of Worship




Why Real

Catholics Dare Not

‘Worship’ With Any Non-

Catholic or False ‘catholics’,

Pretending It ‘Pleases’ God;

Nor May a Pope ‘Change’

This Law, or the Ignorant

Remain Ever ‘Guiltless’





“Whosoever revolteth, and continueth not in the doctrine of Christ hath not God. He that continueth in the doctrine, the same hath both the Father and the Son. If ANY man come to you, and bring NOT this doctrine, receive him NOT into the house, NOR say to him, ‘God speed you.’” (2 John 1:9-10 DRC. All emphases or annotations added, in this or other scriptural quotations in this article unless noted otherwise.)










+++ 1. The Ad evitanda scandala Myth +++


During our dark, wicked & confused times, there are many people who call themselves Catholic and yet think, say --- or assume without actually thinking about it --- that it’s never wrong to worship religiously --- as if in some sort of religious ‘union with’ --- together with those who are obviously NOT Roman Catholic Whole & Entire. Or, leastwise, that Our Creator cares ‘not a whit’ who His Own worship withand, nevertheless, in spite of these non-Catholics or false ‘catholics’, purposefully in completely culpable ignorance (as is in all likelihood), worshipping that which, in totality, amounts to FALSE gods, having little to do with OUR ALL TRUE GOD.


We’ve addressed this issue in the long article Should You Go to a CMRI Mass or Take Part in the Worship of Other Traditionalists? So… why tackle the subject again?


Because that long article is too long for most people nowadays.


Plus, I’m a nobody and obscure. I thus put forth this short article, which tackles this single point, and is very candid and very plain for anyone of adequate intelligence, who cares enough about the Saving Truth to get it right, please God, and save one’s soul. In doing so, humanly speaking, we slightly increase the odds that someone takes a look.


That said, broadly put, there are two ‘justifications’ for interreligious worship.


If calling yourself ‘catholic’ yet a post-Vatican II Novus Ordoist, then you say it’s ‘charitable’ to do so, precisely what Our Creator wants, at least after Vatican II… it remaining rather mysterious why God thought the opposite prior to Vatican II. Such persons usually assume anyone calling his or herself ‘christian’ is actually this, no ifs, ands or buts. Doesn’t matter that he or she is not even a true Novus Ordoist, let alone Catholic. If liberal enough, such persons think any religion is ‘okay’. God ‘loves’ anybody forever regardless of religion and never sends anyone to hell, period.


If calling yourself Catholic yet either a TNO (Traditional Novus Ordoist) who is additionally a so-called ‘sedevacantist’ (although the far better term is ‘interregnumist’), or else truly a Catholic who thinks he or she must get the Sacraments --- especially the Holy Eucharist --- no matter what, that God would never permit the Eucharist to be unavailable to us, then such persons usually assume it never matters who you go to. Provided you think their ‘eucharist’ is real (read: valid, theologically speaking), it’s totally irrelevant to Our Creator where you get It from, or with whom you get It.


Again, period. Oversimplified? Somewhat. But I’ve gotta keep this short.


I am not addressing the first category of post-Vatican II Novus Ordoists thinking antipopes are ‘popes’. It is simply not yet worth my time to make this effort, and, in my experience, pretty much useless. They don’t want to know the Saving Truth, and God is punishing them with spiritual blindness for their terrible sins of unbelief & immorality. (Although, heads up, we have addressed them elsewhere on The Epistemologic Works website, albeit not at hugely great length or with a thoroughly systematic approach.)


It is the second category of people we are writing this explanation for. Any better expectations there? Not much. Interregnumist TNOs are fairly stubbornly blind, too, whereas real Catholics --- what few still exist on earth right now during the Great Apostasy --- are often very bewildered, massively frightened of the horror we face without the majority of the Church’s Sacraments to assist us, and, sometimes, just completely belligerent & unhinged, turning into Catholic fundamentalists (CFs).


So why bother? Interregnumist TNOs, if a miracle happens, are likeliest of all Novus Ordoists to convert to a real Roman Catholicism and then act like they care what God & His Singular Church command regarding who we religiously worship with. Meanwhile, real Roman Catholics in the Church Militant are my spiritual siblings & fellow soldiers, desperately needing someone to help them understand what they’re up against, where their religious enemies are deceitful & wrong, and what to do to save their souls, considering the hideous power and tremendous odds that are against us.


This is therefore an act of mercy, a ‘spiritual alms’, if you will. Savvy?


I’m realistic. Without Heaven’s Blessing & Help, there’s nearly no chance anyone’s going to pay attention, comprehend or cooperate. I am no one important in this world, I’m an extremely bad Catholic, and I have no ecclesial & priestly jurisdiction. Why, then, am I attempting this? Because I must. My heart inside me bursts if I try to stay quiet. My mind reels and bowels ache when I see evil everywhere, even inside myself. I write, as apologist or catechist, to assist myself, to aid fellow Catholics or those close to being Catholic, and, however improbable, to help those worldlings who are willing to think. Above all, I write to do oblation to Our Uncreated Creator, the Triune God of the Catholic Church, striving to honor Him & His Son’s Immaculate Mother, Mary.


Hence far, both He & She have allowed me to do this, wretched tool that I am.


But back to the poor, confused & wandering interregnumist TNOs or real Roman Catholics. There are many arguments… or, leastwise, many variations of arguments… they will use to ‘justify’ themselves in carelessly or knowingly worshipping with those who are non-Catholic or false ‘catholics’. Ultimately, though, if persistent or pushed far enough, they will resort to Pope Martin V’s Ad evitanda scandala and the ‘Great Schism of the West’ as their primary means of claiming it’s okay to do this. And so, prithee, whatever in the world might these two things be? That is, if you care.


The Great Schism of the West was only barely a ‘schism’ in the deepest sense of the word. Nevertheless, scandalous schism it was in spite of the strange circumstances. It was NOT a schism over infallible dogma & morality. No Catholics split from other Catholics because they at first thought them not Catholic. Rather, it was a schism over who was really the pope. That’s right. Troublesome cardinals --- who are responsible for the election of new & rightful bishops of Rome --- caused immense confusion, pain, strife, acrimony & division over which of two men (and even three separate claimants at one point!) was really the true Roman Bishop. No one accused any of these claimants of not being truly & wholly Catholic or, for that matter and to my knowledge, of not being one who is a valid candidate for legal election as the pope. Nor did any sensible Catholic accuse other Catholics, who disagreed about which man was pope, of not being true Catholics (although, granted, some fools got ‘fundamentalist’ and accused them of becoming non-Catholic as a result of a ‘total’ schism…). Comprehend?


This was confusion over and dispute about the arcane rules of papal election.


Is the average Roman Catholic, apart from the aforesaid cardinals responsible for selecting a new pope, expected to know the intricate rules for valid & legal election? Absolutely not. Ergo, is any real sin being committed by such Roman Catholics, when they disagreed about the identity of the pope, as long as they both could not, and ought not, have any responsibility for knowing arcane papal election rules, let alone having no responsibility for actually electing the next pope? Plainly not! Such confused Catholics may have gone on to commit other kinds of sins in relation to this debacle --- sins of uncharitable behavior & accusations, though this can be debatable depending on the different persons and precise situations they faced --- but nobody could be faulted of initial guilt in the matter, aside from at least some of the aforementioned troublesome cardinals, who started this fiasco in the first place; disgruntled cardinals, sadly finding themselves disenchanted with their first & rightful choice, then pretending they could select another man as ‘pope’, this terrible sin of theirs causing the vexing confusion.


