Palmarian dress code except workmen.

31. In work, contact with non-palmarian co-workers must be kept to a minimum, i.e. only talk to when necessary to carry out the job and no social chat.
32. Only religious books approved by Palmar are allowed all others banned and must be burnt. This in effect means virtually any non Palmarian authored book is banned.
33. Any photos/images with priests who have left the order must be burn/destroyed.
34. Religious films are banned.
35. All prayers and hymns not contained in the Palmarian missal are banned.
36. Birthday candles on birthday cakes are banned.
37. Contact with anyone including relatives who are living with partners and not married is banned. This would include all marriages outside the Palmarian Church since the early 1980's as these marriages are considered invalid.
38. Throwing coins in a fountain/well/water is banned.
39. Children must be removed to another room from their classes where non palmarian religious instruction is given.
40. Horoscopes are banned.
41. Movies containing references to magic are banned.
42. The neckline of a shirt or blouse etc must when worn be at least 2 fingers width above the breast bone.
43. Christmas trees are banned.
44. Images of Santa Claus are banned.
45. Giving or opening presents on Christmas day (25th December) is banned.
46. Christmas presents must be given and opened on the feast of the Epiphany.

It is obvious that many of the practices of the Palmarian Church are admirable and good. However, it is  also a sad fact that they are complete deceivers who deceive their followers by their false piety.

[1] The Great Apostasy and a counterfeit Church predicted in the New Testament and in Catholic Prophecy

John Paul II during a syncretist prayer gathering with various false religious leaders at Assisi in 1986 - This “ecumenical” activity was always condemned by the Catholic Church, and specifically labeled as a complete rejection of the Catholic Faith by Pope Pius XI in 1928. This is a revolution against the Faith – a new Gospel. What’s going on here? Read this book to find out.

Luke 18:8- “But yet the Son of man, when he cometh, shall he find, think you, faith on earth?”

In the Gospel, Our Lord Jesus Christ informs us that in the last days the true Faith would hardly be found on the earth. He tells us that “in the holy place” itself there will be “the abomination of desolation” (Mt. 24:15), and a deception so profound that, if it were possible, even the elect would be deceived (Mt. 24:24).

Matthew 24:15- “When therefore you shall see the abomination of desolation, which was spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place: he that readeth let him understand.”

Matthew 24:24-25- “For there shall arise false Christs and false prophets, and shall show great signs and wonders, insomuch as to deceive (if possible) even the elect. Behold I have told it to you, beforehand.”

2 Thess. 2:3-5- “Let no man deceive you by any means, for unless there come a revolt [apostasy] first, and the man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition, Who opposeth, and is lifted up above all that is called God, or that is worshipped, so that he sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself as if he were God. Remember you not, that when I was yet with you, I told you these things?”

In 1903, Pope St. Pius X thought that he might be seeing the beginning of the evils which will fully come to pass in the last days.

Pope St. Pius X, E Supremi (# 5), Oct. 4, 1903: “… there is good reason to fear lest this great perversity may be as it were a foretaste, and perhaps the beginning of those evils which are reserved for the last days; and that there may already be in the world the ‘ Son of Perdition’ of whom the Apostle speaks (2 Thess. 2:3).”1

The New Testament tells us that this deception will happen in the very heart of the Church’s physical structures, in “the Temple of God” (2 Thess. 2:4) and “in the holy place” (Mt. 24:15). It will arise because people receive not the love of the truth (2 Thessalonians 2:10).

In 2 Thessalonians 2, St. Paul speaks of the last days being characterized by a great apostasy that will be the worst ever – even worse than was experienced in the Arian crisis in the 4th century, in which an authentically Catholic priest was hardly to be found.

Fr. William Jurgens: “At one point in the Church’s history, only a few years before Gregory’s [Nazianz] present preaching (A.D. 380), perhaps the number of Catholic bishops in possession of sees, as opposed to Arian bishops in possession of sees, was no greater than something between 1% and 3% of the total. Had doctrine been determined by popularity, today we should all be deniers of Christ and opponents of the Spirit.”2

Fr. William Jurgens: “In the time of the Emperor Valens (4th century), Basil was virtually the only orthodox Bishop in all the East who succeeded in retaining charge of his see… If it has no other importance for modern man, a knowledge of the history of Arianism should demonstrate at least that the Catholic Church takes no account of popularity and numbers in shaping and maintaining doctrine: else, we should long since have had to abandon Basil and Hilary and Athanasius and Liberius and Ossius and call ourselves after Arius.”3

St. Gregory Nazianz (+380), Against the Arians: “Where are they who revile us for our poverty and pride themselves in their riches? They who define the Church by numbers and scorn the little flock?”4

If the Arian crisis – just a prelude to the Great Apostasy – was this extensive, how extensive will the Great Apostasy foretold by Our Lord and Saint Paul be?

Prophecy of St. Nicholas of Fluh (1417-1487): “The Church will be punished because the majority of her members, high and low, will become so perverted. The Church will sink deeper and deeper until she will at last seem to be extinguished, and the succession of Peter and the other Apostles to have expired. But, after this, she will be victoriously exalted in the sight of all doubters.”5

St. Paul further says that this apostasy will result in a man sitting in the temple of God and “shewing himself as if he were God.” Later in this book, we prove that this is exactly what has happened by a man sitting in St. Peter’s Basilica declaring that he and everyone else is God.

Fr. Herman Kramer was a Catholic priest who spent 30 years studying and writing a book on the Apocalypse. In his book, he wrote the following about St. Paul’s prophecy concerning the Antichrist sitting in the Temple of God.

“St. Paul says that Antichrist ‘sitteth in the temple of God’… This is not the ancient Temple of Jerusalem, nor a temple like it built by Antichrist, as some have thought, for then it would be his own temple… this temple is shown to be a Catholic Church, possibly one of the churches in Jerusalem or St. Peter’s in Rome, which is the largest church in the world and is in the full sense ‘The Temple of God.’”6

Notice that Kramer says that “the Temple of God” probably refers to St. Peter’s Basilica in Rome.

Pope Pius XI, Quinguagesimo ante (#30), Dec. 23, 1929: “… such a great number of them came to the Basilica of St. Peter’s for the jubilee of indulgence that We have probably never seen that great temple so crowded.”7

The Catholic Encyclopedia article on “Antichrist” indicates that St. Bernard believed that the Antichrist would be an antipope:

“ ...St. Bernard speaks in the passage of the Antipope [as the Beast of the Apocalypse].”8

Bl. Joachim (d. 1202): “Towards the end of the world, Antichrist will overthrow the pope and usurp his see.”9

But whether or not one believes that the Antichrist will be an antipope, it has definitely been prophesied that the forces of Antichrist will overtake Rome in the final days. On Sept. 19, 1846, Our Lady of La Salette prophesied that Rome would lose the Faith and become the Seat of the Antichrist in a final days apostasy from the one true Catholic Faith.

Our Lady of La Salette, Sept. 19, 1846: “Rome will lose the Faith and become the seat of the Anti-Christ… the Church will be in eclipse.”

This startling prophecy coincides with the prophecies in Sacred Scripture (Apocalypse 17 and 18), which inform us that the city of seven hills (Rome) will become a harlot (a counterfeit Bride of Christ), which will commit spiritual fornication (idolatry) and tread upon the blood of the saints (false ecumenism). The great harlot prophesied in the Bible is not the Catholic Church; it is a counterfeit Catholic Church, an apostate, phony Bride which arises in the last days to deceive Catholics and eclipse the true Church which has been reduced to a remnant. In this book we will bring forward the overwhelming, undeniable, irrefutable evidence from doctrinal grounds and unassailable facts that the “Church” which has arisen with the Second Vatican Council (1962-) is not the Catholic Church all, but rather massively fraudulent Counter-Church which denies fundamental teachings the Catholic Church.

We will show that the men who imposed this new Vatican II religion and the New Mass were not Catholics at all, but manifest heretics preaching a new religion.

In fact, any doubts about the authenticity of Our Lady’s message at La Salette will be obliterated by a careful examination of the evidence in this book. Among other things, this book will document that the Vatican now teaches that Jews are perfectly free not to believe in Jesus Christ.

This may startle some, but this is a fact. Without even considering all of the other apostasy which we will cover in this book, this fact proves that Our Lady’s words have come true: Rome (not the Catholic Church) has lost the Faith (given way to a non-Catholic, counterfeit sect) and become the seat of the Antichrist.

In late 2001, the Pontifical Biblical Commission released a book entitled The Jewish People and the Holy Scriptures in the Christian Bible. The book argues that the Jews’ continued wait for the Messiah is validated and justified by the Old Testament. “The expectancy of the Messiah was justified in the Old Testament,” papal spokesman Joaquin Navarro-Valls explained, “and if the Old Testament keeps its value, then it keeps that as a value, too. It says you cannot just say all the Jews are wrong and we are right.” Asked by reporters whether his statements might be taken to suggest that the Messiah may not in fact have come, Navarro-Valls replied, “It means it would be wrong for a Catholic to wait for the Messiah, but not for a Jew.” This means that the Vatican now holds that the Jews are perfectly free to reject Christ; this is the teaching of the Vatican II “popes.”

Rome has lost the Faith and become the seat of the Antichrist.

1 John 2:22 – “Who is a liar, but he who denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, who denieth the Father, and the Son.”

But how did this come about, and what are Catholics to do about it? This book will endeavor to answer both of those questions in detail.

Read more:

Endnotes for Section 1 :

1 The Papal Encyclicals, by Claudia Carlen, Raleigh: The Pierian Press, 1990, Vol. 3 (1903-1939), p. 6.

2 William Jurgens, The Faith of the Early Fathers, Collegeville, MN: The Liturgical Press, Vol. 2, p. 39.

3 William Jurgens, The Faith of the Early Fathers, Vol. 2, p. 3.

4 William Jurgens, The Faith of the Early Fathers, Vol. 2, p. 33.

5 Yves Dupont, Catholic Prophecy by Yves Dupont, Rockford, IL: Tan Books, 1973, p. 30.

6 Fr. Herman Kramer, The Book of Destiny, Tan Books, 1975, p. 321.

7 The Papal Encyclicals, Vol. 3 (1903-1939), p. 351.

8 The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume 1, “Antichrist,” Robert Appleton Co. 1907, p. 561.

9 Rev. Culleton, The Reign of Antichrist, Tan Books, 1974, p. 130.

History and beliefs of the Palmarian Church

The year 1966 was the start of some strange events in a Spanish village called Palmar de Troya. Two years later they supposedly accepted a form of private apparitions of the “Blessed Virgin”. There were at least two groups of seers, both condemned by a local, Vatican II conciliar bishop. In January of 1976 some of these “prophets” were consecrated bishops by a famous apostate roman “catholic” bishop, Peter Martin Ngo dinh Thuc (1897-1984) from South Vietnam. It was the beginning of a new 'Church'.

According to some sources only in 1976 the first few bishops consecrated 48 bishops, next year 11, one in 1978 and one in 1981, two in 1994, one in 1995, two in 1997, two in 1998 and three in 2000. Those more than 70 bishops, supported by a significant number of “faithful” from Europe, North and South America as well as Nigeria in Africa, call themselves 'the true Church' outside which there are no sacraments nor salvation.

On 5th November Anno Domini 2000, eighteen bishops of the Palmarian Church and seven of their nuns were excommunicated by their leader, 'pope Gregorio XVII', for the above mentioned reasons (see "Statements of Beliefs From El Palmar de Troya Archidona"). 'Pope Gregorio' in his sermon from 20th November 2000 mentioned that most of the German faithful of the Palmarian Church joined the Lefebvre group or traditionalist churches. Also Canadian palmarians decided to stay with the excommunicated bishops.

The Table of Contents:

1. The first part of Palmar de Troya apparitions (1968)

2. The second part of the visions (1969-75)

3. The beginning of sectarianism (1976-78)

4. The drama of Palmar de Troya (1979)

5. The dogmatic fruits of Palmar de Troya (after 1980)

6. The moral state of the palmarian leaders

7. The people who broke down with palmarians

8. The palmarian priests and faithful - how to evaluate them?

1/ The first part of the Palmar de Troya apparitions:

The most terrible description of supposed messages given by the “Blessed Virgin” in Palmar de Troya we can find in a sermon given by so called 'Pope Gregorio' on 15th August 1998 (published by the Palmar de Troya Sede Apostolica).

The first supposed heavenly messages were given to Maria Marin, Maria Louisa Vila, Rosario Arenillas and Pepe Cayetano in 1968. Future leaders of the palmarian movement, Clemente Dominguez y Gomez (“Pope” Gregory XVII) and Manuel Alonso Corral (“Pope” Peter II) came there as lay faithful. 'Pope Gregorio' leaves us with meaningful words about the first vision:

'so we kept coming there, and on one occasion a strongly built man, all of a sudden - as though possessed - right here in this lentisco, by a humanly inexplicable leap ended upside down, his head on the ground and his feet in the air, and a whirlwind swept him away. That was a terrifying, diabolical manifestation. After that, on that same day, we enquired of some people wandering about here, and some said: 'That's nothing. Here we have seen more than one Civil Guard, in uniform and wearing the tricorn hat, swept 50 meters away by whirlwind that has come along'. Our hair stood on end. We observed also that there were people who, after reciting the rosary, would stop praying because, they said, Our Lady did not like the Litany and it caused Her to leave; and if one person lit a candle, another would come and blot it out, saying that Our Lady had no desire for candle, that it startled Her'.

But in spite of that, Dominguez and Corral decided to continue to come to Palmar de Troya. Then, on 15th August 1968, Rosario Arenillas, one of seers, said to Dominguez:

- Today I have seen you dressed in white.
- What do you mean in white? I don't walk the streets of Seville in white trousers and white jacket and the like.
- No, no, no! It is a white soutane, all white from top to bottom, and nor for just any priest.
- But why can't it be for just any priest? In Latin America priests wear white soutanes because of heat.
- No, no! It's a pope's soutane.
- Madam, stop playing jokes on me. I have no thought now of studying for the priesthood.
- I have seen you here as Pope
- said the visionary to Dominguez.

2/ The second part of the visions.

Dominguez and Corral joined the movement and participated in spreading it. At nightfall on the 30th September 1969 Dominguez received his first own vision, after that there followed other false apparitions.

The first 'seers' with their spiritual director, 'Rev. Luna', started to consider Clemente Dominguez y Gomez and Manuel Alonso Corral as cheaters, but they didn't manage to convince any of the “faithful” of this fact. In 1976 a second group, headed by 'Rev. Felix A. Arenal', accused Dominguez and Corral of spreading false messages and left them. New visions were undoubtedly conservative in their meaning, and it is hard to find any explicit diabolical things in them.