Got it? This is what Catholics then, from AD 1378 to 1417, endured. This is what engendered the division & acrimony. Realizing how hideous it was… horrible sins, consequences & conflicts flowing out of it… the cardinals finally took sensible action, unitedly, some 37 years later, the schism ended by the year 1417 noted above, 39 years altogether. Their solution was necessarily complicated yet correct, and the man everybody could eventually agree upon, electing him, was Pope Martin V.


Martin V then faced many difficult problems. One of them was the enduring grudges, suspicions & antipathy formed by some Catholics against other Catholics due to lengthy division & disagreement over who was the pope. This involved bishops, priests, monks, nuns, laity --- even saints. Yes, you read correctly. Canonized saints, or beatified souls, were themselves at odds over who was the true pope during this --- up till then --- very unprecedented dilemma. It wasn’t going to be easy overcoming these suspicions or vengeful feelings. This is what Martin V began to try to solve with his later much misunderstood document, Ad evitanda scandala. It was most definitely NOT any ludicrous attempt to overturn ancient ecclesiastical law regarding notorious & pertinacious heretics or schismatics against the Roman Catholic Church.


Understand? Good. In Martin V’s document, which is quite short, he doesn’t even mention heretics or schismatics specifically. He speaks only of ecclesiastical ‘censure’, ‘sentence’ or ‘interdict’. This is because previous men, whether the true pope or not, had issued several such censures, sentences or interdicts during the 39 year Great Schism of the West. Many, many Catholics, then, upon the conclusion of this hideous confusion, were still confused & upset about who they ought to worship with and who they ought not to worship with. Pope Martin V’s solution, howsoever poorly he may or may not have worded it, was to as much as say, “Listen, my spiritual children. It is no longer something you should worry about. Even if the real popes during the 39 year fiasco actually did issue censures, sentences or interdicts against certain territories, cities, realms, or other Catholics in the midst of this troubled time of four decades, we’re assuring you that --- unless the Hierarchy states clearly that someone is indeed an individual in the Catholic Church needing to be avoided when it comes to things concerning Catholicity or Christendom --- you may stop worrying and simply go, together with anyone who is Catholic, to worship. To avoid scandals (the literal translation of the text’s first three Latin words and hence its title), we as pope do guarantee that this is alright. We need unity now as Catholics, not further schism.”


Comprehend? Ad evitanda scandala was for real Catholics, NOT non-Catholics.


Later canon law (especially the last authoritative body of rules governing the Church’s Latin Rite members, the so-called ‘1917 Code of Canon Law’) does get a bit careless in prescribing who a real Roman Catholic may worship with and who he or she may not. This is ultimately immaterial. The 1917 Code of Canon Law still states adequately & clearly enough which people… despite appearing to be actual Catholics previously… become automatically excommunicated (‘latae sententiae’ in Latin) for those who behave notoriously & pertinaciously as heretics, schismatics or apostates in what is known as the ‘external forum’. That is to say, clear as day for any true Catholic of adequate intelligence to know, with moral certainty, that so-and-so is not actually Catholic. Don’t believe me? Then read Automatic Excommunications (‘Latae Sententiae’): Why Canon Law Automatically Excommunicates Notoriously & Pertinaciously Heretical or Schismatic Members of the Catholic Church Without Formal Action or Declarations from Her Leaders, and Why This Principle Applies from Highest Pope to Lowliest Layperson from the Most Ancient of Times. If truly Catholic or in the process of converting to Roman Catholicism Whole & Entire, then, dare you to doubt, you are morally obligated to read this other short article proving what I have just said. Meanwhile, if truly Catholic and of, at a bare minimum, adequate intelligence, then there’s only so long you can be ignorant about this matter and not be guilty for not performing due diligence in understanding God & His Church’s Law. Automatic excommunications are automatic for a reason. And they do NOT require bishops making formal declarations for the automatic excommunication to actually occur… otherwise, what is the point of them being automatic? Get it? It’s wonderful when Catholic bishops are there, and do act, to make the automatic excommunication absolutely clear to everyone in the True Church, including the unlearned.


Yet necessary for the automatic excommunication to take place? No, because it’s automatic. And if automatic, totally pointless if a real Catholic can’t eventually know, with due diligence, who’s truly Catholic and who’s not. Were that the case, then the Roman Catholic Church should never set up automatic excommunications to begin with!!! Do you see? This is the point of automatic excommunications. Given that apostasy, heresy or schism are notorious & pertinacious, then any real member of Christ’s Catholic Body, with adequate intelligence, can recognize such people.


Getting it now? If automatic excommunications are never eventually recognized by purported members of God’s True Church --- and despite their adequate intelligence --- then they’re either bad members of the Church or false ‘members’ of this Church. Only in this way could automatic excommunications prove to be ‘pointless’… if Catholics cease to be good Catholics or if Catholics turn into fake ‘catholics’. These are the ostensibly Roman Catholic persons who will never pay attention, and never figure it out.


Because they don’t care. They’re bad or fake. Do you care, my dear reader?


Then here’s your chance to figure it out and prove that you do really care.


Ad evitanda scandala was never meant to teach real Catholics it’s ‘okay’ to worship together with those who are obviously not Catholic. It was to reassure & heal Catholics after the Schism of the West, to get them to reunite and stop worrying about the fiasco that had just ended. It was a way to wipe the slate clean, so to speak, forgiving one another, as true Catholics in fellowship. It had nothing to do, and cannot at all have anything to do, with saying it’s mysteriously & inexplicably ‘okay’ now for Roman Catholics to knowingly worship with people who are plainly, religiously & most unquestionably outside the Very Visible & Roman Catholic Body of Christ.


Call yourself Catholic? And are you the real thing? Truly? Honestly…?


Then please take this seriously lest you suffer God’s Wrath forever.


+++ 2. The Point of Religious Unity +++

& Religious Separation


Our Creator is All Holy.


If you really do fathom this simple yet profound point, then you needn’t read further. Notwithstanding, perhaps you wish to peruse something that is edifying? Sadly, I am no great saint. I can only put into my words what God’s One True Church teaches. Provided you love the Saving Truth of His Singular Roman Catholicism, then it may edify in spite of my lack of virtue. But whether it does or not, I can tell you, quite confidently, having become truly Catholic Whole & Entire, that this is the truth. And we begin with that exceedingly ‘simple’ fact --- that the Triune God of the Catholic Church is HOLY.


Utterly, entirely, no defect, not lacking a single attribute of perfection.


He makes everything out of nothing, and that includes us, human beings. He made us, too, to look like Him… in His Image, as it were. This is why He loves us, this is why we are so very important in this creation, this vast cosmos of ours. It’s not because we are so very special to begin with, in and of ourselves. Remember? We would be nothing if God hadn’t spoke us into existence by His Sovereign & Eternal Will. Unfortunately, Lucifer the Fallen Angel sinned by rebelling against God. Our Creator made both him & us all good at the start. But He also tested our first parents, permitting Lucifer --- the devil --- the opportunity to tempt us. The first temptation had nothing to do with our flesh directly. It was a spiritual temptation, a temptation of the soul, heart & mind alone. However, once St. Eve, our first mother, fell for the devil’s serpentine lie, and her husband, St. Adam, in accord with her fatal decision, in spite of both her & him having no excuse not to know better, our flesh became corrupt as well. This was the Original Sin, something every human being is conceived into since then, apart from King Jesus & Queen Mary.


Now our bodies, as well as our souls, are corrupt and stained with sin, primed and ready, as it were, to rebel against the Maker. And, since every new generation to arise after King Adam & Queen Eve’s first sin is ignorant to start, then solely one’s parents teaching their children how to please God is, normally, going to start us off with understanding of these things. To wit, how to please God by not sinning and doing good instead. Not that this lets us ‘off the hook’ if we’re raised without this knowledge. Our Creator still puts the Law of Natural Reason upon our hearts. We can fight this Law; but it’s still there.


Adam & Eve’s Rebellion turned dominion of the earth over to satan. This, along with God’s Curse upon us & him, is our punishment for that Original Sin. Does it sound not quite ‘fair’ to you? Well, then, recall that we’re made out of nothing. Recall, too, that we are conceived into Original Sin, which is a mortal sin all by itself, damning us to hell for a neverending eternity. That isn’t our own personal fault, chosen freely… apart from Ss. Adam & Eve… yet Our Maker is All Holy and cannot just ‘take us as we are’ in our state of hideous sin, as if it ‘doesn’t matter’, or as if He can be with, and ‘mix with’, as it were, us, All Holy mingling with the Terribly Unholy. Humbly remember, too, that most of us since then, since our conceptions, most of the time, freely choose to sin --- usually quite often --- disregarding, to some degree at least, the Law of Natural Reason etched upon our hearts. This makes us even more reprehensible in Heaven’s Sight. And, finally, realize it is the Perfectly Holy God Who determines what is true and what is thereby false, and what is right and what is thereby wrong. And He’s put this on our hearts. Adequately intelligent of mind, my dear reader? Then… we’ve no excuse.


We ought to be burning in hell, all of us, the whole human race, right now.


That we do not… not all of us, leastwise… is because God is Merciful, in addition to being All Holy & Just. But do you see the problem? He made us for Himself. That’s why we look like Him. And He is not willing that any should perish, i.e., go to hell forever. If we do, then it’s ultimately our own fault. To some extent or another, every single one of us, aside from Jesus & Mary, is deserving of eternal damnation, our suffering there in proportion to how culpable & guilty any particular human being is, failing God.


God is All Holy. The Holy does not mingle with the profane & filthy.


That’s what we are. It takes HUMILITY to see it and admit it.


In the meantime, as early Church fathers loved to note (and I paraphrase), “Oh, happy fault of Ss. Adam & Eve that it should call forth such a Great Redemption!” That is, God was not willing that those, Who He made to bear His Image, should all perish. Yet our sin is, including the Original Sin into which we are conceived, so mammoth & hideous that it would have been utterly just had Our Maker put us all into hell forever. Hence why huge debt requires huge payment. Yet the debt incurred by our sin is eternal damnation. And not one of us could pay this, remitting the debt, without God’s Help. We either spend the rest of our immortal existence consciously suffering in the Pool of Fire, wherein hell will be cast at the end of the world as we know it, or else Our Creator does an even greater & better thing, taking our evil and ultimately working it for good. Accordingly, He shows us an Act of Mercy that is so powerful, so humble and so painful that we must stand in awe of His Charity, His Love, for us. This is what the Second Person of the Godhead accomplished by being born to His Immaculate Mother, Mary, becoming one of us, teaching us, when older, His New & Final Covenant --- the Roman Catholic Faith --- whilst, most amazing of all, consenting to die at our rebellious hands upon the Cross on the Hill of Golgotha (Calvary, or ‘Hill of the Skull’), in this way paying the eternal debt of our sins and redeeming, from the devil, any who would seek His Way of Catholicism, Whole & Entire, our sins washed away in the Sacrament of Baptism, and persevere unto the end, dying as Roman Catholics in the state of grace. This is the One Single Way that He has given to us. That He would provide any way at all --- let alone one that requires Him to suffer & die at our hands! --- is Undeserved Mercy. Yet in doing so, He opens Heaven’s Doors, and Life & Happiness Eternal, to mere human beings that sinned.


If we hear His Roman Catholic call and obey all His Church infallibly teaches.


Our All Holy Maker cannot mingle indefinitely with the foul & degraded. This is precisely what any human being is who is not baptized into His Roman Catholic Body and professing His Roman Catholic Mind, or, if Catholic Whole & Entire, nevertheless carelessly dies in the state of mortal sin. Are you comprehending, my precious soul?


Catholics have been so careless, and uncaring, about this Priceless Gift. God has graciously provided so many opportunities for them to appease His Just Wrath and spiritually please Him by safeguarding this Singular Religion with utmost diligence, along with time, both in our little individual lives and over so many centuries since the time of Jesus Christ, to make satisfaction for our sins that we have committed after our baptisms, defiling again what He had made whole & clean --- the new birth gained in Holy Mother Church’s Sacrament of Baptism, the Laver of Regeneration as ancient Catholics frequently called it. Again and again we have defied Him; or, remaining Catholic on the outside, nonetheless, caring for this life more than Life to Come.


This is how we have eventually reached the Great Apostasy that we endure now.


From God’s Perspective, since more and more Catholics have so little cared for His Remarkable Gift of Grace, then He has withdrawn graces and left most human beings blind to their blindness. Put alternatively, we’ve the Curse of St. Amos the prophet upon us, left to our wicked & stubborn ways, losing Roman Catholicism Whole & Entire as punishment for our misdeeds, till His Wrath is exhausted. This is WHY the world is increasingly & shockingly wicked. As in the days of St. Noe [Noah], so today.


The Great Apostasy didn’t happen overnight at Vatican II in the 1960s. It was most literally centuries in the making. The Vatican II Pseudo-Council merely allowed it to come out into the open, with no more pretences for those with eyes to see. Was there anyone left with eyes to see at that point in time? I’d like to think so. But I must, too, concede the possibility that there was no one left for awhile. In any case, just as the Twelve Apostles fled at Jesus’ Arrest, abandoning Him, so, also, did these bishops abandon us with Vatican II. Resulting in loss of Roman Catholicity. You savvy?


When I converted out of nowhere in the middle of Los Angeles to the Religion of Catholicism, having been raised as Protestant & Modernist, taught to hate or ridicule God’s One True Faith, I found myself almost all alone. Still, I was at least able to talk with several people over the course of a few years who remembered how Catholics behaved just prior to Vatican II, in the 1920s, ’30s, ’40s & ’50s. They were not necessarily Catholic themselves; still, I gleaned lots of information from them.


Whatever did I learn? How awful ‘catholics’ were during these decades.


They were careless, dismissive, mocking, rebellious & wayward. Priests & bishops, monks & nuns, were lax, petty, riddled with sins, pharisaical, more concerned with the positions of comfort, prestige & wealth that they could attain than anything to do with a real holiness or real charity for their poor, lost & wandering flocks. All were afflicted with a vertiginous spirit of diabolical disorientation. Spiritually drunken sots, feet akimbo, ground caving in, immortal souls plunging to the heart of hell.


The point is, this is the very opposite of an All Holy Triune Catholic God.