It was almost the same time when the Novus Ordo Missae (the invalid Vatican II New Mass promulgated by Paul VI) appeared, that caused great spiritual doubts in the hearts of “Catholics” or apparent Catholics. Dominguez and Corral gave them palatable explanations to the crisis that had arisen. Let's remember that then, in 1969, almost nobody had heard about Archbishop Lefebvre or sedevacantism.

They really didn't know what to think and it was a great opportunity for people like 'ex-priest' Michael Collin alias 'pope Clemente XV' in France (Collin's was ordained a priest in 1935 and announced in 1936 that he had been ordained a bishop by Christ himself. He founded a community called the Order of the Mother of God (a name later changed to "Apostles of Infinite Love"), in response to the 1846 request made by the Blessed Virgin Mary, as reported later by Mélanie Calvat, one of the seers of La Salette. In 1950 he announced that he had been crowned 'Pope' and had taken the name Clement XV. Pope Pius XII laicized him in 1951 and publicly declared him, by name, a vitandus (one who should be avoided)), or the St. Jovite sect in Quebec, or Dominguez and Corral - to deceive people. These events were also followed by numerous false pseudo-traditionalist marian apparitions that didn't help make the situation better.

This is how the situation was explained in 'Short Biographical Sketch of His Holiness Pope Gregory XVII':

'the greater part of the cardinals, Bishops and Priests have apostatized. The reigning Pope, Saint Paul VI, is the innocent victim of freemasonry and communism which actually govern the Church. The Pope is kept under drugs, he is a prisoner within the walls of the Vatican, unable to do or decide anything save what the enemies of the Church ordain. The true doctrine of the Church has been adulterated; the Most Holy Sacrament profaned; the Blessed Virgin set aside. We are in the first great apostasy of the last times. One sole place of salvation remains: El Palmar de Troya, beacon and stronghold of the Faith, depository of Holy Tradition, seminary of the true teaching, altar where the true Sacrifice of the Mass is offered. Away from El Palmar reign darkness, confusion and error'.

3/ The beginning of sectarianism

Here is the whole tragedy - people decided to put their confidence in the seers from Spain, and gave their hearts (and money...) to a man who seemed for them to be well prepared by “Heaven” to rescue the Church. And that's how they started to be kept in a trap. Once they got involved with Palmar de Troya, other traditionalist groups also didn't want to get involved with them.

Let's mention some of those deceived people. The best know is 'Bishop Ngo dinh Thuc'. He was found by palmarians in a very poor condition. In 1975 he had been living in Arpino, a small village near Rome in Italy. His family was murdered by communists in Vietnam, he was left by his friends, and “forced” by Antipope Paul VI to resign from his See (a See that he never really occupied due to the fact of his manifest heresies). And when he almost gave up all his hope, Palmar de Troya seers found him with the help of 'Father Maurice Revaz', who for some time was in Econe, working in a seminary build by 'Archbishop Lefebvre'. Let's allow Ngo Thuc to speak for himself: 'at that time a priest came to me who I had formerly known in Econe, Switzerland. He said to me point-blank: Your Excellency, the Holy Virgin has sent me to bring you at once to Spain in order to render her a service. My car is waiting for You at the door of the presbytery and we will leave immediately so as to reach there by Christmas. Thrilled by this invitation, I said to him: If it is a service demanded by the Holy Virgin, I am ready to follow you to the end of the world'.

Ngo dinh Thuc was the first one from a countless group of people used by Dominguez and Corral. Thuc ordained them priests and in January 1976 consecrated them bishops together with three “catholic” priests - 'Rev. Camilo Estevez Puga de Maside' from Spain, 'Rev. Michael Thomas Donelly' from Ireland and 'Rev. Francis Bernard Sandler' from United States. Having now valid apostolic succession (although heretics and schismatics use it illicitly), they lost their interests in Ngo Thuc, who moved to Toulon in France and cut all his connections with them. He even said that he only “pretended” to ordain priests and consecrate bishops there, but it's hard to believe him.

In 1975-78 he was really convinced that palmarians possessed the Truth and after 1978 he denied it. From a strategical point of view it would be easier for opposers to say that palmarians have no priesthood at all, but simply: this is not true.

During two years 1976-78 Clemente Dominguez, now bishop Ferdinand, together with Manuel Corral, now bishop Isidore Mary, consecrated more than 50 bishops, and using the name 'Carmelite Order of the Holy Face' started to build up a parallel 'Church'.

It was successfully ended on 15th August 1978 when 'cardinals' of the 'Church' made bishop Ferdinand a 'pope', 'pope Gregorio XVII' - as he called himself.

4/ The drama of Palmar de Troya

The news spread among traditional “Catholics” of the whole world. New bishops were almost everywhere - in Spain, Ireland, England, France, Germany, Switzerland, Italy, Canada, United States, Columbia, Brasil, Argentina, Nigeria - endeavoring to “help” the spiritual needs of people, who did not feel well with the new Mass.

And, most importantly, Gregorio XVII really knew what to say to catch the attention of traditional minded “Catholics”. In his first document he condemned the Novus Ordo Missae and re-affirmed the teaching of Trent. In the second one he proclaimed a new dogma - Mary mediatrix and Mary co-redemptrix.

By the end of 1978 the long awaited consecration of Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary was done, he forbade concelebration, made cassock obligatory as well as reminded that Latin is the official language of the true Church. He excommunicated communists, masons, said a few strong sentences against birth control, made a lot of new saints - including 'Saint Francisco Franco' and 'Saint Jose Antonio Primo de Rivera', and announced that civil War in Spain 1936-39 should be titled a 'Holy Crusade'.

Many gullible people who then heard about a 'true pope' who lives hidden somewhere in a desert in Spain, and who hadn't had any true knowledge about the diabolical roots of the apparitions that led to the creation of the Palmarian sect, obviously were easily deceived. That's how he managed to 'catch' a lot of people, especially elderly priests and nuns: 'Rev. James Williams' from the White Fathers, 'Rev. Wiliam Daly', 'Rev. Olan Healey', 'Rev. Andrzej Dabrowski' (a Pole ordained a priest in 1945) and many others.

What were their reasons for joining the palmarian Church? Let's look closer on a few cases from biographical sketches published by the Santa Sede Apostolica Sevilla:

Case number one:

“'Sister Mary Teresa of the Holy Face and Our Lady of the Miraculous Medal - know as Frances Bernadette O'Malley (...) her father died (...) leaving the family in extreme poverty (...) in 1959 she offered herself to the Legion of Mary and was sent to Germany with another young lady to work in order to counteract Communists and atheists among the workers and spread the devotion to the Most Holy Virgin Mary (...) this time they sent her to Sweden, a country well known for its depraved morals (...) she founded many Legion of Mary cenacles in all parts of Sweden (...) in 1972 she was forces to abandon her apostolate in Sweden because of a [Vatican II] bishop, now progressivist, ordered her to remove the name of Mary from the Legion of Mary'.”

Case number two:

“'Sister Mary Julie of the Holy Face and the Immaculate Heart of Mary - know as Theresa Himmeler in the world (...) on the 4th of April 1935 she left for Vienna and entered in the Order of Poor Schoolteacher Sisters of Our Dear Lady (...) as from 1963 she began to feel uncomfortable in her own order, for her soul was unable to accept such destructive changes [after the Vatican II] (...) she had to fight hard in her convent to receive Holy Communion kneeling and combat other progressivist innovations also'.”

She left her convent in November 1978.

A few days later she entered the “Carmelite Order of the Holy Face”.

Sister Mary Julie and sister Mary Teresa are two examples from hundreds - examples of people, lay or living consecrated life, who were caught up by the palmarians, because of odd things done and said by their 'conciliar' so called “superiors.”

In the 1970's The Palmarian Church was very similar in their beliefs and practices to pre-Vatican II “Catholicism.” All of this was dramatically changed in the 80's however.

5/ The dogmatic fruits of Palmar de Troya

During the years 1975-79 thousands of people, mostly from Spain and Ireland, converted to the Palmar de Troya 'Church'.

Then the blow came. Since 1980 'pope Gregorio' started to change everything that is important in the religious life - the rites of the sacraments and the teaching of the Church. He deprived them of the sacraments, but kept strict moral rules and from the catholic principle of allegiance to superiors made an instrument of brainwashing.

In 1980 'pope Gregorio' introduced a 'palmarian rite' of Mass, which includes almost only the Consecration. During the next few years he changed all rites.

We should also carefully examine the so called 'Palmarian Catechism'. The catechism teaches that in the Holy Mass are two sacrifices - Christ's and Mary's. 'Pope Gregorio' says also that Mary's body and blood are present in the Holy Communion and that we receive a bit of her blood during Baptism. He thinks that somewhere in Space there is a place kept away from the first human sin - he calls it the Planet of Mary. On the other hand there is also a place where one can't hope for salvation - the Planet of Antichrist.

Creatures, who live on the Planet of Antichrist come from the fourth dimension, and people who live in the Planet of Mary, including Elias, Enoch, Moses and Saint John, look at the Space from the eight dimension. During the Armageddon people from the Planet of Mary will come back on Earth to help us in the battle.

On the other hand we should remember that the 'Palmarian Catechism' clearly reaffirms main evangelical principles, forgotten by so many modern 'neochristians'.

Probably the clearest comparison for American readers would be one with Veronica Lueken from Bayside. In both cases we can find an influence of not only heresy, but also of science fiction.

6/ Moral state of palmarian leaders

That's the most shadowy and sad part of the story. Priests left theirs parishes and joined the palmarians because they wanted to live a modest, catholic life. And there they where... sexually abused by their 'pope'. In the 1990s, Gregory XVII was accused of sexual impropriety with several of his priests and nuns. In 1997 he admitted to it and begged forgiveness. Let's allow one of the bishops consecrated in Palmar de Troya, 'Rev. Geoffrey Francis Mayenne', to explain it:

'perhaps the worst fruit of the tree was homosexuality. (...) It was the cancer emanating from the three superiors. Instead of actually trying to kill it, they allowed it to grow; and furthered it! For many years the bogey was well hidden but in the lat 80's it paraded in public. How in God's name does the superior of a religious order, Clemente, ask someone to stay behind after lunch, and this was done in a public forum, for implied sexual purposes? In my own case, I was ill one evening in my room shortly before departing the community (in 1990 - R.N.). Suddenly the door was opened and the false prophet (Clemente Dominguez - R.N.) entered. He wanted to be accommodated sexually. I told him that I wasn't that way inclined and with his tail between his legs he left the room. Shortly after that I left the community'.

When the problem started to be obvious among the 'faithful', 'pope Gregorio' decided to cut the gossip, by affirming in his sermons that they are true. For example on the 21 of January 2001 'pope Gregorio' had a vision of Our Lord Jesus Christ, who told him:

'- O My bellowed Vicar, that grace of chastity which you are working hard for, I will grant you in the near future, if you preserve, as a permanent grace; but beforehand you must undergo dreadful temptations, and thus obtain it at a higher price (...)
- Lord! No, not greater temptations than in the past. No, Lord, I cannot. Lord, I cannot. Lord, I cannot. I will fall. You know that I am weak. In chastity, Lord, You know that I am weak. Lord, for long years it has been a battle to be chaste, for years and years (...)
- Oh My beloved Vicar Gregory XVII, De Gloria Olivae, to gain so great a grace as confirmation in chastity, I shall permit Satan to tempt you as he never has up till now (...)

It's just a part of a supposed talk between Jesus and 'pope Gregorio', which was published by Sancta Sede Apostolica Sevilla.

7. People who broke down with palmarians

Why the so called faithful and bishops haven't left the sect? There have been two main reasons. First of all 'pope Gregorio' managed to convince them that he would 'withdraw' from bishops and priests outside his Church all powers to confer any Sacrament.

When the 'faithful' had come to him, he kept on answering - yes I'm a poor sinner, but also a pope and nowhere in the whole world will You find sacraments. What is more worthy? Here You have the grace of receiving the Body of Christ, but You must be strong and accept that I'm just a sinner and I have some problems with my sexual life. Please pray for me. And this was said by a man who was a supposed stigmatic, and who for a long time had made a lot of 'miracles'. So they simply believed him.

The second reason was that they had nowhere to go. Of course they always might be 'laicized' in the Conciliar Church, as 'Bishop Maurice Revaz', 'Bishop Francis Coll', 'Bishop Manfred Zewell' or 'Bishop Ciaran Broadberry' were. But the most of them want to stay in contact with Holy Tradition. Among other traditional groups they were generally not welcome.

Anyway some of them managed to get out. Usually they hide their past allegiance and allegations with palmarians or at least don't want to talk about it.

[1] First of all we should mention here a big group of people and at least a few priests in France, whose leader is 'Rev. Placide Marc', who lives in the Monastere de la Croix de la Borde. They recognize John Paul II as “pope” and use the tridentine rite missal.

[2] Then there is 'Rev. John Quinn', who is co-director of Tridentine Rite Conference in United States.

[3] 'Bishop Michel F. Main' in 1987 was consecrated again, sub condicione, by George J. Musey, a sedevacantist from United States and he serves as a tridentine bishop in France.

[4] The same was done to 'Bishop Alfred Paul Seiwert-Fleige' by Jean Roux in 1994.

[5] We also should mention 'Bishop Raymond Maurice Terrasson' who, after breaking with Palmar de Troya, ordained considerable number of priests and bishops all around the world - including 'Rev. Timothy Hennebery', who was made a priest by famous 'Bishop Moises Carmona-Rivera'.

Sedevacantist “converts” from palmarianism and their decedents can be found all around the world, including such places like Gabon in Africa. Unfortunately some bishops went even more apostate on tradition after breaking with Palmar de Troya. The most famous example of it is the so called Order Mater Dei run by 'Bishop Michael Patric O'Connor Cox' well known from the fact that he made the famous pop singer Sinead O'Connor, who is a female, a tridentine rite 'priest'!

8. Palmarian priests - how to evaluate them?

I think that palmarian ordinations should be divided in two groups:

[1] Those consecrated on August 6th of 1978 (proclaiming their own pope) are valid but are to be considered schismatic. Those of them who didn't break away from the palmarians immediately after the false conclave have even less reason for excuse.

[2] Consecrated from 1978 to circa 1983-85 - they were valid but for sure schismatic. Those of them who didn't break away from the palmarians immediately after the false and heretical Palmarian council, and other heretical implementations, have even less reason for excuse.

9. The Summing up

[1] For sake of the future faithful all palmarian priests should publicly abjure their errors, including schism, heresy and their illicit ordination.

[2] Bishops and priests ordained in the palmarian rite that have converted to the traditional Catholic faith have to get a dispensation from a true Catholic Pope (whenever the sedevacante will be over) in order to perform their priestly and jurisdictional functions licitly.

[3] They need help - first of all prayer and then the confession including careful examination of conscience and behaviour.

[4] We also must note that most of them lack deep theological knowledge, that does not invalid their priesthood, but might cause a big difficulty in serving as a priest.

[5] We have to constantly pray in order to convert those poor people.


[2]. Our enemy, the Devil, first and foremost comes to us and enter our hearts through our eyes. No other sense is more potent in tempting man. Learning to control what you look at is absolutely crucial in order to be saved, for every time you look willfully with lust in your heart at an unchaste, enticing or unsuitable object, or any object at all for that matter, even if modest, you have most assuredly committed a mortal sin! Therefore, whenever you come across something sinful with your eyes (or even something licit but which is very beautiful) you must make a habit to look down or away – for the sin of lust will not be far away – making the sign of the cross and saying 1 or 3 Hail Mary’s, which is highly recommended since it helps against impurities.

Countless of Saints have rebuked people for the great error of failing to control their eyes. St. Ignatius of Loyola for example rebuked a brother for looking at his face for more than a brief moment. St. Bridget made a specific confession for every single face she saw during each day! This is true wisdom, but the world and current custom and habit tells you to always watch the person you are with, or looking at, in the face, even if they are on the Television! This is a bad custom or habit to say the least. This will many times lead to sins and impure thoughts and temptations of the Devil. Modesty and purity requires us to not stare people in the face, and especially the eyes, even at all, or only for a very short moment, even when we talk to them directly. In former times, this was common knowledge.

St. Alphonsus Liguori writes the following concerning this: “But I do not see how looks at young persons of a different sex can be excused from the guilt of a venial fault, or even from mortal sin, when there is proximate danger of criminal consent. "It is not lawful," says [Pope] St. Gregory, "to behold what it is not lawful to covet." The evil thought which proceeds from looks, though it should be rejected, never fails to leave a stain upon the soul.” (The True Spouse of Jesus Christ, Mortification of the Eyes, p. 221)

This virtue may indeed be hard to put into practice for many in the beginning, but overtime and with practice, it will become easier.

The above quote from St. Alphonsus also shows why most of the things broadcasted on the media are totally unsuitable to watch or read. News in itself isn’t evil or contrary to God or morals but most newspapers or news-channels today have totally unacceptable pictures or immodestly dressed or very beautiful tv-hosts, which make them extremely unsuitable to read or watch, or at least to fix one’s eye on. Remember, "It is not lawful," says St. Gregory, "to behold what it is not lawful to covet." To read newspapers which you know will contain many unchaste, immodest and sexual pictures and useless stories about sex, etc., is complete idiocy and will lead to sins of the flesh if you cannot guard yourself. Therefore, if you care for your salvation, you must not read any newspaper or magazine or watch any show or film that contains immodesty of people tempting you.

St. Alphonsus, On Avoiding the Occasion of Sin: “Now, no one can receive absolution unless he purpose firmly to avoid the occasion of sin; because to expose himself to such occasions, though sometimes he should not fall into sin, is for him a grievous sin. And when the occasion is voluntary and is actually existing at the present time, the penitent cannot be absolved until he has actually removed the occasion of sin. For penitents find it very difficult to remove the occasion; and if they do not take it away before they receive absolution they will scarcely remove it after they have been absolved.” (The complete ascetical works of St. Alphonsus, vol. 15, p. 543)

For example, in the past I have gone to numerous mainstream news websites just to read news, and it has become so bad that I never go to them unless I first have all the images blocked (on my web-browser). In fact, I have even made a habit of surfing the web without any images or JavaScript enabled at all, or at least without images on depending on the browser and the work I do. Almost all sites works perfectly fine without images and JavaScript enabled anyway. And on the few sites that don’t work without JavaScript or images enabled, one can always allow an exception for that site.

It is highly important for one’s salvation to block and not allow images to be shown when surfing the internet because without a doubt, almost all sites without exception will have some form or another of immodestly dressed women displayed; and, in the cases they are not immodest, they are still very beautiful or sensual looking. It’s unavoidable, even if the article may seem sound. In truth, I have seen and learned that from personal experience too many times.

Adblock or Adblock Plus extension for Firefox or Google Chrome web-browsers are also good tools to get rid of all internet ads, immoral or otherwise. And so if people don’t use a web-browser that can use extensions (or if they don’t have an Adblock installed) they must change internet browser and install an Adblock by virtue of obedience to God’s law that demands modesty and the avoidance of occasions of falling into sin when it is possible to do so.

That one must avoid the proximate occasion of sin in order to be Saved and receive Forgiveness of one’s sins from God is a certain fact of the Natural and Divine law that has always been taught by the Church and Her Saints. For instance, Blessed Pope Innocent XI during his papacy, condemned three propositions that denied this truth:

Pope Innocent XI, Various Errors on Moral Matters #61, March 4, 1679: “He can sometimes be absolved, who remains in a proximate occasion of sinning, which he can and does not wish to omit, but rather directly and professedly seeks or enters into.” – Condemned statement by Pope Innocent XI.

Pope Innocent XI, Various Errors on Moral Matters #62, March 4, 1679: “The proximate occasion for sinning is not to be shunned when some useful and honorable cause for not shunning it occurs.” – Condemned statement by Pope Innocent XI.

Pope Innocent XI, Various Errors on Moral Matters #63, March 4, 1679: “It is permitted to seek directly the proximate occasion for sinning for a spiritual or temporal good of our own or of a neighbor.” – Condemned statement by Pope Innocent XI.

Here we see that the Church confirms that the opinion that “It is permitted to seek directly the proximate occasion for sinning for a spiritual or temporal good of our own or of a neighbor” is directly condemned. And this condemnation is about those who “seek directly the proximate occasion for sinning” for a good cause, rather than for a selfish cause. But most people in this world do not even watch or listen to evil and ungodly media for a good cause but rather for the sake of pleasure or for other unnecessary reasons, and it is certainly not necessary “for a spiritual or temporal good of our own or of a neighbor.” This shows us that the Church and the Natural Law absolutely abhors and condemns the opinion that one can watch or listen to media that can tempt a person to sin. Indeed, not only the occasions of sin, like evil, worldly and ungodly media, but also the “the proximate occasion for sinning for a spiritual or temporal good of our own or of a neighbor” must be totally rejected and shunned if one wants to attain salvation.

People who reject this advice and continue to put themselves in a proximate or near occasion of sin will undoubtedly lose their souls, since God will allow the devil to fool them in some way since they rejected the Word of God, and chose to put themselves in the way of temptation. Many there are, indeed, who presumptuously claim that they won’t get tempted by watching or listening to worldly media, or that they will be able to control it, but here we see in the condemnations of Blessed Pope Innocent XI that one may not even put oneself in “the proximate occasion for sinning for a spiritual or temporal good of our own or of a neighbor”. God will undoubtedly leave a person who is presumptuous and prideful, and the Church and Her Saints have always condemned such individuals that trusts in their own strength. As a matter of fact, one can even understand from the light of natural reason that one is not allowed to put oneself in the occasion of sin, so those who do this act will have no excuse whatsoever on the day of judgment. In addition, a person who watches bad, worldly or ungodly media, tempts his fellow man to watch these evil things also, and thus, by his bad example, puts both himself and others in the way of damnation by his selfishness and presumption. So in addition to damning himself if he obstinately continues in such a course of life, such a person also actually tries to damn others by his bad example, trying to drag others with him into the eternal darkness and fire of hell. This is a kind of evil that is breathtaking to behold! It is thus a fact “that when men avoid the occasions of sin, God preserves them; but when they expose themselves to danger, they are justly abandoned by the Lord, and easily fall into some grievous transgressions.” (St. Alphonsus Liguori, The True Spouse of Jesus Christ, Mortification of the Eyes, p. 221)

The pitiful and unreasonable addiction to media by so many “Catholics” or “Christians” today is something new, and almost no one before the 20th century was so miserably addicted to it as the weak and bad willed population of our own times! The amount of pitiful and pathetic excuses that we have had to hear from bad willed people who try to excuse their act of putting themselves in the proximate or near occasion of sin is, simply said, almost endless. Even though they understand that they are not allowed to endanger their souls, they just couldn’t care since they are hooked on the media, just like a drug addict, who need his daily “fix” to endure the day. For about a hundred years ago, almost no media existed as compared to today, and people thrived and the crime rates was as nothing when compared to today. So the unreasonable addiction to media cannot be excused, for man does not need media at all to survive, and putting oneself in the near or “the proximate occasion for sinning for a spiritual or temporal good of our own or of a neighbor” is directly condemned by the Church.

Concerning music, it is just a fact that all kinds of popular music are mortally sinful trash that is made by the Devil for the sole reason to drag your soul to an eternal hell fire. There will be countless of impure suggestions toward sin along with a rejection of any kind of morality and decency. Popular music praises sin, and oftentimes speak against God and morality. In short, it contains the same errors and sins that worldly media have, such as: immodest clothing, adultery, blasphemy, foul language and cursing, greed, fornication, make-up, vanity, gloating, magic, occultism, acceptance of false religions, idol-making of mortal humans etc... and are many times even worse. Popular songs that doesn’t praise the idolatry and worship of man is hard to find today, and it’s even harder today to find popular songs which does not praise or worship sin and worldliness as norm. But worse still are the music-videos. A person cannot even listen to these songs without grave sin, but how much more then does a person sin when watching these sinful music-videos with half naked women/men worshiping sin and the occult by deed and example? This is sadly what many of your children are watching daily on the TV you have given them! You must reject this evil music entirely and not accept this to be played in your home.

Not all music are bad or sinful, you can, for example, listen to religious music, instrumental music, classical music or other music in line with decency and morals. But the highest good is of course not to listen to music at all. Giving up one’s own will is always the highest good.

The best music which one may listen to is of course religious music, since it draws your mind and heart toward our Lord Jesus Christ, Mary, the joy of Heaven, etc.

The next best music which one may listen to is classical music and instrumental music where no singing is involved, for this will not affect your mind toward worldly things as worldly songs always otherwise do.

The worst kind of music one could listen to is music which sings about worldly affairs. A person that listens much to music should avoid listening to worldly songs, otherwise he or she will be drawn toward these worldly things and affairs which are sung about. It is also very necessary to test yourself if you are addicted to music in any way, even totally acceptable music. This is easily done by going a few days without music so that you can test if some withdrawal symptoms effect you. All addictions of earthly things are evil and effect the soul in a harmful way. Just because you don’t see or understand the effect doesn’t mean that it isn’t happening. Spiritual sloth and depression among other things are common attributes of an addiction to media or music.

The effects from the wrong kind of music, and secular songs are very dangerous. There are numerous quotes from the secular world that can be brought forth to prove this point.

"Music directly represents the passions of states of the soul-gentleness, anger, courage, temperance... if one listens to the wrong kind of music he will become the wrong kind of person..." (Quote from Aristotle)

Brain specialists, Dr. Richard Pellegrino declared that music has the uncanny power to "...trigger a flood of human emotions and images that have the ability to instantaneously produce very powerful changes in emotional states." He went on to say: "Take it from a brain guy. In 25 years of working with the brain, I still cannot affect a person's state of mind the way that one simple song can."

Dr. Allan Bloom is quite correct when he asserts that "popular music has one appeal only, a barbaric appeal, to sexual desire... but sexual desire undeveloped and untutored... popular music gives children, on a silver plate, with all the public authority of the entertainment industry, everything their parents always used to tell them they had to wait for until they grew up... Young people know that rock and popular music has the beat of sexual intercourse... Never was there such an art form directed so exclusively to children... [Every Catholic must of course understand that masturbation is a clear mortal sin!] The words implicitly and explicitly describe bodily acts that satisfy sexual desire and treat them as its only natural and routine culmination for children who do not yet have the slightest imagination of marriage or family." (Dr. Allan Bloom, Closing of the American Mind, pp. 73-74).

Dr. Allan Bloom: "Today, a very large proportion of young people between the ages of 10 and 20 live for music. It is their passion; nothing else excites them as it does; they cannot take seriously anything alien to music. When they are in school and with their families, they are longing to plug themselves back into their music. Nothing surrounding them - school, family, church - has anything to do with their musical world. At best that ordinary life is neutral, but mostly it is an impediment, drained of vital..."

Dr. Paul King, medical director of the adolescent program at Charter Lakeside Hospital, in Memphis, TN, says more than 80% of his teen patients are there because of rock music. Dr. King says, "the lyrics become a philosophy of life, a religion."

To allow yourself or your children to have any kind of evil or ungodly music like rock, pop, rap, techno, trance, or any kind of music that is even remotely similar to this is mortally sinful and really idiotic when presented with these facts. Billions of souls are burning now as we speak in the excruciating fire of hell since they refused to stop listening to bad and sinful music! You will have your children eating your heart out for all eternity in hell because of the violent hatred they will have against you, since you could have hindered them in their sin, but refused to do so. In short, just like with all bad or worldly media, God will abandon a person who listens to such worldly music since they chose to put themselves in the proximate occasion for sinning.

In conclusion: We advice all people to use the internet in this safe way as described above, and always have images blocked. And we want to warn people not be deceived by the Devil or their evil attachment to images on this point. Again, remember what St. Alphonsus says: “when men avoid the occasions of sin, God preserves them; but when they expose themselves to danger, they are justly abandoned by the Lord, and easily fall into some grievous transgressions.”

Attachment to images made me delay using the internet in this safe way for way too long. If there are images you want to view, then you can always open another web-browser (with an ad-block installed!) where images are enabled, or enable them quickly on the web-browser you’re currently on. (Or you can just right click on the image and click with the scroll mouse button on “view image” in Firefox so that the image can be seen in a new tab; in Chrome just right click and press “Open image in new tab” and it will show the image.) Most of the time there are no real reasons or necessity to see any images anyway. Only curiosity makes us want to see them. Of course, when images are necessary or needed, then it is lawful to surf with them on for as long as it is necessary, provided it is not a danger to one’s soul and the site is not bad. But how often do we need to see images at all times? Never. Therefore, if we have no reason or necessity to have them on, they must be off.