Any surprise, then, spiritually drunk as our ‘catholic’ forebears became, that they’d lose all respect & concern --- all piety --- for the True God, True Religion, and This True God & True Religion’s House & Home… to wit, the Holy Sanctuaries of Roman Catholicism? Not at all. These Sanctuaries are consecrated. I.e., dedicated solely to the Triune God of the Catholic Church, His Holy Body. There should be nothing there, in His Presence, visibly opposed to him. What Catholics carry in their hearts, secretly & invisibly, is beyond our normal human power to prevent, if mortally sinful yet private, hidden & unconfessed. But non-Catholics? Or Catholics in public scandal, impenitent, void of visible remorse for their terrible crimes? That is entirely different. Such unholy souls have nothing to do with the All Holy God & His All Holy House. They don’t belong there! Period. That a nobody like me has to even point this out, informing those who suppose themselves ‘learned’ is a measure of our blindness, deformity & rebellion. Would the everyday person take hateful enemies or deadly criminals into his or her home, under the pretense of having a ‘pleasant’ social get-together? Would you or another pretend the excrement-befouled wino is welcome into your house without initially cleaning up and being presentable, not spreading filth & disease?


Obviously. The physical is allegory for spiritual. God made it this way.


He also gave most of us adequately intelligent minds to understand.


Thus, if you don’t understand, it’s for lack of trying, or demonic.


Whichever, the All Holy is not to mingle with the All Unholy.


The two do not go together!!! The non-Catholic must first become Catholic Whole & Entire, receiving the Sacrament of Baptism, to enter a Sanctuary rightly. At the very least, as in ancient times, if a serious inquirer’, you would be allowed to sit in the Sanctuary a short time at the beginning of Mass, before dismissal to ask questions and learn more. If catechumens, they would be permitted to stay a little longer at the start of Mass, yet still dismissed prior to the Consecration of the Most Holy Eucharist and Its Administration. Meanwhile, if publicly & provably Catholic, but publicly in a scandalous mortal sin, impenitent, then you must first receive the Sacrament of Penance, making a good & adequate confession, and, as required, adequate satisfaction. During ancient times, terrible apostates did strict penance for ten years straight, separated at Mass from everyone else, till, proving their sincerity & remorse, they were finally rejoined sacramentally to the Ecclesial Body of Christ, Visibly & Openly. Comprehend?


Catholics of recent centuries --- at least since the late 1800s into the 20th century, culminating with the Vatican II Pseudo-Council --- have been shockingly lax, lazy, impious, blithe & oblivious toward the All Holy and what It requires. They have only repulsed & angered God, to Whom they were supposed to belong and about Whom they were supposed to care, exhausting His Mercy and their time to do penance. They did not. And they have left a mess for real Catholics to clean up, when the Great Apostasy ends, rivaling the spiritual ignorance & religious carelessness confronted by Ss. Esdras & Nehemias in the wake of the Babylonian Exile, when Israelites eventually returned, suffering 70 years of captivity in a pagan land for their ugly apostasy, these men teaching their descendants how to be good & decent Catholics once again. It was gargantuan, the impiety & sin of ignorance, from lack of catechism, appalling.


The same task faces us today, whoever is left who is truly a Roman Catholic.


We must drive home the following Sacred Truth intrepidly & unflinchingly:


The Terribly & Knowably Unholy does NOT belong inside the All Holy!


+++ 3. The Modern Doorkeeper or ‘Porter’ Fantasy +++


The Priesthood in the Roman Catholic Church has always been achieved, if called & permitted, by men first ascending through the ‘sub-clerical’ orders, of which there are six. In ancient times, this amounted to real duties, for a certain period of time, till you proved, by your excellent service and carrying out of your duties, that you were worthy to then be elevated to a following ‘sub-order’. The ascending titles, up to seven, are: porter, lector, exorcist, acolyte, subdeacon, deacon & priest. The first four were called ‘minor orders’. The next three are ‘major orders’, yet the first two of the major orders do not constitute an actual & whole Sacrament of Order. Priesthood alone amounts to actual & visible membership in the Catholic Church’s clergy, with true & full ineffable ‘mark’ of Holy Orders. Theologians have debated whether or not being made a ‘bishop’ is distinct in a significant way from priesthood. God’s Roman Catholic Church hasn’t ever solemnly & explicitly defined this clearly. Howsoever, what is not debatable is that Roman Catholic bishops are priests, too. Furthermore, that it is both a permissible & logical theological opinion, till now, concerning the Catholic episcopacy (read: being an actual Catholic bishop), that it’s primarily a question of primacy and not order. That is to say, indeed there exists a completely distinct ritual for consecrating the bishop --- as opposed to ordaining a candidate to the priesthood --- notwithstanding, the most rudimentary of distinctions discernible between priest & bishop is that the latter governs, in addition to purely priestly functions, whilst a former carries out the duties peculiar to God’s Roman Catholic priesthood, empowering them to do so via the Church’s Sacrament of Orders. Whether or not a man consecrated as a bishop is assigned actual jurisdiction, it is the unique characteristic of his position as a bishop that he alone, normally, can ordain another man as a priest, and that, normally, he alone administers the Sacrament of Confirmation to those under his jurisdiction, or authorized, by governing bishop, ecclesially speaking, to administer the Sacrament of Confirmation to Catholics.


Following this so far? Excellent. If confused, don’t fret. You’ll figure it out.


So why is this important? Why make a fuss of it and explain it carefully?


I’m glad you asked. Or, er, as I’m fond of saying, that I asked for you.


Hopefully, you’re coming along for the ride. If so, then listen up:


The ‘minor orders’ --- porter, lector, exorcist & acolyte --- were not just mere ‘perfunctory’ steps that a man made, or went through, in order to (no pun intended) become a priest in God’s Singularly Roman Catholic Church. They were quite real positions, with very real duties, originally, that a man had to perform with excellence, sincerity & virtue, proving himself worthy of the next step. Which then leads us to ask one very simple question --- “So what is a ‘porter’?” More commonly translated as the word ‘doorkeeper’ or ‘doorman’ in the last few centuries, nevertheless, what does this crucial & initial position, as part of the ‘minor orders’ --- first of seven steps to, at last, full & real priesthood --- amount to? Here is where a modernist fantasy dominates. A human being who is truly Catholic… or calls one’s self ‘catholic’… might sincerely believe this position to be nigh well ‘symbolic’ or ‘perfunctory’… yet this is simply delusional. That is, uninformed fantasy. Or, if you will, after-the-fact reasoning. I.e., imagined explanations they don’t understand correctly, or don’t know to begin with, actual reality in ancient times. Rather iffy about this? Don’t feel too bad. Most folks really don’t comprehend correctly. They either don’t study ancient writings to know facts, or else don’t interpret these facts correctly to form a full & right knowledge. Wherefore? Because they ‘assume’ beforehand that they know what they don’t really know. Porters? I.e., doorkeepers? They presume, without knowing any better in these times, what porters really are. They think, without knowing any better, that a porter is simply a ‘symbolic’ but ‘impractical’ position, merely a ‘stepping stone’ to eventual elevation to the priesthood. They don’t know better because, one, they have not ever studied the matter carefully; and, two, because even if they’ve studied the matter in serious detail, they’ve not ‘connected the dots’ and interpreted it correctly, thereby interpreting the data fully & rightly. They are truly ignorant to a certain degree.