The best and easiest user experience in using the internet in this safe way is using a web-browser with add-ons or extensions installed that manually blocks and unblocks all images easily with just one click of a button, which means that you will not have to enter settings all the time to do this. By using extensions to block images, you can just click on the icon visible on the top-right side of the web-browser, thus manually blocking and unblocking all images, or just press on the image itself as explained in the Google Chrome section.

We generally recommend no one to use any other webbrowser than Google Chrome, since it is so much better when it comes to the extensions available, as is explained in the above article. The image blocker extension for Google Chrome is just superior to all other webbrowsers, which means that more people will continue using an image blocker when surfing the internet and not give up.

If you want recommendations for other webbrowsers such as Firefox, Opera, Safari, Edge, Internet Explorer etc. you need to consult the links.

For the best ad-blocker for Google Chrome web-browser, visit this link:

uBlock Origin:

This adblocker is the perhaps the best of them all but more advanced and comes with the additional plus that it has no “acceptable” advertising built into the program, which means there is no need to disable anything as with the other adblockers. It also helps you keep your Ad-Blocker active and the webpage working, when you visit a website and it asks you to disable.

In order to understand how to use and configure uBlock Origin in order to remove as much ads as possible, you need to read this and the following section.

If you want to use other adblockers and other webbrowsers and configure them correctly, you need to consult these links:

uBlock Origin for Google Chrome, Firefox, Opera and Microsoft Edge

AdBlock for Google Chrome, Opera, Safari and Microsoft Edge

Adblock Plus for Google Chrome, Opera, Safari and Microsoft Edge

Adblock Plus for Firefox

For best image blockers for Google Chrome web-browser, visit these links:

Wizmage Image Blocker:

This image blocker is the most convenient and user friendly image blocker that I know of. With one click, you can display the image or hide it again. It is only available for Chrome, sadly. If you want to learn how to use this image blocker and everything it can do you will need to read the more detailed instruction on how to use it.

But in order for the above image blocker to work more effectively, it will be necessary to also install Fast Image Blocker for Google Chrome and have it activated at the same time with Wizmage Image Blocker. The reason for this is that the Wizmage extension does not always block all images on certain sites nor does the programs always block all images immediately. You also have the additional benefit that the Wizmage’s image feature (of easily showing the images) still works in most cases with Fast Image Blocker activated at the same time.

Here is the direct download link to Fast Image Blocker for Google Chrome:

If you need more detailed instructions with images explaining how to use and configure the extensions, see the section on Fast Image Blocker for Chrome, and Wizmage Image Blocker for Chrome.

After installing Fast Image Blocker, click on the camera icon and remove every single site already put into the “exceptions list”. Press the X icon in order to remove a website from the list. There are a lot of websites put into this list as exceptions as you will see after having installed the program (not a smart move, since it makes people think the program doesn’t work!).

Only add exceptions (the + icon with the address already inserted) that are absolutely necessary or needed, since it won’t block images on that site if you have it added.

Also, when clicking the camera icon, if the camera icon in the menu is colored, this means the image blocker is activated; if it is grey, it means it is disabled for all websites.

Since there are some known problems when using both of these image blockers at the same time, it is advisable that you read the section “Solutions to some known problems when using the extensions”. It is important that you use both image blockers at the same time.

If you want to use other image blockers and other webbrowsers and configure them correctly, you need to consult these links:

The best and safest image blockers for Firefox

Best and safest Image Blocker for Opera

Why you should completely disable images in Internet Explorer even if you never use it

Microsoft Edge, Safari, and others

For best flash and html5 blockers for Google Chrome web-browser, visit these links:

(A flash blocker helps you have more control of flash content by preventing it from loading in webpages until you allow it, such as videos and other flash related content, which means that you cannot see videos or things that are flash related playing or showing their content automatically without you first having given your authorization.)


This flash blocker is the only one we currently recommend for Chrome since it blocks more flash content than any other flash blocker we know of.

But in order for the this flash blocker to work properly, you need also to download and install an extension that blocks html5 content from automatically playing on youtube and on other websites that you are browsing, such as this one:

Disable HTML5 Autoplay:

Since html5 is becoming the new standard online, is not enough with just a flash blocker anymore; and most youtube videos are also automatically played with the new html5 format when available.

In order to learn all the information you need to know about these flash and html5 blockers and how to use and configure them in the best possible way for your own convenience, please see the Flashcontrol section, and the Disable HTML5 Autoplay section for Google Chrome.

If you want to use other flash blockers and other webbrowsers and configure them correctly, you need to consult these links:

The best and safest flash and html5 blockers for Firefox

Best and safest Flash and HTML5 Blocker for Opera

Internet Explorer

Microsoft Edge, Safari, and others

If you don’t use an add-on (which you should be doing) the best browser to use is the Google Chrome web-browser since it allows you the option to disable both images and JavaScript on all specific internet sites (Firefox doesn’t allow this option with Java or Images at all unless one first download extensions); and it is best since it allows you (after you have disabled images or Java in settings) an option to enable the images or java on the site you’re currently on—without having to enter settings all the time to do this. The bad thing with this option, however, is that it perpetually enables and allows all images to be shown on that domain and not just temporarily. So do not allow images to be shown in this way on all sites or bad sites but only on trustworthy sites you go to often. It is idiocy to perpetually allow images on various websites just because you are curious of the pictures in one article. (You can also remove sites manually from “allow images” exceptions in settings afterwards if you made a mistake. It is also possible to right click on a blocked image an press “Open image in new tab” and then it will show the image. But it is preferable to just install in image block extension instead since it is so much more easier and convenient.)

Also, in Firefox, the images displayed by Google is not blocked by all image blockers. That is why we recommend users to use Google Chrome instead of Firefox. So when you search for something on this browser, you will not risk seeing something bad being displayed by Google against your will. Please see the best image blockers for Firefox for all the information on how to safely block all images in this web-browser.

Always surf without images on. Don’t be a fool by rejecting this advice of the Popes and Saints of the Church concerning the unlawfulness of putting oneself in the proximate occasion for sinning and of looking on things that are unlawful to covet or behold and that are a danger to one’s salvation. If you want to see images on some site, then allow the images only temporarily and afterwards block it again so that you do not continue surfing the internet with images on.

And yes, it is a sin to refuse to follow this advice since it’s virtually impossible to escape bad and immodest images and commercials of men or women tempting you every day when surfing the internet (and the same of course applies to watching most media too, which is why we recommend people never to watch movable images and that they only listen to the audio). Only a condemned person not fearing God or sin at all would refuse to follow this good advice that helps him avoid falling into sexual temptations and sins everyday.

St. Alphonus, On Avoiding the Occasions of Sin: “We find in this day’s gospel that after his resurrection Jesus Christ entered, though the doors were closed, into the house in which the apostles were assembled, and stood in the midst of them. St. Thomas says that the mystical meaning of this miracle is that the Lord does not enter into our souls unless we keep the door of the senses shut. (On John, 20, 4) If, then, we wish Jesus Christ to dwell within us, we must keep the doors of our senses closed against dangerous occasions, otherwise the devil will make us his slaves. I will show today the great danger of perdition to which they who do not avoid the occasions of sin expose themselves.

“1. We read in the Scriptures that Christ and Lazarus arose from the dead. Christ rose to die no more: "Christ rising from the dead, dies no more." (Rom. 6. 9); but Lazarus arose and died again. The Abbot Guerric remarks that Christ arose free and unbound; "but Lazarus came forth bound feet and hands." (John 11.44) Miserable the man, adds this author, who rises from sin bound by any dangerous occasion: he will die again by losing the divine grace. He, then, who wishes to save his soul, must not only abandon sin, but also the occasions of sin: that is, he must renounce such an intimacy, such a house; he must renounce those wicked companions, and all similar occasions that incite him to sin.

“2. In consequence of original sin, we all have an inclination to do what is forbidden. Hence St. Paul complained that he experienced in himself a law opposed to reason: "But I see another law in my members, fighting against the law of my mind, and captivating me in the law of sin." (Rom. 7.23) Now, when a dangerous occasion is present, it violently excites our corrupt desires, so that it is then very difficult to resist them: because God withholds efficacious helps from those who voluntarily expose themselves to the occasion of sin. "He that loves danger shall perish in it." (Ecclus. 3.27) "When," says St. Thomas, in his comment on this passage, "we expose ourselves to danger, God abandons us in it." St. Bernardine of Siena teaches that the counsel of avoiding the occasions of sin is the best of all counsel, and as it were the foundation of religion.

“3. St. Peter says that "the devil goes about seeking whom he may devour." (1 Pet. 5.8) He is constantly going about our souls, endeavoring to enter and take possession of them. Hence, he seeks to place before us the occasions of sin, by which he enters the soul. "Explorat," says St. Cyprian, "an sit pars cujus aditu penetret." When the soul yields to the suggestions of the devil, and exposes itself to the occasions of sin, he easily enters and devours it. The ruin of our first parents arose from their not flying from the occasions of sin. God had prohibited them not only to eat, but even to touch the forbidden apple. In answer to the serpent tempting her, Eve said: "God has commanded us that we should not eat, and that we should not touch it." (Gen. 3.3) But "she saw, took, and ate" the forbidden fruit: she first looked at it, she then took it into her hands, and afterwards ate it. This is what ordinarily happens to all who expose themselves to the occasions of sin. Hence, being once compelled by exorcisms to tell the sermon which displeased him most, the devil confessed that it was the sermon on avoiding the occasions of sin. As long as we expose ourselves to the occasions of sin, the devil laughs at all our good purposes and promises made to God. The greatest care of the enemy is to induce us not to avoid evil occasions; for these occasions, like a veil placed before the eyes, prevent us from seeing either the lights received from God, or the eternal truths, or the resolutions we have made: in a word, they make us forget all, and as it were force us into sin.

“4. "Know it to be a communication with death; for you are going in the midst of snares." (Ecclus. 9.20) Everyone born in this world enters into the midst of snares. Hence, the Wise Man advises those who wish to be secure to guard themselves against the snares of the world, and to withdraw from them. "He that is aware of the snares shall be secure." (Prov. 11.15) But if, instead of withdrawing from them, a Christian approaches them, how can he avoid being caught by them? Hence, after having with so much loss learned the danger of exposing himself to the danger of sin, David said that, to continue faithful to God, he kept at a distance from every occasion which could lead him to relapse. "I have restrained my feet from every evil way, that I may keep your words." (Ps. 118.101) He does not say from every sin, but from every evil way which conducts to sin. The devil is careful to find pretexts to make us believe that certain occasions to which we expose ourselves are not voluntary, but necessary. When the occasion in which we are placed is really necessary, the Lord always helps us to avoid sin; but we sometimes imagine certain necessities which are not sufficient to excuse us. "A treasure is never safe," says St. Cyprian, "as long as a robber is harbored within; nor is a lamb secure while it dwells in the same den with a wolf." (Lib. de Sing. Cler.) The saint speaks against those who do not wish to remove the occasions of sin, and still say: "I am not afraid that I shall fall." As no one can be secure of his treasure if he keeps a thief in his house, and as a lamb cannot be sure of its life if it remain in the den of a wolf, so likewise no one can be secure of the treasure of divine grace if he is resolved to continue in the occasion of sin. St. James teaches that every man has within himself a powerful enemy, that is, his own evil inclinations, which tempt him to sin. "Every man is tempted by his own concupiscence, drawn away, and allured." (James 1.14) If, then, we do not fly from the external occasions, how can we resist temptation and avoid sin? Let us, therefore, place before our eyes the general remedy which Jesus has prescribed for conquering temptations and saving our souls. "If your right eye scandalize you, pluck it out and cast it from you." (Matt. 5.29) If you find that your right eye is to you a cause of damnation, you must pull it out and cast it far from you; that is, when there is danger of losing your soul, you must fly from all evil occasions. St. Francis of Assisi used to say, as I have stated in another sermon, that the devil does not seek, in the beginning, to bind timorous souls with the chain of mortal sin; because they would be alarmed at the thought of committing mortal sin, and would fly from it with horror: he endeavors to bind them by a single hair, which does not excite much fear; because by this means he will succeed more easily in strengthening their bonds, till he makes them his slaves. Hence he who wishes to be free from the danger of being the slave of hell must break all the hairs by which the enemy attempts to bind him; that is, he must avoid all occasions of sin, such as certain manners of speech, places, little presents, and words of affection. With regard to those who have had a habit of impurity, it will not be sufficient to avoid proximate (near) occasions; if they do not fly from remote occasions, they will very easily relapse into their former sins.

“5. Impurity, says St. Augustine, is a vice which makes war on all, and which few conquer. "The fight is common, but the victory rare." How many miserable souls have entered the contest with this vice, and have been defeated! But to induce you to expose yourselves to occasions of this sin, the devil will tell you not to be afraid of being overcome by the temptation. "I do not wish," says St. Jerome, "to fight with the hope of victory, lest I should sometimes lose the victory." I will not expose myself to the combat with the hope of conquering; because, by voluntarily engaging in the fight, I shall lose my soul and my God. To escape defeat in this struggle, a great grace of God is necessary; and to render ourselves worthy of this grace, we must, on our part, avoid the occasions of sin. To practice the virtue of chastity, it is necessary to recommend ourselves continually to God: we have not strength to preserve it; that strength must be the gift of God. "And as I knew," says the Wise Man, "that I could not otherwise be continent, except God gave it, … I went to the Lord, and besought him." (Wis. 8.21) But if we expose ourselves to the occasions of sin, we ourselves shall provide our rebellious flesh with arms to make war against the soul. "Neither," says the Apostle, "yield your members as instruments of sin unto iniquity." (Rom. 6.13) In explaining this passage, St. Cyril of Alexandria says: "You stimulate the flesh; you arm it, and make it powerful against the spirit." St. Philip Neri used to say that in the war against the vice of impurity, the victory is gained by cowards -- that is, by those who fly from the occasions of this sin. But the man who exposes himself to it, arms his flesh, and renders it so powerful, that it will be morally impossible for him to resist its attacks.

“6. "Cry out," says the Lord to Isaiah, "all flesh is grass." (Isa. 40.6) Now, says St. John Chrysostom, if all flesh is grass, it is as foolish for a man who exposes himself to the occasion of sin to hope to preserve the virtue of purity, as to expect that hay, into which a torch has been thrown, will not catch fire. "Put a torch into hay, and then dare to deny that the hay will burn." No, says St. Cyprian; it is impossible to stand in the midst of flames, and not to burn. "Impossibile est flammis circumdari et non ardere." (De Sing. Cler.) "Can a man," says the Holy Spirit, "hide fire in his bosom, and his garments not burn? or can he walk upon hot coals, and his feet not be burnt?" (Prov. 6.27, 28) Not to be burnt in such circumstances would be a miracle. St. Bernard teaches that to preserve chastity, and, at the same time, to expose oneself to the proximate occasion of sin, "is a greater miracle than to raise a dead man to life."