Distressing? Yes, to some degree. A serious problem? Only when stubborn.


Accordingly, only when they assume, blithely, they ‘couldn’t’ be wrong.


But let us get blunt. Where do they go wrong about ‘porters’? Either, one, that ‘doorkeepers’ were always & ever merely a ‘perfunctory’ position without any real function or duties; or, two, that ‘doorkeepers’ were merely & rather uselessly a ‘title’ which never performed real, serious & imperative duties on behalf of the Church, duties which, performed excellently, not only were practical but proved themselves as a worthy man suited for the higher orders, culminating in, eventually, the priesthood… if showing themselves worthy of the position, truly called by God to this immense responsibility. Understanding a little bit now? Grasping why this transcends a mere ‘symbolism’?


I don’t pretend to know everything there is to know about the position of ‘porter’.


To wit, there are tens of thousands of pages of early Church father writings. You can’t just ‘skim’ through these copious pages and pretend to ‘understand’ everything perfectly. It takes time, thought & serious effort to comprehend what they were saying. But I do say that I’ve an essential comprehension. I dare to say this because I really am a true Catholic (however poorly so) and I really do grasp the essential purpose of Christ’s Catholic Body and His Catholic Faith. Knowing these infallible basics, it is NOT impossible to fathom, with moral certitude, what his Body’s various positions are for, and what they are meant to accomplish. Consequently, porters or doorkeepers? Were they merely ‘greeters’, like Walmart employees stationed at the entrances of their (usually) very big stores to greet shoppers, or check carts & bags as shoppers exit, making sure nobody is shoplifting?


Most certainly not. Nor were porters merely there to prevent ‘theft’ of holy things.


Like, for instance, golden chalices or golden patens, or the Holy Eucharist Itself, kept reserved in the ‘Tabernacle’ of the Holy Sanctuary, in which consecrated place the Holy Eucharist is both confected and kept reserved in the Holy & Consecrated Sanctuary of the Roman Catholic Church. We do not dispute that porters were used around the clock, at all hours to keep the holy things of Holy Mother Church safe, unstolen & unmolested. What we do insist is that, during Holy Mass, doorkeepers identified those who had a religious privilege to enter the consecrated Sanctuary and who did not. To wit, if not Catholic, it was never permissible for such people --- not provably Roman Catholic --- to enter a Sanctuary at any time, especially during Holy Mass. Doorkeepers therefore functioned, truly, as doorkeepers keeping those without religious right to pass the doors of such consecrated Sanctuaries, defiling, with their wicked presence, that which is All Holy. It may be so, as claims one acquaintance of mine, remotely at least, who I charitably call Roman Catholic since those I trust insist he is truly Catholic --- and I have never had reason yet, based on solid evidence, to question his purported Catholicity --- that the doorkeepers deferred to deacons to keep out those who were not demonstrably truly Roman Catholic. All the same, it is the doorkeepers’ duty to first identify these non-Roman Catholics, or uncertainly so, as such, prior to a deacon’s action to keep such individuals from entering the Holy Sanctuary when they have no right to do so. Is it making sense? Whether or not such porters physically acted to keep the intruders out, their duty was clear --- identify those not deserving entrance into God’s Holy Temple. Not that their ecclesial duty was surely to physically restrain non-Catholics, or a very wicked Catholic from entering. No matter. It was still their responsibility to alert the deacons to this threat, the deacons themselves then acting physically, where needed, preventing such unworthy & unholy souls from entering the Holy Place. Perchance deacons were assigned to help the newly-minted porters do their jobs, overseeing untested men who were only just learning. No matter. Truth is truth. Getting it?


This is why there were ‘porters’ or ‘doorkeepers’ to begin with. Examine it.


What is the definition of ‘porter’ in its first sense? “1. a doorman or gatekeeper…” And ‘doorman’? “…a man whose work is opening the door of a building for those who enter or leave….”  Meanwhile, ‘gatekeeper’? “…a person in charge of a gate to control passage through it…” (Quotes from Webster’s New World Dictionary of the American Language, 2nd College Edition, as by printed by The World Publishing Co. in New York City, NY, and Cleveland, OH, in 1972 with David B. Guralnik as the Editor-in-Chief. Cited from the entries on Pages 1110, 418 & 578, respectively.) We may also inquire from the now venerable Wikipedia at wikipedia.org regarding a more full explanation for ‘doorman’ as a profession, “A doorman (also porter in British English) is an individual hired to provide courtesy and security services… [The] doorman is responsible for opening doors and screening visitors…” (Current as of 18 February 2019.) Putting it together, beloved?


A ‘porter’ is still current in British English. In either American or British English it is equivalent to a ‘doorman’ or a ‘gatekeeper’. The ‘doorman’ is responsible for opening a door for those who enter or leave, whist a ‘gatekeeper’ is in charge of controlling passage through the entrance. Additionally, ‘porter’ or ‘doorman’ is responsible for the screening of visitors and, resultantly, provides security services on top of this. Now you put two & two together. While a first sub-clerical or minor order position may have entailed other duties as well (such as the ringing of bells, greeting kindly all Roman Catholics that are identifiable, permissible and in good standing, etc.), what, pray thee, is the purpose of opening the door whilst controlling the passage and providing screening & security services if, at least, not alerting those who can come at a moment’s notice in order to control & secure the entrance against those who have no business entering since they’re not Catholic or, if truly Roman Catholic, in scandalously & morally hideous standing? And why would ecclesial translators choose to translate --- bishops approving it --- Holy Mother Church’s ancient term for the position as English’s ‘porter’ if, in fact, the word ‘porter’ is not an accurate, descriptive & properly equivalent word in meaning? Why not instead, if none of this is pertinent, simply swing the holy Sanctuary’s doors wide open and allow anybody at all, willy nilly, to enter with no questions asked?


Are you comprehending? And do you see the simple, ironclad logic? Not so?


Alright, then. What’s your logical & factual explanation? Nonplussed?


Then please be humble enough to admit you mayn’t really know.


+++ 4. When Real Love Necessarily Gets ‘Tough’ +++


I care about you, dearest soul. That’s why I’m explaining this. I am not, though, Our Almighty Creator. As a result, I can’t ‘make’ you believe it. Nor is it my responsibility. It’s yours. Don’t like that? My sincere condolences. I didn’t, however, cause you to be born into this world. I therefore cannot take responsibility for what you believe or so belligerently refuse to believe. That’s your choice… not mine. End of sentence.


In the meantime, note the scriptural quote at the beginning of this short article.


From 2 John, one of St. John the Evangelist’s shortest writings in the Bible. Did you notice it before you started reading this article? If not, then notice it now. Take a very serious look. Known as the ‘Apostle of Love’, we see the beloved disciple get kind of ‘tough’ sounding, distinguishing ‘harshly’ between those who truly are His Master’s disciples, and those who are not. Surprised? Or shocked? You oughtn’t be. ‘Love’ is never what modernist people presume it to be. It isn’t just a ‘nice feeling’ or being ‘friendly’ to everyone no matter what. No. It is, first and foremost, loving God the Creator above all else. And there is only ONE WAY to do this. There’s only ONE SINGLE WAY that the Triune God of the Roman Catholic Church has given to us. Accordingly, to be Roman Catholic WHOLE, ENTIRE & UNDEFILED. Period.


Repulsed? Offended? Outraged? Then you’re not Roman Catholic in either case. I.e., regardless of whether you claim to be Catholic or not, you’re most certainly not Roman Catholic if you reject the ‘no Salvation outside the Roman Catholic Church’ dogma in its original, ancient, correct, narrow, strict, perpetual & unchanging sense. Infallible dogmas are infallible dogmas for a reason --- they’re both definitely true without a doubt; wholly necessary to know, believe & profess for the eternal salvation of our your immortal soul; and irreformable, unable to be ‘changed’ in meaning later on as styles or tastes shift.


Comprehending this fully, willingly & zealously? Please do. Real Catholics do not --- and cannot --- pick & choose which infallible dogmas they want to believe and which ones they don’t want to believe. Real Catholicism is an entire package. You either profess all of it or have none of it. 99% of the infallible dogmas of Catholicism… whilst rejecting a mere single infallible dogma (which includes changing the unchanging meaning of this dogma to something you like better, but which isn’t true!)… doesn’t cut it. Never has.


St. John the Evangelist’s second scriptural letter --- he wrote a gospel, two other letters, and an apocalypse, too --- is significant for another reason as well, apart from the fact that it drives home the principle of religious separation from those who are not truly Catholic and are not religiously united with you, assuming you yourself are actually Catholic. Oh, mind you, we’re not advocating being unsociable, nasty, cruel, stand-offish or otherwise unjust toward those who are not real Catholics. We’re simply stating the truth --- that in no way can real Catholics think, pretend or act like they’re ‘religiously united’ with any person not actually Catholic (and obviously so, not something that is unforeseen or not possible to ever know!), or, knowing that you, as a real Catholic, are not religiously united with them, but think or pretend that it’s ‘okay’ to get the sacraments from or together with them. But what is this additional reason for 2 John’s significance?


We present the whole passage once more to make sure you remember:


“Whosoever revolteth [revolts, that is, rebels against what God tells us to religiously believe as the Saving Truth] and continueth [continues] not in the doctrine [read: Jesus’ Roman Catholic Religion Whole, Entire & Undefiled] of Christ hath [has] not God [God doesn’t claim you as His Own and you don’t belong to Him]. He that continueth in the doctrine, the same [this kind of person] hath both the Father and the Son. If ANY man come to you, and bring NOT this doctrine [Roman Catholicism Whole & Entire!], receive him NOT into the house [don’t you dare treat this person as if you two, religiously speaking, are wholly united and are worshipping the very same thing together], NOR say to him, ‘God speed you [don’t bless such persons in a way appearing like both of you are truly religiously united].’” (2 John 1:9-10 DRC)


We trust that the thrust of the scriptural passage is plain. There are many other biblical verses we could quote to demonstrate the same point; this one, however, is particularly blatant and particularly incisive, especially coming from the Beloved Disciple, he who so many call the ‘Apostle of Love’. Notice, nonetheless, where it warns “…receive him not into the house…”? Most Catholics, if they even bother reading Sacred Scripture and see this passage, interpret “house” to mean ‘the house that you, as a Catholic, live in’… and that’s it. Accurate and believable? It’s entirely acceptable. You can as a Catholic take it this way and that’s alright. Howsoever, recollect what I’ve remarked elsewhere. Sacred Scripture is inspired by God, Who is Infinite & Vast, and it is fully possible that He is intending, in any particular passage, two or more meanings at the same time. In other words, that more than one interpretation can be true simultaneously. So my point is absolutely NOT either / or. It is very possibly both / and. Which is to say…?


+++ 5. God’s House +++


That “house” is easily & justifiably interpretable as ‘God’s Sanctuary’.


And in New Testament times… the era of Roman Catholicism, after Jesus Christ’s Advent as the God-Man upon the earth… what is God’s Sanctuary? Right. A Roman Catholic Sanctuary. Any place of worship, as approved by a bishop with full jurisdiction and consecrated by him as a building sanctified unto the Triune God of Catholicism as a place where He ‘dwells’, His Manifest Presence there in a Eucharistic Host under mere appearance as ‘bread’ and ‘wine’. Getting it now? The Holy Ghost through St. John is arguably (and undeniably, when we understand Christ’s Catholic Body correctly and apply Her Laws appropriately) saying that nobody, who isn’t Catholic, or a Catholic publicly in good standing, is to be allowed entrance into the Abode of the Holy. Why? Because Catholics are so ‘cruel’? Don’t be a silly billy. Or, at least, don’t act way less intelligent than you really are. The explanation is stark. Can and should the All Holy mingle with the Unholy? NO!!!!!!!! Sorry to be so ‘emotional’ or ‘emphatic’. Don’t intend to ‘overwhelm’ or ‘antagonize’ you. Just that, quite honestly, I care way more about what Our Creator thinks about me than what you, the dearest reader, think of infinitesimal me. Like St. Phinees in the Old Testament, I am zealous for Our All Holy God’s Immeasurable Holiness & Reputation. I am appalled at the carelessness of God’s earthly ecclesial shepherds in most recent centuries at NOT guarding God’s Sanctuary with utmost earnestness & security, and I am appalled at Catholics today… what few they be during the Great Apostasy… having so little understanding of, and regard for, defending God’s House’s Sanctity & Security against those who have no real business entering there and defiling it with their unholy presence or deeds. Too much for you? I ask quietly, “Who do you love more… this world and its opinions, or the Opinion of Our Almighty & All Holy Maker?” The point is the point --- and true. A Catholic Sanctuary is God’s ‘House’. Ergo, ought we as real Catholics to receive the non-Catholic or publicly iniquitous Catholic --- iniquitous in a public, mortal way --- blithely into God’s House?


The rejoinder is simple, rational, rock solid & irrefutable… NOT AT ALL!!!!!!!!


Mind you, we’re not arguing intellectually, at this point, over the precise duty of ‘porters’. We’re merely noting an irrefutable fact --- that the All Holy God’s All Holy Sanctuary cannot be left unguarded and thus anyone at all, whether Catholic or not, whether openly & publicly holy or not, free to enter as they wish, helter skelter.


Don’t get this? Yet adequately intelligent? Then perhaps you’re a rebel.


Do get this? Yet really don’t like it? Then, mayhap, you’re wicked.


Insulted? I am sorry. I don’t want to insult you. I just want Truth. And if you choose religious falsehood --- dangerously contemporary and spiritually deadly spiritual lies --- then I am compelled to say what might offend you in order to save even one soul from an everlastingly damnable lie and to please my Uncreated Creator… Whose Opinion is, I am forced to say, FAR MORE IMPORTANT TO ME THAN YOURS. I want to be at full peace with you if possible, and I want to be nice & charitable toward you… yet not at the expense of my immortal soul, or at the risk of eternal damnation of this most precious of things that I have. What do you want? The merely earthly & temporal? Well, then, dear reader, that’s where you and I must part ways. I hope you reconsider. Please do! I want you with me, in Heaven Forever, as my fellow Roman Catholic. But to do that, you’ve got to hold God’s Opinion as more important than yours, or mine, or anyone else’s.