“7. In explaining the fifth Psalm, St. Augustine says that "he who is unwilling to fly from danger, wishes to perish in it." Hence, in another place, he exhorts those who wish to conquer, and not to perish, to avoid dangerous occasions. "In the occasion of falling into sin, take flight, if you desire to gain the victory." (Serm. 250 de temp.) Some foolishly trust in their own strength, and do not see that their strength is like that of flax placed in the fire. "And your strength shall be as the ashes of tow." (Isa. 1.31) Others, trusting in the change which has taken place in their life, in their confessions, and in the promises they have made to God, say: Through the grace of the Lord, I have now no bad motive in seeking the company of such a person; her presence is not even an occasion of temptations: Listen, all you who speak in this manner. In Mauritania there are bears that go in quest of the apes, to feed upon them: as soon as a bear appears, the apes run up the trees, and thus save themselves. But what does the bear do? He stretches himself on the ground as if dead, and waits till the apes descend from the trees. The moment he sees that they have descended, he springs up, seizes on them, and devours them. It is thus the devil acts: he makes the temptation appear to be dead; but when a soul descends, and exposes itself to the occasion of sin, he stirs up temptation, and devours it. Oh! how many miserable souls, devoted to spiritual things, to mental prayer, to frequent communion, and to a life of holiness have, by exposing themselves to the occasion of sin, become the slaves of the devil! We find in ecclesiastical history that a holy woman, who employed herself in the pious office of burying the martyrs, once found among them one who was not as yet dead. She brought him into her own house, and procured a physician and medicine for him, till he recovered. But, what happened? These two saints (as they might be called -- one of them on the point of being a martyr, the other devoting her time to works of mercy with so much risk of being persecuted by the tyrants) first fell into sin and lost the grace of God, and, becoming weaker by sin, afterwards denied the faith. St. Macarius relates a similar fact regarding an old man who suffered to be half-burned in defense of the faith; but, being brought back into prison he, unfortunately for himself, formed an intimacy with a devout woman who served the martyrs, and fell into sin.

“8. The Holy Spirit tells us that we must fly from sin as from a serpent. "Flee from sin as from the face of a serpent." (Ecclus. 21.2) Hence, as we not only avoid the bite of a serpent, but are careful neither to touch nor approach it, so we must fly not only from sin, but also from the occasion of sin -- that is, from the house, the conversation, the person that would lead us to sin. St. Isidore says that he who wishes to remain near a serpent, will not remain long unhurt. "Juxta serpentem positus non erit sin illaesus." (Solit., Bk. 2) Hence, if any person is likely to prove an occasion of your ruin, the admonition of the Wise Man is, "Remove your way far from her, and come not near the doors of her house." (Prov. 5.8) He not only tells you not to enter the house which has been to you a road to hell ("Her house is the way to hell." Prov. 7.27); but he also cautions you not to approach it, and even to keep at a distance from it. "Remove your way far from her." But, you will say, if I abandon that house, my temporal affairs shall suffer. It is better that you should suffer a temporal loss, than that you should lose your soul and your God. You must be persuaded that, in whatever regards chastity, there cannot be too great caution. If we wish to save our souls from sin and hell, we must always fear and tremble. "With fear and trembling work out your salvation." (Phil. 2.12) He who is not fearful, but exposes himself to occasions of sin, shall scarcely be saved. Hence, in our prayers we ought to say every day, and several times in the day, that petition of the Our Father, "and lead us not into temptation." Lord, do not permit me to be attacked by those temptations which would deprive me of your grace. We cannot merit the grace of perseverance; but, according to St. Augustine, God grants it to every one that asks it, because he has promised to hear all who pray to him. Hence, the holy doctor says that the Lord, "by his promises has made himself a debtor" (cf. Romans 4:25).” (Hell’s Widest Gate: Impurity, by St. Alphonsus Liguori, Sermons (nn. 2-4) taken from Ascetical Works, Volume XVI: Sermons for all Sundays in the Year (1882) pp. 152-173)

We also advice you to never watch news on television or the like since it is so filled with sins that it’s almost impossible to watch without seeing things that will injure your virtue like immodesty, make-up, sensuality, blasphemy, gloating, useless and unnecessary stories, lust, adultery, fornication... continuing in infinity. However, to watch news daily is hardly necessary and St. Alphonsus clearly rebukes people for this in his most excellent work, The True Spouse of Christ.

“St. Dorotheus says: "Beware of too much speaking, for it banishes from the soul holy thoughts and recollection with God." Speaking of religious that cannot abstain from inquiring after worldly news, St. Joseph Calasanctius said: "The curious religious shows that he has forgotten himself." It is certain that he who speaks too much with men converses but little with God, for the Lord says: "I will lead her into the wilderness, and I will speak to her heart." (Osee, ii. 14.) If, then, the soul wishes that God speak to its heart, it must seek after solitude; but this solitude will never be found by religious who do not love silence. "If," said the Venerable Margaret of the Cross, "we remain silent, we shall find solitude." And how will the Lord ever condescend to speak to the religious, who, by seeking after the conversation of creatures, shows that the conversation of God is not sufficient to make her happy? Hence, for a nun that delights in receiving visits and letters, in reading the newspapers, and in speaking frequently of the things of the world, it is impossible to be a good religious. Every time that she unnecessarily holds intercourse with seculars, she will suffer a diminution of fervor.” (The complete ascetical works of St. Alphonsus, Volume X, pp. 468-469)

We ourselves do not watch any videos anymore except exclusively when for the sake of making videos. We also try to avoid reading any secular news or other worldly websites. Now we only listen to religious audio, having all the movable images blocked. On YouTube, when we still watched YouTube (we now have it blocked), we did not watch the videos but only listened to them by downloading them as audio (or video) and listened to them only in audio, or at least, by avoiding watching at the screen if we were watching it on youtube, or on other video sites. Anyone who cares about virtue and about their eternal salvation and for those who fear not to offend God by viewing or seeing bad scenes or images, will of course do the same thing, since it’s almost impossible to watch anything today that does not contain immodesty or that will harm one’s virtue. Even purely Christian films, whether on tv or youtube, have many bad and unacceptable scenes, statues or images in them. What then could be said about more secular media, documentaries, or series?

That so much naked religious images have been made, spread and depicted even in churches! during the last 700 years or so is undoubtedly a sign of the gradual falling away from God and the corruption of morals within and without the Church by the people, and indicates why God ultimately abandoned the Church to what it is has become today.

Also consider that it is very easy to sin in one’s thought. In fact, one consent to an evil thought is enough to damn a person to burn in Hell for all eternity! and all the bad scenes one sees in all the films, television, movies, series etc. tempts one to commit exactly this sin against God.

St. Alphonsus: “Listen to this example: A boy used often to go to confession; and every one took him to be a saint. One night he had a hemorrhage, and he was found dead. His parents went at once to his confessor, and crying begged him to recommend him to God; and he said to them: "Rejoice; your son, I know, was a little angel; God wished to take him from this world, and he must now be in heaven; should he, however, be still in purgatory, I will go to say Mass for him." He put on his vestments to go to the altar; but before leaving the sacristy, he saw himself in the presence of a frightful spectre, whom he asked in the name of God who he was. The phantom answered that he was the soul of him that had just died. Oh! is it you? exclaimed the priest; if you are in need of prayers, I am just going to say Mass for you. Alas! Mass! I am damned, I am in hell! And why? "Hear," said the soul: "I had never yet committed a mortal sin; but last night a bad thought came to my mind; I gave consent to it, and God made me die at once, and condemned me to hell as I have deserved to be. Do not say Mass for me; it would only increase my sufferings." Having spoken thus, the phantom disappeared.” (The complete ascetical works of St. Alphonsus, vol. 15, p. 167)

 “O eternity, eternity! The saints tremble at the mere thought of eternity; and ye sinners, who are in disgrace with God, you do not fear? You do not tremble? It is of faith that he who dies in the state of sin goes to burn in the fire of hell for all eternity!” (Ibid, p. 108)

Scripture teaches that few are saved (Mt. 7:13) and that almost the entire world lies in darkness, so much so that Satan is even called the “prince” (John 12:31) and “god” (2 Cor. 4:3) of this world. “We know that we are of God, and the whole world is seated in wickedness.” (1 John 5:19)

Why are most people damned? Most people are damned because they don’t care enough about God nor fear Him enough to avoid all sin and the occasions of falling into obvious sin, nor do they love Him more than they love their own perverse will or self-love—which is the direct reason for their indifferent lifestyle; neither do they care enough about God so as to avoid even what they obviously know will lead them into possible sin. The great St. Ambrose said concerning this: “True repentance [and thus love of God] is to cease to sin [all sin, however small].”

That of course means that one must do all in one’s power to avoid not only mortal sin, but also venial sin. It also means to in fact never even have a will to commit even the slightest sin that one knows to be a sin culpably or with full consent against the all good God — and now we may deduce already why most people in fact are damned.

Hence that most people are damned and always have been. So the only reason it would be hard for someone to be forgiven his sins and be saved is if he don’t love God enough, fear God enough, nor trust God enough with his whole heart—trust and love, such as believing in Him and that He will forgive you if you do what you must—and that He hears all your prayers and grants all your prayers that are good for you, such as all prayers for the grace of attaining forgiveness and salvation. Therefore, it is only hard to be saved for the bad — and not for the good souls.

Also see: About the sacrament of penance and contrition and about receiving forgiveness without an absolution

Generally, one of course cannot know whether a film, documentary or show that one watches or desires to watch will have any bad images or scenes in them—before having already watched it. (There are some sites that offers warnings of immodesty, bad language, nudity etc., but their warnings probably are not enough, nor will they, in all likelihood, include a warning against the so-called modern day women’s fashion in which women show of their womanly figure by pants or revealing and tight clothing since this is how every one dress today (which in itself would be bad enough to forbid watching these shows entirely), and of course, the modern day “Catholic” or “Christian” standard of modesty is not enough and is even evil in many cases.) Therefore, it is playing with fire to watch movable images and risk one’s soul; and as we have seen, God will ultimately abandon a person that willfully put himself in danger of falling. Again, remember what St. Alphonsus said: “WHEN MEN AVOID THE OCCASIONS OF SIN, GOD PRESERVES THEM; BUT WHEN THEY EXPOSE THEMSELVES TO DANGER, THEY ARE JUSTLY ABANDONED BY THE LORD, AND EASILY FALL INTO SOME GRIEVOUS TRANSGRESSIONS.”

We recommend that no one watch videos or even listen to audios at all (unless perhaps you wish to only listen to strictly religious things), but if you want to watch more secular things (such as news clips, documentaries or whatever else, even religious films) then listen to audio only. This means that you should turn the television around or put something over the screen. If on the internet, it means that you should avoid watching the video that is playing; or download vlc player and disable video in preferences, and download the videos instead of watching them on the internet, and listen to them only as audio through vlc player or some other video player. You can also download videos and convert them to mp3 or download an extension or program that does it automatically for you. This is a good youtube to mp3 website that we recommend (enter it without images on, of course, since I have no idea of what it may show!):

If you enter youtube videos, you should disable auto play so that videos do not play automatically for the same reason (the flashblock addons linked to above does the trick). You can also disable youtube comments in channel settings or by extensions. Many of them are pure evil, filthy and spiritually distracting anyway. But the comments vary in badness depending on the video you are watching or entering. But just so you know, it is possible to disable seeing them.

Images must also be blocked when surfing on youtube! The number of bad, immodest and mortally sinful inducing images I myself have seen on youtube, and especially in the related videos while watching a video, or after it ended, is almost innumerable! (and no, I don’t watch sensual material and anyone who has spent any time on youtube will know from experience that related thumbnails can be pure evil and filthy regardless of what videos you are watching, be it a news clip or a religious video, and the latter example is especially true if it concerns a moral subject). Having images blocked goes for all websites that have any bad images in them, even wikipedia, unless the article is deemed safe. (For the same reason, it is evil and a sin to link to articles that one knows contains any bad images. Yet many people, even traditional so-called Catholics, frequently, and without any scruple, link to such articles all the time just as if they thought they will not receive a judgment for every person that has becomes affected or aroused sensually by what they posted, linked to or were personally responsible for.) Also, on Firefox, never watch a youtube video to the end, or, if you do, scroll down before the film ends, since the related video images on Firefox—that are shown in the video screen—sadly doesn’t get blocked by having images disabled. I have seen not a few evil images because of that, sadly. Now I know better, and that one must avoid seeing this and falling into this devilish trap (but happily, we don’t even watch videos anymore and we encourage all to follow this same advice).

St. Alphonsus, On avoiding the occasions of sin: “Some also believe that it is only a venial sin to expose themselves to the proximate occasion of sin. The catechist must explain that those who do not abstain from voluntary proximate occasions of grievous sin are guilty of a mortal sin, even though they have the intention of not committing the bad act, to the danger of which they expose themselves. … It is necessary to inculcate frequently the necessity of avoiding dangerous occasions; for, if proximate occasions, especially of carnal sins, are not avoided, all other means will be useless for our salvation.” (The complete ascetical works of St. Alphonsus, vol. 15, pp. 351-355)

Considering the quotes of St. Alphonsus on avoiding occasions of sin and about how God demands more of certain souls that He has given more graces: it is highly important for one’s salvation to not watch media or expose oneself to dangerous occasions (such as by surfing the internet with images on).

Pope Innocent XI, Various Errors on Moral Matters #61, March 4, 1679: “He can sometimes be absolved, who remains in a proximate occasion of sinning, which he can and does not wish to omit, but rather directly and professedly seeks or enters into.” – Condemned statement by Pope Innocent XI.

Pope Innocent XI, Various Errors on Moral Matters #62, March 4, 1679: “The proximate occasion for sinning is not to be shunned when some useful and honorable cause for not shunning it occurs.” – Condemned statement by Pope Innocent XI.

Pope Innocent XI, Various Errors on Moral Matters #63, March 4, 1679: “It is permitted to seek directly the proximate occasion for sinning for a spiritual or temporal good of our own or of a neighbor.” – Condemned statement by Pope Innocent XI.