And His House on earth is any Roman Catholic Sanctuary, where dwells His Manifest Presence Eucharistically. It is also consecrated, a bishop & his priests making it pure & holy, a fitting place on earth for God to show Himself under the appearance of bread & wine. So, right & fitting that the Unholy should dare to enter… and be allowed to enter… this Most Holy of Places upon earth, where Our Maker deigns to make His ‘Home’? Can the Holy abide with the Unholy? Ought the Holy be ‘made’ to abide with the Unholy? Of course not. The very notion is nonsensical and should be ‘unthinkable’ for the thinking. The Catholic thinking, that is. And hence this short article. To get you, the reader, to think straight. If truly Catholic, or becoming truly Catholic. Separate the two!


Or do you not understand Who you claim to serve? If not, please fathom.


+++ 6. And God’s Elect +++


A final observation. At the start of St. John’s 2nd letter we read:


“The ancient to the lady Elect, and her children, whom I love in the truth, and not I only, but also all they that have known the truth [all real Catholics, who know, profess & love this One True Religion Whole, Entire & Undefiled], for the sake of the truth which dwelleth [dwells] in us, and shall be with us for ever.” (2 John 1:1-2 DRC)


Notice that unusual name or title, ‘the Lady Elect’? Yes, indeed. Curious.


The popular theological opinion for the past few centuries is that, while it may be a very poetic way to write to a Catholic ‘family’ with this name (Elect) or a particular church (diocese), that it’s probably the proper name of a real individual woman named ‘Elect’, renowned for her ‘piety’ and ‘great charity’, so as to merit a letter, personally, from the last living of Christ’s Twelve Apostles. Believable? Somewhat. I surely don’t pretend I can ‘prove’ this is false with the evidence I have. Yet provable it is an individual woman? Not at all. It amounts to conjecture, NOT certainty. The only thing going for this opinion is ‘eminence’ of the theological scholars opining it. Alternative explanation? As a matter of fact, yes. Yes there is. Orthodox? Indubitably. Likely? I think so. Shall we have it?




Anyone who reads the Bible thoroughly & closely notes how often the Holy Ghost through chosen writer refers to Catholics as God’s ‘elect’. For instance, “And he shall send his angels with a trumpet, and a great voice: and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from the farthest parts of the heavens to the utmost bounds of them.” (Matthew 24:31 DRC) Or, “Put ye [all of you] on therefore, as the elect of God, holy, and beloved, the bowels of mercy, benignity, humility, modesty, patience…” (Colossians 3:12 DRC) Several other examples exist from New Testament Sacred Scripture, too.


Are you beginning to put the pieces of the puzzle together, my precious soul?


If God via His Scriptural Composers routinely refers to God’s Chosen People --- Catholics --- as His ‘elect’, and His Singular Catholic Church, to which these Chosen belong, as His Bride or Wife, then to whom do you think ‘the Lady Elect’ might refer? Faint suspicion starting to form in your mind? Right… She’s the Roman Catholic Body of Jesus Christ. Infallibly defined? No. Theologically acceptable? Without a doubt. To be taken seriously? In my opinion, yes. Notwithstanding, why would St. John be so cryptic? (In actuality, the Holy Ghost inspiring him…) For one thing, to be poetic. For another, keeping outlawed Catholics from being easily identified in this letter, meant for many Catholics throughout the world if I’m correct, were it intercepted, one copy at bare minimum, falling into antagonistic pagan hands, leading to a very gory persecution.


And why is the membership of the Triune God of the Catholic Church called His ‘elect’… why is a true Roman Catholic ‘elect’? Who elected us? Who, indeed. The Almighty, Our Creator, He Who Is All Holy. Understanding? He is All Holy. We, if Catholic, truly & wholly, must also be All Holy. Only then may we have the privilege, the right, to access His All Holy House, a Roman Catholic Sanctuary, where there is never to be a place for the Unholy --- a non-Catholic person or publicly scandalous Catholic. This is the primary purpose of the porter or doorkeeper’. Recall this? Precisely. Lowest rung of seven steps to full & complete priesthood, the exalted Sacrament of Holy Orders, it is no titular or merely symbolic position. It carries, necessarily, real & practical duties. Does this amount to bare ‘protection’ of the ‘valuables’ of the Church? To wit, silver chalice, golden paten, marble altar, etc. Nonsense. Such thinking is naïve or biased. Holy items made by human hands, as is derived from earthly materials, are valuable. Yet the real most valuable thing in the Sanctuary, the True Treasure, is God Himself in the Eucharist. The next priceless extravaganza is the Sanctuary Itself, consecrated & holy to God. And when are religiously costly things, like anything most vulnerable, most prone to abuse? Absolutely... whenever Holy Mass occurs, rightful members of the Church in good standing participating. So when does the porter’s job most matter? When is his function outstandingly needed? Correct again, my astute peruser. When he must stand vigilant at the Sanctuary’s door, watching carefully to identity anyone potentially unrecognizable for the real Roman Catholic they are supposed to be prior to entrance, or, this person being a real Roman Catholic, nonetheless, well known, publicly, as an impenitent & scandalously mortal sinner. Getting it? Do you see and understand, dear reader?


An acquaintance of mine, who I believe to be truly Catholic, insists that it was the deacons who actually prevented such illegitimate people from entering, or physically escorted them back outside from the Sanctuary. This very well could be the truth. I am not claiming to know for certain. This is because, one, for all my study & learning, tens of thousands of pages of the early Church fathers exist to be read, and it is not very light reading. It takes time and careful thought --- years & years of it. And, two, just as much scholarly writings from those who are purportedly Catholic, but unquestionably learned, exist to be read as well. This also takes time and careful thought, not being light reading. I’ve never yet been able to feel like I can prioritize this particular branch of study. Ergo, I’m not going to pretend that I ‘know better’. This gentleman, my acquaintance, is very possibly correct. Yet guess what? The exact case is irrelevant to this precise point.


We repeat --- the exact case here is irrelevant to this precise point. Period.


Whether or not the deacons actually prevented entrance of unworthy persons, the imperative function of the porters was the same. The porters were the persons who vigilantly watched at the doors to identify each & every person, daring to enter God’s Sanctuary & All Holy House, as real Roman Catholics and publicly worthy of doing so. Performing this duty well, with utmost gravity and excellence, was the beginning proof of their worthiness to ascend further in the steps toward actual priesthood. I mean, after all, if you can’t be bothered to protect the sanctity of God’s Sanctuary --- or do so very incompetently even if you really do care --- then how in the world are you going to be worthy of the far more important task of consecrating the Most Holy Eucharist, or hearing the confessions of sinful Catholics, discerning their hearts and dispensing absolution & satisfactions? Eh? This is why the Church began you with porter.


+++ 7. Great Learning, Authority & Eminence Can +++

Be FantasticYet Even the Simple Can Know the Truth


But someone might say, “How do you know? You haven’t studied it adequately.” Or, “Who in the world are you? You’re nobody! I don’t have to pay attention to what you say…” In actuality, I have studied the matter of porters and their ancient duties. I simply never foolishly claim that I’ve studied it well enough to pretend ‘expertise’ in the subject. And, yes, you’re right. I’m nobody. So true! I’ve never pretended otherwise. Rather, it is a bit routine for me to go out of my way to say the very same thing about myself --- that I’m nobody important. I don’t insist that anyone has to listen to me, and take my words seriously about the Catholic Religion, because I’m important. To the contrary… I say you’d better take what I say seriously in spite of being a nobody --- the message is what’s vitally important, NOT the messenger! Get it? If not, I’ve done my best.