St. Alphonsus Maria de Liguori describes in his masterpiece book The True Spouse of Jesus Christ” how Modesty of the Eyes is absolutely crucial for all people to have in order to save their souls:

St. Alphonsus: “On the mortification of the eyes, and on modesty in general. Almost all our rebellious passions spring from unguarded looks; for, generally speaking, it is by the sight that all inordinate affections and desires are excited. Hence, holy Job "made a covenant with his eyes, that he would not so much as think upon a virgin." (Job xxxi. 1) Why did he say that he would not so much as think upon a virgin? Should he not have said that he made a covenant with his eyes not to look at a virgin? No; he very properly said that he would not think upon a virgin; because thoughts are so connected with looks, that the former cannot be separated from the latter, and therefore, to escape the molestation of evil imaginations, he resolved never to fix his eyes on a woman.

“St. Augustine says: "The thought follows the look; delight comes after the thought; and consent after delight." From the look proceeds the thought; from the thought the desire; for, as St. Francis de Sales says, what is not seen is not desired, and to the desire succeeds the consent.

“If Eve had not looked at the forbidden apple, she should not have fallen; but because "she saw that it was good to eat, and fair to the eyes, and beautiful to behold, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat." (Gen. iii. 6) The devil first tempts us to look, then to desire, and afterwards to consent.

“St. Jerome says that Satan requires "only a beginning on our part." If we begin, he will complete our destruction. A deliberate glance at a person of a different sex often enkindles an infernal spark, which consumes the soul. "Through the eyes," says St. Bernard, "the deadly arrows of love enters." The first dart that wounds and frequently robs chaste souls of life finds admission through the eyes. By them David, the beloved of God, fell. By them was Solomon, once the inspired of the Holy Ghost, drawn into the greatest abominations. Oh! how many are lost by indulging their sight!

“The eyes must be carefully guarded by all who expect not to be obliged to join in the lamentation of Jeremiah: "My eye hath wasted my soul." (Jer. iii. 51) By the introduction of sinful affections my eyes have destroyed my soul. Hence St. Gregory says, that "the eyes, because they draw us to sin, must be depressed." If not restrained, they will become instruments of hell, to force the soul to sin almost against its will. "He that looks at a dangerous object," continues the saint, "begins to will what he wills not." It was this the inspired writer intended to express when he said of Holofernes, that "the beauty of Judith made his soul captive." (Jud. xvi 11)

“Seneca says that "blindness is a part of innocence;" and Tertullian relates that a certain pagan philosopher, to free himself from impurity, plucked out his eyes. Such an act would be unlawful in us: but he that desires to preserve chastity must avoid the sight of objects that are apt to excite unchaste thoughts. "Gaze not about," says the Holy Ghost, "upon another’s beauty; . . . hereby lust is enkindled as a fire." (Ecc. ix. 8, 9) Gaze not upon another’s beauty; for from looks arise evil imaginations, by which an impure fire is lighted up. Hence St. Francis de Sales used to say, that "they who wish to exclude an enemy from the city must keep the gates locked."

Hence, to avoid the sight of dangerous objects, the saints were accustomed to keep their eyes almost continually fixed on the earth, and to abstain even from looking at innocent objects. After being a novice for a year, St. Bernard could not tell whether his cell was vaulted. In consequence of never raising his eyes from the ground, he never knew that there were but three windows to the church of the monastery, in which he spent his novitiate. He once, without perceiving a lake, walked along its banks for nearly an entire day; and hearing his companions speak about it, he asked when they had seen it. St. Peter of Alcantara kept his eyes constantly cast down, so that he did not know the brothers with whom he conversed. It was by the voice, and not by the countenance, that he was able to recognize them.

The saints were particularly cautious not to look at persons of a different sex. St. Hugh, bishop, when compelled to speak with women, never looked at them in the face. St. Clare would never fix her eyes on the face of a man. She was greatly afflicted because, when raising her eyes at the elevation to see the consecrated host, she once involuntarily saw the countenance of the priest. St. Aloysius never looked at his own mother in the face. It is related of St. Arsenius, that a noble lady went to visit him in the desert, to beg of him to recommend her to God. When the saint perceived that his visitor was a woman, he turned away from her. She then said to him: "Arsenius, since you will neither see nor hear me, at least remember me in your prayers." "No," replied the saint, "but I will beg of God to make me forget you, and never more to think of you."

From these examples may be seen the folly and temerity of some religious who, though they have not the sanctity of a St. Clare, still gaze around from the terrace, in the parlour, and in the church, upon every object that presents itself, even on persons of a different sex. And notwithstanding their unguarded looks, they expect to be free from temptations and from the danger of sin. For having once looked deliberately at a woman who was gathering ears of corn, the Abbot Pastor was tormented for forty years by temptations against chastity. St. Gregory states that the temptation, to conquer which St. Benedict rolled himself in thorns, arose from one incautious glance at a woman. St. Jerome, though living in a cave at Bethlehem, in continual prayer and macerations of the flesh, was terribly molested by the remembrance of ladies whom he had long before seen in Rome. Why should not similar molestations be the lot of the religious who willfully and without reserve fixes her eyes on persons of a different sex? "It is not," says St. Francis de Sales, "the seeing of objects so much as the fixing of our eyes upon them that proves most pernicious."

“"If," says St. Augustine, "our eyes should by chance fall upon others, let us take care never to fix them upon any one." Father Manareo, when taking leave of St. Ignatius for a distant place, looked steadfastly in his face: for this look he was corrected by the saint. From the conduct of St. Ignatius on this occasion, we learn that it was not becoming in religious to fix their eyes on the countenance of a person even of the same sex, particularly if the person is young. But I do not see how looks at young persons of a different sex can be excused from the guilt of a venial fault, or even from mortal sin, when there is proximate danger of criminal consent. "It is not lawful," says St. Gregory, "to behold what it is not lawful to covet." The evil thought that proceeds from looks, though it should be rejected, never fails to leave a stain upon the soul. Brother Roger, a Franciscan of singular purity, being once asked why he was so reserved in his intercourse with women, replied, that when men avoid the occasions of sin, God preserves them; but when they expose themselves to danger, they are justly abandoned by the Lord, and easily fall into some grievous transgressions.

“The indulgence of the eyes, if not productive of any other evil, at least destroys recollection during the time of prayer. For, the images and impressions caused by the objects seen before, or by the wandering of the eyes, during prayer, will occasion a thousand distractions, and banish all recollection from the soul. It is certain that without recollection a religious can pay but little attention to the practice of humility, patience, mortification, or of the other virtues. Hence it is her duty to abstain from all looks of curiosity, which distract her mind from holy thoughts. Let her eyes be directed only to objects which raise the soul to God.

“St. Bernard used to say, that to fix the eyes upon the earth contributes to keep the heart in heaven. "Where," says St. Gregory, "Christ is, there modesty is found." Wherever Jesus Christ dwells by love, there modesty is practiced. However, I do not mean to say that the eyes should never be raised or never fixed on any object. No; but they ought to be directed only to what inspires devotion, to sacred images, and to the beauty of creation, which elevate the soul to the contemplation of the divinity. Except in looking at such objects, a religious should in general keep the eyes cast down, and particularly in places where they may fall upon dangerous objects. In conversing with men, she should never roll the eyes about to look at them, and much less to look at them a second time.

To practice modesty of the eyes is the duty of a religious, not only because it is necessary for her own improvement in virtue, but also because it is necessary for the edification of others. God only knows the human heart: man sees only the exterior actions, and by them he is edified or scandalized. "A man," says the Holy Ghost, "is known by his look." (Ecc. xix. 26) By the countenance the interior is known. Hence, like St. John the Baptist, a religious should be "a burning and shining light." (John, v. 35) She ought to be a torch burning with charity, and shining resplendent by her modesty, to all who behold her. To religious the following words of the Apostle are particularly applicable: "We are made a spectacle to the world, and to angels, and to men." (1 Cor. iv. 9) And again: "Let your modesty be known to all men: the Lord is nigh." (Phil. iv. 5)

“Religious are attentively observed by the angels and by men; and therefore their modesty should be made manifest before all; if they do not practice modesty, terrible shall be the account which they must render to God on the day of judgment. Oh! what devotion does a modest religious inspire, what edification does she give, by keeping her eyes always cast down! St. Francis of Assisi once said to his companion, that he was going out to preach. After walking through the town, with his eyes fixed on the ground, he returned to the convent. His companion asked him when he would preach the sermon. We have, replied the saint, by the modesty of our looks, given an excellent instruction to all who saw us. It is related of St. Aloysius, that when he walked through Rome the students would stand in the streets to observe and admire his great modesty.

“St. Ambrose says, that to men of the world the modesty of the saints is a powerful exhortation to amendment of life. "The look of a just man is an admonition to many." The saint adds: "How delightful it is to do good to others by your appearance!" It is related of St. Bernardine of Sienna, that even when a secular, his presence was sufficient to restrain the licentiousness of his young companions, who, as soon as they saw him, were accustomed to give to one another notice that he was coming. On his arrival they became silent or changed the subject of their conversation. It is also related of St. Gregory of Nyssa, and of St. Ephrem, that their very appearance inspired piety, and that the sanctity and modesty of their exterior edified and improved all that beheld them. When Innocent II visited St. Bernard at Clairvaux, such was the exterior modesty of the saint and of his monks, that the Pope and his cardinals were moved to tears of devotion. Surius relates a very extraordinary fact of St. Lucian, a monk and martyr. By his modesty he induced so many pagans to embrace the faith, that the Emperor Maximian, fearing that he should be converted to Christianity by the appearance of the saint, would not allow the holy man to be brought within his view, but spoke to him from behind a screen.

That our Redeemer was the first who taught, by his example, modesty of the eyes, may, as a learned author remarks, be inferred from the holy evangelists, who say that on some occasion he raised his eyes. "And he, lifting up his eyes on his disciples." (Luke, vi. 20) "When Jesus therefore had lifted up his eyes." (John, vi. 5.) From these passages we may conclude that the Redeemer ordinarily kept his eyes cast down. Hence the Apostle, praising the modesty of the Saviour, says: "I beseech you, by the mildness and modesty of Christ." (2 Cor. x. 1)

I shall conclude this subject with what St. Basil said to his monks: "If, my children, we desire to raise the soul towards heaven, let us direct the eyes towards the earth." From the moment we awake in the morning, let us pray continually in the words of holy David: "Turn away my eyes, that they may not behold vanity" (Ps. cxviii. 37).” (St. Alphonsus Liguori, The True Spouse of Jesus Christ, Modesty of the Eyes, pp. 252-261)

St. Francis of Assisi used to exhort his brethren frequently to guard and mortify their senses with the utmost care. He especially insisted on the custody of the eyes, and he used this parable of a King’s two messengers to demonstrate how the purity of the eyes reveals the chastity of the soul:

“A certain pious King sent two messengers successively to the Queen with a communication from himself. The first messenger returned and brought an answer from the Queen, which he delivered exactly. But of the Queen herself he said nothing because he had always kept his eyes modestly cast down and had not raised them to look at her.

The second messenger also returned. But after delivering in a few words the answer of the Queen, he began to speak warmly of her beauty. “Truly, my lord,” he said, “the Queen is the most fair and lovely woman I have ever seen, and thou art indeed happy and blessed to have her for thy spouse.”

At this the King was angry and said: “Wicked servant, how did you dare to cast your eyes upon my royal spouse? I believe that you may covet what you have so curiously gazed upon.”

Then he commanded the other messenger to be recalled, and said to him: “What do you think of the Queen?”

He replied, “She listened very willingly and humbly to the message of the King and replied most prudently.”

But the Monarch again asked him, “But what do you think of her countenance? Did she not seem to you very fair and beautiful, more so than any other woman?”

The servant replied, “My lord, I know nothing of the Queen’s beauty. Whether she be fair or not, it is for thee alone to know and judge. My duty was only to convey thy message to her.”

The King rejoined, “You have answered well and wisely. You who have such chaste and modest eyes shall be my chamberlain. From the purity of your eyes I see the chastity of your soul. You are worthy to have the care of the royal apartments confided to you.”

Then, turning to the other messenger, he said: “But you, who have such unmortified eyes, depart from the palace. You shall not remain in my house, for I have no confidence in your virtue.” (The Works of the Seraphic Father St. Francis of Assisi, London: R. Washbourne, 1882, pp. 254-255)

Concerning modesty of the eyes and related virtues, St. Hippolytus of Rome (c. 170-236 A.D.), From the Commentary of St. Hippolytus on Proverbs, writes:

“[Proverbs 4:25 “Let thy eyes look straight on, and let thy eyelids go before thy steps.”] He “looks right on” who has thoughts free of passion; and he has true judgments, who is not in a state of excitement about external appearances. ….

“[Proverbs 6:27 “Can a man hide fire in his bosom, and his garments not burn?”] That thou mayest not say, What harm is there in the eyes, when there is no necessity that he should be perverted who looks? he shows thee that desire is a fire, and the flesh is like a garment. The latter is an easy prey, and the former is a tyrant. And when anything harmful is not only taken within, but also held fast, it will not go forth again until it has made an exit for itself. For he who looks upon a woman, even though he escape the temptation, does not come away pure of all lust. And why should one have trouble, if he can be chaste and free of trouble? … And, figuratively speaking, he keeps a fire in his breast who permits an impure thought to dwell in his heart. And he walks upon coals who, by sinning in act, destroys his own soul.

“[Proverbs 7:21-25 “[21] She entangled him with many words, and drew him away with the flattery of her lips. [22] Immediately he followeth her as an ox led to be a victim, and as a lamb playing the wanton, and not knowing that he is drawn like a fool to bonds, [23] Till the arrow pierce his liver: as if a bird should make haste to the snare, and knoweth not that his life is in danger. [24] Now therefore, my son, hear me, and attend to the words of my mouth. [25] Let not thy mind be drawn away in her ways: neither be thou deceived with her paths.”] The “cemphus” [the fool] is a kind of wild sea-bird, which has so immoderate an impulse to sexual enjoyment, that its eyes seem to fill with blood in coition; and it often blindly falls into snares, or into the hands of men [Footnote: “The cemphus is said to be a sea-bird “driven about by every wind,” so that it is equal to a fool.” [Proverbs 7:22]]. To this, therefore, he [Solomon] compares the man who gives himself up to the harlot on account of his immoderate lust; or else on account of the insensate folly of the creature, for he, too, pursues his object like one senseless. And they say that this bird is so much pleased with foam, that if one should hold foam in his hand as he sails, it will sit upon his hand. And it also brings forth with pain.