But I’ll let you in on a little secret. People who think themselves Catholic --- whether TNOs who aren’t really Catholic despite sounding & looking so, or the real deal and of varying degrees of knowledge about Catholicism or lack thereof --- tend to go gaga over eminent scholarship, papal documents, curial pronouncements, and so forth and so on. If anyone bothers reading what I write, then you know, for a fact, that I don’t despise great learning or knowledge. Far from it! Howsoever, as I’m fond of saying, you don’t need immense learning, knowledge or high degrees to be a real Catholic. If so, then people having very little brain are in big trouble. Only the intellectuals will get into Heaven.


Do I believe this? Of course not! Don’t be a goofy wog. Intellectualism is a deficit. To salvation, that is. Why? Because pride then dogs your footsteps. And deceit. The very simple yet good-willed Roman Catholic is far more likely to make it into Heaven.


Ah, but the secret? All you need is basic but wise understanding of God. All you need, regarding His One True Faith, is basic but wise understanding of His Singularly Roman Catholic Body’s Purpose. Once you have this down, everything else follows. Time and time again have I known the answer to serious questions about Catholicism and, later learning from eminent sources the truth about the matter, confirmed what I already figured out. Why? Because I’m so smart? The opposite, actually. Because I’m so extremely simple-minded… but good-willed when it comes to Infallible Truth.


That said, we’ll throw in one last thing. A thing people of a traditional nature, and claiming to be Roman Catholic, really do go gaga over. To wit, eminent scholarship & authoritative yet arcane statements from the Church’s Hierarchy. Not that I disdain these things. Anyone who reads my writings can know this is not true! Contrarily, because one is not ‘proven right’ by these sources just because he or she quotes it. People who are unlearned are no more reliably aided by such sources than is the everyday person qualified to run a nuclear reactor just because one glances at a physics book.


Yet the eminent & authoritative quote? We may peruse the following;


“It should be taught, therefore, that these orders are seven in number, and that this has been the constant teaching of the Catholic Church. These orders are those of porter, lector, exorcist, acolyte, subdeacon, deacon and priest… After tonsure [a sign of dedication to God’s Holy Service as a man, whether in the priesthood or in the monastery] it is customary to advance to the first order, which is that of porter. The function (of porter) is to guard the keys and doors of the church [sanctuary], and to allow no one to enter there to whom access has been forbidden.” (The Catechism of the Council of Trent --- also known as The Roman Catechism, etc. --- and, while not of infallible nature, continually attested for the past four centuries, by both academics & clergy within the Catholic Church, as the next thing to it in authoritative teaching. St. Charles Borromeo edited it overall, it was ordered to be written by the holy Council of Trent, and promulgated by Pope St. Pius V. First published in original Latin in Rome in 1566. The English edition, from which this quote derives, was first printed in 1923 with nihil obstat of V. F. O’Daniel, O.P., S.T.M. and T. M. Schwertner, O.P., S.T.Lr., and the imprimi potest of J. R. Meagher, O.P., S.T.Lr., as well as the nihil obstat of A. J. Scanlan, S.T.D. and the imprimatur of Patritus J. Hayes, Archbishop of the Diocese of New York. This English translation later reprinted by Marian Publications in South Bend, IN, in 1976, and further reprinted by TAN Books & Publishers, Inc., in Rockford, IL, as of 1982. Quotes from the chapter called “The Sacrament of Holy Orders”, the first from Page 323 in the subsection entitled “Number of Orders”, and the second, respectively, from Page 325 in the subsection entitled “The Minor Orders” and subsubsection of “Porter”. All emphases & annotations added, apart from parenthetical clause.)


Notice the “function” bold highlighted in the quote above? Namely, “…and to allow no one to enter there [the church, that is to say, a sanctuary] to whom access has been forbidden…”? Naturally. And who, prithee, is it that “access” to a Roman Catholic Sanctuary has “been forbidden”? Correct, my intelligent, honest & humble reader:


People who are not Catholic or are impenitent & publicly sinful Catholics.


Yet will even this quote convince the inconvincible? Not a chance. If CF (Catholic fundamentalist) , then no amount of eminent or authoritative quotes is likely to change their minds. CFs are not simply unlearned, they are also proud & impatient. Too, they really like looking ‘right’ regardless of whether or not their stance is actually right. Accordingly, truth is never their highest aim; always ‘winning’ the argument is.


But for a sincere & honest person, truly wanting to know the truth about this?


Why, this really ought to be enough. Especially for a relatively short article.


So why did I wait until now to bring out this quote? I’d read it some time ago while studying The Catechism of the Council of Trent meticulously. However, I’ve also read and written thousands upon thousands of pages regarding Catholicity since then. It thus was someone just now (as I write!) bringing it to my attention that has permitted me to cite it, backing up what we’ve dared to say concerning ‘porters’. Yet, again, why put it here, near the very end of the article? Because, dear reader, the stubborn are not ever going to capitulate in spite of such ‘eminent quotes’. And because, my beloved one, Roman Catholics --- the real kind, even now during the Great Apostasy! --- need to know, imperatively, how it is never eminent scholarship or authoritative statements guaranteed solely to lead one into adequate & correct understanding of Catholicity.


In other words, you needn’t be a brilliant, learned & eminent scholar or intellectual in order to save one’s soul as a real & good Roman Catholic. If so, as said before, then only the learned intellectual will make it into Heaven. But is this the case? Absolutely not. Our One True Religion is profound enough for an eminent scholar, who is truly Catholic, to plumb endlessly for wisdom & comprehension. It’s also simple enough for the average person of adequate intelligence to know, believe & profess, saving his or her soul. Whichever, knowing, believing & professing Infallible Catholic Truth is the key.


What we’ve said above concerning sanctuaries & porters is simple & true.


Anybody should be able to comprehend it, even the simple-minded.


I know, because I’m a simple-minded man who loves the truth.


Do you love truth? Then please be simple. And honest.


It really is the best policy --- honestly.




If harboring confusion or skepticism regarding what this short article has dared to say, particularly concerning certain canon laws in the 1917 Code of Canon Law, then you are morally obligated to examine another short letter that dovetails with this article perfectly and is called Unity of Worship Redux: How the 1917 Code of Canon Law Does Not, & Cannot, Vitiate or Change the Church’s Ancient Teaching re Religious Separation Applied to Ritual or Worship . As well as, if still dubious, you are morally obligated to examine yet another even shorter letter that dovetails perfectly with both the preceding, called Unity of Worship Addendum: How the 1917 Code of Canon Law Simply Is Not, However Someone May Want to Think Otherwise, Any Act of ‘Infallibility’, the Truly Infallible Definition of Papal Infallibility at the Vatican Council of the 1800s Proving This . Both are in the Letters & Admonishments section of The Epistemologic Works. This is a matter of eternal life or death. Follow all links provided when uninformed & disbelieving. Figure it out --- please do so!


+ + +


Pilate’s query met:




if you’ve come to this webpage directly from a search

engine or other website, then, when done viewing this webpage

 --- and assuming you wish to view more of this website’s pages ---

please type the website’s address (as given above right before this

note) into the address bar at the top of your browser and hit the

enter’ button on the keyboard of your computer.


Please go here about use of the writings

on this website.


© 2019 by Paul Doughton.

All rights reserved.