“[Proverbs 7:26 “For she hath cast down many wounded, and the strongest have been slain by her.”] You have seen her mischief. Wait not to admit the rising of lust; for her death is everlasting. And for the rest, by her words, her arguments in sooth, she wounds, and by her sins she kills those who yield to her. For many are the forms of wickedness that lead the foolish down to hell. And the chambers of death mean either its depths or its treasure. How, then, is escape possible?” (The Extant Works and Fragments of Hippolytus, "On Proverbs," by St. Hippolytus of Rome, 170-236 A.D., vol. 5, Ante-Nicene Fathers)


Antipope Paul VI's Heresies

The Palmarian Church considers Paul VI - the evil and heretical antipope who implemented all the heresies of the Second Vatican Council and who gave the world the New Mass - a 'martyr' and 'saint' who was held as a 'prisoner' by evil freemasons in the Vatican. Let's now behold some of Paul VI's amazing heresies to see if their absurds claims, such as his supposed sainthood, are true.


The Catholic Church teaches that all non-Catholic religions are false. There is only one true Church, outside of which no one can be saved. This is Catholic dogma.

Pope St. Gregory the Great, 590-604: “The holy universal Church teaches that it is not possible to worship God truly except in her and asserts that all who are outside of her will not be saved.”5

All of the other religions belong to the Devil. This is the teaching of Jesus Christ, the Catholic Church and Sacred Scripture. See 1 Cor. 10:20 and Psalm 95:5. Anyone who shows esteem for non-Christian religions, or regards them as good or deserving of respect, denies Jesus Christ and is an apostate.

Paul VI, General Audience, Nov. 8, 1972: “Ecumenism began in this way; as respect for non-Christian religions…”6

Pope Pius XI, Mortalium Animos (# 2), Jan. 6, 1928: “… that false opinion which considers all religions to be more or less good and praiseworthy... Not only are those who hold this opinion in error and deceived, but also in distorting the idea of true religion they reject it...”7

Here is more of what Paul VI thought about non-Christian religions of the Devil:

Paul VI, Address, Sept. 22, 1973: “…noble non-Christian religions…”8

This is apostasy – a total rejection of Jesus Christ.

Paul VI, General Audience, Jan. 12, 1972: “…a disconcerting picture opens up before our eyes: that of religions, the religions invented by man; attempts that are sometimes extremely daring and noble…”9

Here Paul VI says that religions invented by man are sometimes extremely noble! This is apostasy – a rejection of Jesus Christ and the Catholic Faith.

Paul VI, Message, Dec. 6, 1977: “…non-Christian religions, which the Church respects and esteems…”10

He is saying that he esteems false religions.

Paul VI, Message, Nov. 24, 1969: “…overcome divisions, by developing a mutual respect between the different religious confessions.”11

Paul VI, Address, Dec. 3, 1970: “We greet with respect the representatives of all the other religions who have honored us by their presence.”12

Paul VI, General Audience, July 6, 1977: “We welcome with sincere respect the Japanese delegation of the Konko-kyo religion.”13

In his Address, Aug. 22, 1969, Paul VI praised the Hindu Gandhi, and stated that he was: “Ever conscious of God’s presence…”14

Hindus are pagans and idolaters who worship many different false gods. For Paul VI to praise the notorious Hindu Gandhi as “ever-conscious of God’s presence” shows again that Paul VI was a complete religious indifferentist. Paul VI also officially praised the false religion of Hinduism in the official Vatican II document Nostra Aetate #2 (on non-Christian religions), as we quoted in the section on Vatican II.

Paul VI, Apostolic Exhortation, Dec. 8, 1975: “The Church respects and esteems these non- Christian religions…”15

Notice again that Paul VI esteems false religions; this is satanic.

Paul VI, Address, Aug. 24, 1974: “Religious and cultural differences in India, as you have said, are honored and respected… We are pleased to see that this mutual honor and esteem is practiced…”16

Paul VI says that religious differences are honored in India and that he is pleased to see this. This means that he honors the worship of false gods.

Paul VI, Address to Synod of Bishops, Sept. 2, 1974: “Likewise we cannot omit a reference to the non-Christian religions. These, in fact, must no longer be regarded as rivals, or obstacles to Evangelization…”17

Here Paul VI boldly reveals that he is preaching a new Gospel. Non-Christian religions, he tells us, are no longer our obstacle to evangelization. This is an antichrist religion of apostasy.

Pope Gregory XVI, Mirari Vos (# 13), Aug. 15, 1832: “They should consider the testimony of Christ Himself that ‘those who are not with Christ are against Him,’ (Lk. 11:23) and that they disperse unhappily who do not gather with Him. Therefore, ‘without a doubt, they will perish forever, unless they hold the Catholic faith whole and inviolate’ (Athanasian Creed).”18

Paul VI, Address to Dalai Lama, Sept. 30, 1973: “We are happy to welcome Your Holiness today… You come to us from Asia, the cradle of ancient religions and human traditions which are rightly held in deep veneration.”19

Paul VI tells us that it is right to hold false religions which worship false gods in “deep veneration”! This may be the worst heresy that Paul VI uttered.

Paul VI, Message to Pagan Shinto Priests, March 3, 1976: “We know the fame of your temple, and the wisdom that is represented so vividly by the images contained therein.”21

This is one of the most evil, revealing and heretical statements that Paul VI ever uttered. He is praising the wisdom contained in the images in the pagan Shinto Temple; in other words, he is praising the idols of the Shintoists!


Buddhism is a false, pagan religion of the East which teaches belief in re-incarnation and karma. Buddhists hold that life is not worth living, and that every form of conscious existence is an evil. Buddhists worship various false gods. Buddhism is an idolatrous and false religion of the Devil. Here’s what Paul VI thought about Buddhism:

Paul VI, General Audience to Japanese Buddhists, Sept. 5, 1973: “It is a great pleasure for us to welcome the members of the Japanese Buddhists Europe Tour, honored followers of the Soto-shu sect of Buddhism… At the Second Vatican Council the Catholic Church exhorted her sons and daughters to study and evaluate the religious traditions of mankind and to ‘learn by sincere and patient dialogue what treasures a bountiful God has distributed among the nations of the earth’ (Ad Gentes, 11)… Buddhism is one of the riches of Asia…”22

According to Paul VI, the false, pagan and idolatrous religion of Buddhism is one of the “riches” of Asia!

Paul VI, General Audience to Japanese Buddhist Mission Tour, Oct. 24, 1973: “Once again it is our pleasure to welcome a distinguished group of the Japan Buddhist Mission Tour. We are happy to reiterate the esteem we have for your country, your noble traditions…”23

Paul VI, Speech to Tibetan Buddhist Spiritual Leader, Jan. 17, 1975: “The Second Vatican Council has expressed sincere admiration for Buddhism in its various forms… We wish Your Holiness and all your faithful an abundance of Prosperity and Peace.”24

Notice his idolatry and apostasy in admiring, not only Buddhists, but the false religion of Buddhism.

Paul VI, Address to Buddhists, June 5, 1972: “It is with great cordiality and esteem that we greet so distinguished a group of Buddhist leaders from Thailand... We have a profound regard for… your precious traditions.”22

Paul VI to a group of Buddhist Leaders, June 15, 1977: “To the distinguished group of Buddhist leaders from Japan we bid a warm welcome. The Second Vatican Council declared that the Catholic Church looks with sincere respect on your way of life… On this occasion we are happy to recall the words of St. John: ‘The world, with all it craves for, is coming to an end; but anyone who does the will of God remains forever’.”26

He first says that the Catholic Church looks with sincere respect upon the Buddhists’ way of life. This is heresy. He then says that, on this occasion, he must recall the words of St. John: anyone who does the will of God remains forever. His meaning is clearly that Buddhists will live forever; that is, they will be saved. This is totally heretical.


Islam is a false religion which denies the Divinity of Christ and rejects the Most Holy Trinity. Besides rejecting the true God, Islam allows polygamy up to four wives, and its followers (Muslims) spread this false religion with a zeal unequalled by the others. Islam is the most viciously anti-Christian major false religion in the world. To convert to Christianity in many Islamic countries means death. The propagation of the true Faith is strictly prohibited by the Muslims. Islamic society is one of the most evil things in human history. Here is what Paul VI thought about this false religion which rejects Christ and the Trinity:

Paul VI, Speech, Sept. 9, 1972: “We would also like you to know that the Church recognizes the riches of the Islamic faith – a faith that binds us to the one God.”28

Paul VI speaks about the “riches” of the Islamic Faith, a “Faith” that rejects Jesus Christ and the Trinity. He says this “Faith” binds us to the One God. This is apostasy.

Paul VI, Address, Sept. 18, 1969: “…Moslems… along with us adore the one and merciful God, who on the last day will judge mankind.”29

Moslems don’t worship the one true God, the Holy Trinity, together with Catholics, as we covered in the section on the heresies of Vatican II. To assert that Muslims do worship the same God as Catholics is heresy. And Moslems certainly don’t worship God who will judge mankind on the last day, Jesus Christ.

Paul VI, Address to Muslim Ambassador, June 4, 1976: “... Moroccan Moslems … our brothers in faith in the one God. You will always be made very welcome and you will find esteem and understanding here.”30

He says that Muslims are brothers in the Faith. This is apostasy. He then says that Muslims will always find esteem at the Vatican.

Paul VI, Address, Dec. 2, 1977: “…the Moslems (who) profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind’s judge on the last day, as the Second Vatican Council solemnly declared.” 31

Paul VI, Address, August, 1969: “…Our lively desire to greet, in your persons, the great Moslem communities spread throughout Africa? You thus enable Us to manifest here Our high respect for the faith you profess… In recalling the Catholic and Anglican Martyrs, We gladly recall also those confessors of the Moslem faith who were the first to suffer death…”32

He mentions his high respect for the false faith of Islam, and he commemorates Muslims who witnessed to this false religion through death. This is total apostasy.

Paul VI, Angelus Address, Aug. 3, 1969: “Twenty-two martyrs were recognized, but there were many more, and not only Catholics. There were also Anglicans and some Mohammedans.”33

This is probably the most scandalous statement we’ve ever seen regarding the heresy that there are non-Catholic martyrs. Paul VI says that Muslims (who don’t even believe in Christ or the Trinity) are martyrs, in addition to Anglicans. This is truly amazing and totally heretical.

Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, 1441, ex cathedra: “….nobody can be saved, no matter how much he has given away in alms and even if he has shed blood in the name of Christ, unless he has persevered in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church.”34

Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, dogmatic Athanasian Creed, 1439: “Whoever wishes to be saved, needs above all to hold the Catholic faith; unless each one preserves this whole and inviolate, he will without a doubt perish in eternity…”35


The Heresies of the Vatican II Antipopes


Antipope Francis, Evangelii Gaudium (# 254), Nov. 24, 2013: “Non-Christians [such as pagans and atheists], by God’s gracious initiative, when they are faithful to their own consciences, can live “justified by the grace of God”, and thus be “associated to the paschal mystery of Jesus Christ”… to the sacramental dimension of sanctifying grace... to live our own beliefs.”

It is infallibly taught in Sacred Scripture that everyone above the age of reason can know with certainty that there is a God. They know this by the things that are made: the trees, the grass, the sun, the moon, the stars, etc. Anyone who is an atheist or agnostic (who believes that God does not exist or is unknowable) is without excuse. The natural law convicts him. This is a revealed truth of Sacred Scripture.

Creation itself bears witness that there is a God, that is, a living, omnipotent and intelligent Being who created it. The apostle Paul wrote to the saints in Rome that since the creation of the world, God’s invisible qualities – His eternal power and Godhead – have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made (Romans 1:20); and David said that the heavens declare the glory of God, and the firmament shows His handiwork (Psalm 19:1). Therefore, since the existence of God is so clearly witnessed by His works, those who deny His existence are without excuse. “The fool has said in his heart, ‘there is no God’” (Psalm 53:1).

God defined infallibly, based on Romans 1, that the one true God can be known with certitude by the things which have been made, and by the natural light of human reason.

Romans 1:19-21: “Because that which is known of God is manifest in them. For God hath manifested it unto them. For the invisible things of Him, from the creation of the world, are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made; His eternal power also, and divinity: SO THAT THEY ARE INEXCUSABLE.”

Yet, the Vatican II sect officially teaches that one can be an atheist through no fault of his own:

Vatican II document, Lumen Gentium # 16: “Nor does divine providence deny the helps that are necessary for salvation to those who, through no fault of their own, have not yet attained to the express recognition of God yet who strive, not without divine grace, to lead an upright life.”

Vatican II is teaching here that there are some people who, THROUGH NO FAULT OF THEIR OWN, have not yet attained to the express recognition of God. In other words, there are people who, through no fault of their own, don’t believe in God (i.e., are atheists). This is heresy.

St. Paul teaches that atheists are inexcusable because God’s creation proves His existence. Vatican II and Francis, on the contrary, teaches that atheists can be excused and saved. This causes us to ask, “What bible was Vatican II and Francis using?” It must have been the revised satanic edition. Their statement about those who don’t acknowledge God is not only condemned by St. Paul, but also by Vatican Council I. Vatican I dogmatically defined the principle set forth in Romans 1 – which directly contradicts the teaching of atheism, agnosticism and the Vatican II sect.

Pope Pius IX, First Vatican Council, Session 3, On Revelation, Can. 1: “If anyone shall have said that the one true God, our Creator and Lord, cannot be known with certitude by those things which have been made, by the natural light of human reason: let him be anathema.”

Pope Pius IX, First Vatican Council, Session 3, On God the Creator, Can. 1: “If anyone shall have denied the one true God, Creator and Lord of visible and invisible things: let him be anathema.”

Vatican II and Francis falls directly under these anathemas by its heretical teaching above.

Yet despite this dogmatic teaching based on Romans 1, in On Heaven and Earth, pp. 12-13 Francis says he respects atheists and doesn’t try to convert them. He also says that their “life is not condemned”:

I do not approach the relationship in order to proselytize, or convert the atheist; I respect himnor would I say that his life is condemned, because I am convinced that I do not have the right to make a judgment about the honesty of that person… every man is the image of God, whether he is a believer or not. For that reason alone everyone has a series of virtues, qualities, and a greatness of his own.” (Francis, On Heaven and Earth, pp. 12-13)

In contrast to Francis, the Council of Florence dogmatically defined that any individual who has a view contrary to the Catholic Church’s teaching on Our Lord Jesus Christ or the Trinity, or any one of the truths about Our Lord or the Trinity, is rejected, condemned and anathematized by God.

Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, Bull Cantate Domino, 1442, ex cathedra: “… the holy Roman Church, founded on the words of our Lord and Savior, firmly believes, professes and preaches one true God, almighty, immutable and eternal, Father, Son and Holy SpiritTherefore it [the Church] condemns, rejects, anathematizes and declares to be outside the Body of Christ [and of God], which is the Church, whoever holds opposing or contrary views.”

An atheists interviewed Francis for the Italian newspaper The Republic. The interview was published on October 1, 2013. Francis directly told the atheist that he has no intention of trying to convert him. Francis rejects proselytism four different times in this interview. Francis declared: “Proselytism is solemn nonsense, it makes no sense.”

Now, our Lord commanded the apostle to go and proselytize, to go and teach. He said: “Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commended you.” (Matthew 28:19)

How clear is that? And what’s really outrageous about this statement is that he’s essentially spitting on and mocking the martyrs, who suffered, died, were tortured, for teaching, preaching and spreading the true faith; and this apostate has the nerve to call it a solemn nonsense. That anyone claiming to be the Pope says such an evil statement, is incredible.

Pope Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum (# 13), June 29, 1896: “Therefore if a man does not want to be, or to be called, a heretic, let him not strive to please this or that manbut let him hasten before all things to be in communion with the Roman See.”

Pope Pius IV, profession of faith, Council of Trent, ex cathedra: “This true Catholic faith, outside of which no one can be saved… I now profess and truly hold…”

The Catholic Church infallibly teaches that atheists are condemned and that they must be converted to the Catholic faith for salvation. Yet, Antipope Francis is dominating the headlines around the world with his assertion that people don’t need to believe in God to get to heaven.

Antipope Francis, Evangelii Gaudium (# 254), Nov. 24, 2013: “Non-Christians [such as pagans and atheists], by God’s gracious initiative, when they are faithful to their own consciences, can live “justified by the grace of God”, and thus be “associated to the paschal mystery of Jesus Christ”… to the sacramental dimension of sanctifying grace... to live our own beliefs.”

Some may argue that when Francis continued in his Evangelii Gaudium, saying: “they [false religions, practices and beliefs] can be channels which the Holy Spirit raises up in order to liberate non-Christians from atheistic immanentism or from purely individual religious experiences” -- that this means they will be converted. But we already know he doesn’t believe the Catholic Faith is necessary for salvation, and that he rejects proselytizing atheists; so that is not what he means. He is just saying it could happen - “they can” - not that it will, which is why he said: they can be justified if they follow their conscience. And then he ended saying: “which can help us better to live our own beliefs.” (Evangelii Gaudium, # 254)

His position is of course, heresy and apostasy. He made a similar statement in an open letter to the founder of the newspaper La Repubblica.

Statements like this only confirm what we’ve documented about the Vatican II antipopes, and what was proven in the video “What Francis Really Believes.” I’ve read Francis’ entire letter. The headlines accurately reflect what Antipope Francis wrote in his Evangelii Gaudium.

Concerning atheists, Francis wrote:

“First of all, you ask if the God of Christians forgives those who do not believe and do not seek faith. Given that - and this is fundamental - God’s mercy has no limits if he who asks for mercy does so in contrition and with a sincere heart, the issue for those who do not believe in God is in obeying their own conscience. In fact, listening and obeying it, means deciding about what is perceived to be good or to be evil. The goodness or the wickedness of our behavior depends on this decision.” (“Pope” Francisco writes to La Repubblica: “An open dialogue with non-believers”, 2013/09/11/)

Here Francis clearly indicates that people who don’t believe in God can be forgiven and saved if they obey their own conscience and follow what they perceive to be good; and later in his “Evangelii Gaudium” (254) he confirmed that this indeed was what he meant. So don’t allow any liar to claim that Francis’ statement has been misrepresented. It has not been misrepresented as Antipope Francis himself confirmed.

That’s an astounding heresy because it’s a basic dogma of Catholicism that faith is necessary for salvation. This is a fundamental issue. As Hebrews 11:6 says, “…without faith it is impossible to please God.”


As we will see, Francis says he respects those who favor the abomination of same sex “marriage”, and says he never was disrespectful to sodomites and perverts. Francis also says he does not “judge” homosexuals and that a person who is gay can have “good will”.

Discussing homosexuals (people in general and clergy), Francis said in July 2013:

If a person is gay and seeks God and has good will, who am I to judge them?

Francis claims to be the first Judge in the Catholic Church, a pope, and yet says “who am I to judge” homosexuals. It is shocking and a total inversion of Catholic morals… It is not surprising that Francis believes such horrible things when he idolizes man.

Also notice the following interesting statements Francis makes about gay “marriage” and homosexuals.

Francis, On Heaven and Earth, p. 117: “When the head of the Government of the City of Buenos Aires, Mauricio Macri, did not appeal the judge’s opinion right away authorizing a [same-sex] wedding, I felt that I had something to say, to inform; I saw myself with an obligation to state my opinion. It was the first time in eighteen years as bishop that I criticized a government official. If you analyze the two declarations that I formulated, at no time did I speak about homosexuals nor did I make any derogatory reference toward them… Macri told me that these were his convictions; I respected him for that, but the head of the Government does not have to transfer his personal convictions to law. In no moment did I speak disrespectfully about homosexuals…”

Here we see that Francis says he respects those who favor the abomination of same sex “marriage”, and that he never was disrespectful to sodomites and perverts.

Francis also mentions how he allowed the pro-gay “marriage” supporting president of Argentina, Nestor Kirchner, to preside over a “Catholic” memorial service to honor deceased “Catholic priests” and seminarians:

Francis, Conversations, p. 145: “I even asked him to preside over the ceremony when he arrived at the church…”

Later when the apostate president died, Francis immediately offered a public “requiem mass” for him.

Francis also allowed politicians who are vocal pro-abortion and gay “marriage” supporters to receive “communion” at his installation “mass”.

LifeNews, Mars 20, 2013: “Pro-abortion Biden and Pelosi Received Communion at Mass for Antipope Francis - The communion issue was exacerbated when, despite their pro-abortion views, Vice President Joe Biden and House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi both received communion at the Mass to celebrate Pope Francis’ inauguration. Biden’s office confirmed to the Washington Times that he had received communion and reporters in the White House presidential reporting pool confirmed in an email to LifeNews that Pelosi had received it as well. … “At a Mass during which our new Pope emphasized the duty public officials – and all the rest of us – have to protect the weakest among us, Joe Biden and Nancy Pelosi have the audacity to receive Communion while publicly renouncing their responsibility to protect the weakest among us.”

It has now also been documented and confirmed that Francis favored homosexual civil unions when he was in Argentina. He just didn’t want a homosexual civil union to be called a marriage.

CNN, March 21, 2013: “Behind closed doors, pope supported civil unions in Argentina, activist says - Less than an hour after he fired off an angry letter to Catholic Church leaders about their handling of Argentina’s same-sex marriage debate, Marcelo Marquez says his phone rang. … "He [Francis, then the “archbishop” of Buenos Aires] told me. … ‘I’m in favor of gay rights and in any case, I also favor civil unions for homosexuals, but I believe that Argentina is not yet ready for a gay marriage law," said Marquez, a gay rights activist, a self-described devout Catholic and a former theology professor at a Catholic seminary.”

HuffingtonPost, March 20, 2013: “Pope Francis Advocated For Civil Unions For Gay Couples In 2010 As Argentina’s Cardinal Bergoglio - Pope Francis supported civil unions for gay couples as recently as 2010. … As Argentina’s legislature debated President Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner’s bill to allow gay marriage, Francis -- then known as Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio -- suggested to his bishops that the Church support civil unions as a compromise of sorts. At the time, civil unions were already legal in parts of Argentina ABC noted. Civil unions were the “lesser of two evils,” said Sergio Rubin, authorized biographer for then-Cardinal Bergoglio, according to The New York Times. “He [Bergoglio] wagered on a position of greater dialogue with society.”

It has also been reported that Francis still favors homosexual civil unions as “Pope”.

DailyMail, March 10, 2014: “Pope to stop condemning same-sex civil partnerships hints leading cardinal in move which could be step towards Catholic gay marriage - Pope Francis has suggested that the Vatican could support gay civil unions in the future, according to one of the church’s most senior cardinals. Cardinal Timothy Dolan said that the pontiff wants the Catholic Church to study same-sex unions, ‘rather than condemn them’. Cardinal Dolan told American television that Francis wants church leaders to ‘look into it and see the reasons that have driven them.’ … In an interview to mark his first year in the church’s top job, Pope Francis last week reaffirmed the Vatican’s opposition to gay marriage but indicated that some types of civil unions could be acceptable to the church. The Pope restated the church’s teaching that ‘marriage is between a man and a woman,’ but added ‘We have to look at different cases and evaluate them in their variety.’ Some countries justify civil unions as a way to provide the same economic and legal rights to cohabitating couples as those who are married, the Pope said in the interview with Italian newspaper Corriere della Sera. … Francis’ comments are the first time that a Pope has indicated even tentative acceptance of civil unions, according to Vatican watchers. … In recognition for the perceived change in stance Francis appeared on the cover of gay magazine The Advocate as their person of the year.”

Sergio Rubin is an Argentine journalist and authorized biographer of Francis. He wrote (in 2010) the only biography of Jorge Bergoglio (now Antipope Francis) available at the time of his election. Rubin testified that while taking a strong stand against same-sex marriage, Bergoglio raised the possibility in 2010 with his bishops in Argentina that they support the idea of civil unions as a compromise position. On Gay Unions, a Pragmatist Before He Was a Pope. The article went on to say that “a majority of the bishops voted to overrule him”.

In addition to Marquez and Rubin’s testimonies, two other Argentine journalists and two senior officials of the Argentine “bishops conference”, supported Rubin’s account:

NCR Online, Apr. 12, 2013: “On March 19, The New York Times reported that when Argentina was gearing up for a bitter national debate on gay marriage in 2009 and 2010, Bergoglio quietly favored a compromise solution that would have included civil unions for same-sex couples. … On this score, I was told by three sources in Argentina that the Times basically got it right: Bergoglio did, in fact, favor civil unions. That was confirmed on background by two senior officials of the bishops’ conference in Argentina, both of whom worked with Bergoglio and took part in the behind-the-scenes discussions as the conference tried to shape its position. "Bergoglio supported civil unions," one of those officials told me. Mariano de Vedia, a veteran journalist for La Nación, has covered church/state issues in Argentina for years and said he could confirm Bergoglio’s position had been correctly described in the Times account. Guillermo Villarreal, a Catholic journalist in Argentina, said it was well known at the time that Bergoglio’s moderate position was opposed by Archbishop Héctor Rubén Aguer of La Plata, the leader of the hawks.”

This is heresy. It means that Francis approved perverted and abominable sexual behavior that is condemned in Scripture and Catholic teaching. His stance is no different at all from endorsing abortion under the condition that the state does not give abortion special or privileged status by using state funds for it.

All of this without a doubt proves that Francis is certainly not a Catholic. He’s not a pope, he’s not a lover of truth and of the true God, he’s not honest, he’s not seeking to convert souls to the one true faith, etc. As he cannot defend openly gay pseudo-marriage, he uses relativism to defend the “gay agenda”, reducing the issue of homosexuality to the mere political lobby. “If a person is gay and seeking God, who am I to judge her?”, says Antipope Francis.

Since Francis idolizes man, it’s no wonder he endorses such blasphemies and perversions. One hear the “You can’t judge!” heresy so many times it makes one sick. Heretics love this evil phrase and will recite it every time someone charitably rebukes their sinful lifestyle. They don’t seem to grasp the fact that God has already judged (Leviticus 20:13; 1 Corinthians 6:9).

More on Francis’ Heresies on Homosexuals and Homosexuality

Antipope Francis recently gave a shocking interview to the editor of the so-called Jesuit journal, La Civilta Cattolica. He was interviewed by Antonio Spadaro on behalf of La Civilta Cattolica, Thinking Faith, America and several other major Jesuit journals around the world. The interview was conducted in Italian. After the Italian text was officially approved, a team of five independent experts were commissioned to produce the English translation, which is also published by America.

We will be quoting from the English pdf translation found in the Jesuit journal Thinking Faith, Sept. 19, 2013.

On p. 7 of the interview, Francis is talking about homosexuals. He says:

“In Buenos Aires I used to receive letters from homosexuals persons who are ‘socially wounded’ because they tell me that they feel like the church has always condemned them. But the church does not want to do this. During the return flight from Rio de Janeiro I said that if a homosexual person is of good will and is in search of God, I am no one to judge.” He goes on to say, “it is not possible to interfere spiritually in the life of a person.” Thinking Faith, Sept. 19, 2013, p. 7.

He then re-quotes something he said previously about homosexuals:

“A person once asked me, in a provocative manner, if I approved of homosexuality. I replied with another question: “‘Tell me: when God looks at a gay person, does he endorse the existence of this person with love, or reject and condemn this person?’ We must always consider the person.” Thinking Faith, Sept. 19, 2013, p. 8.

This is wicked heresy! First he says, he’s “no one to judge” and that “the church does not want to do this [that is, condemn the homosexuals].” That’s interesting because the First Vatican Council declared that a Pope (a true Pope) is the supreme judge of the faithful. Francis doesn’t judge or condemn anyone because he’s not a Catholic and he’s not the Pope. Also, to say that the Church does not condemn homosexuals is equivalent to saying that God does not condemn homosexuals. There is no difference between the two.

Second, he’s discussing homosexuals. He says he’s no one to judge, and he teaches that God and the Church doesn’t condemn them or reject them. That indicates quite clearly, that homosexuals could be justified despite their wickedness and abominable behavior. And, we know Francis is including active homosexuals in his comments, because he makes no distinction between people who merely consider themselves to have a homosexual orientation, and those who engage in homosexual behavior.

Indeed, we know he’s talking about those who engage in homosexual acts because Francis refers to homosexuals who have claimed to him that they feel excluded. That obviously includes active homosexuals. In fact, in this very context Francis speaks of confession. “This is also the great benefit of confession as a sacrament: evaluating case by case and discerning what is the best thing to do for a person who seeks God and grace.” Thinking Faith, Sept. 19, 2013, p. 8.

The Vatican II sect would only consider homosexual acts, not the homosexual orientation, matters for confession (both are equally wrong, however).

Antipope John Paul II, New Catechism, #2357: “Homosexuality… Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained.”

Related articles:
Free DVDs, Articles and Books