Wednesday, September 28, 2016

One Soul’s Escape From Satanism to Catholicism

One Soul’s Escape From Satanism to Catholicism

In 2011, at an Easter Vigil in a simple parish church in New York State, a number of souls were received into the Catholic Church. As it does every year, the ceremony moved from the darkness surrounding the Paschal Fire through the many readings from the Old and New Testament to the proclamation of the triumph of the Resurrection – reminding all present that the long reign of Sin and Death has finally ended. On that night, those adults becoming Catholics made their baptismal promises. They accepted the Truths of the Faith. They rejected Satan and all his works and all his empty promises.
It is right and fitting that they did so, but for one among them it had an even greater significance than for the others present that night. Previously, he had been part of a witch’s coven. For many years, he had practiced its blasphemous rites, and seen things that he maintains could only have come from Hell as that is whence he had summoned them.
Of course, Fred Wolff had not always been a Satanist. In fact, he was born, in 1956, into a New York Jewish family. His family was not overtly religious. Nevertheless, the boy attended the local synagogue and Hebrew School, and then duly made his Bar Mitzvah. He left the practise of his faith when aged 16-year-old. A year later he had his first introduction to the Occult.
A friend brought him to meet his cousin. This cousin happened to run an Occult bookshop in Wolff’s hometown. There, the youth met men who were witches; soon he was happily being inducted into Wicca. Wicca pretends to be magic of the sort that harms no one. Looking back, Wolff sees it was harming him, and more worryingly opening the channel to another deeper, more dangerous, encounter with evil.
On one level, Wolff’s life appeared normal. In 1977, he joined the Air Force and was duly posted to different parts of the country. On another level, his life was anything but normal. In these different postings with the military, he would be connected to Occult groups that were present wherever he was stationed. In his own words, such covens are ‘widespread’ – true then, no doubt, even more so today.
One encounter proved too much, though, and showed where this was ultimately leading. Wolff was posted to California. A man approached him. As he did so, he noticed that the man carried a leather case with a Pentagram upon it. This symbol of devil worship proved to be portentous, for the man was a Satanist. He invited Wolff to his first Black Mass.
It took place in San Francisco and left the airman traumatised. He had never experienced anything like it before, despite the many Wicca ceremonies in which he had taken part. What he does remember of that ‘mass’ was that the chief ‘celebrant’ of its blasphemy was a defrocked Catholic priest.
Here is not the place to recount the vile things witnessed that night as the Holy Mass was perverted into a sacrilege. What Wolff remembers clearly is that he was aghast while attending it. But, no matter how frightened he felt of what was taking place before his eyes, there seemed to be another power, albeit an invisible one, holding him there, preventing his leaving.
After his discharge from the air force, in 1981, Wolff returned to civilian life. He also returned to the practise of his pagan ways. Soon he was the High Priest, so called, of his local coven on Long Island. And, so it remained, and would have done so, had not a figure from his past reappeared in the winter of 1982. That person was one of the people whom he had met at the Occult bookshop all those years previously, and who, subsequently, had introduced him to Wicca. He came with a curious request.
The man was convinced that he had found the ritual and invocations to conjure up a demon. He asked if Wolff wanted to participate in what he was about to attempt. More out of curiosity than anything, Wolff agreed; however, what was about to take place was to change both men’s lives.
A so-called ‘circle of protection’ was marked upon the floor. His friend told him that as long as they stayed within the circle’s confines they would be ‘safe’. The chanting of the long incantations began. Little did either of them know of the power of evil and that Satan and his demons have one goal: to destroy all those with whom they come into contact, ‘friend’ or foe. And yet, the ritual continued.
As it did so, from the corner of the darkened room, a figure began to appear. As it came into the light, Wolff remembers it was the most beautiful woman he had ever seen, with a beauty that was captivating. She beckoned to him to leave the circle. Somehow, motivated by fear more than anything else, he managed not to move. It was just as well for within seconds the figure had changed from beautiful to that of a hideous shape. In fact, he was later to say that it was the most horrible thing he had ever set eyes on. But, by then, he says, the ‘real show’ had just begun.
The very walls around the two men appeared to melt. And with that, came the most suffocating and awful smell – a sulphuric smell. Today, Wolff realises that he was being given his very own glimpse of Hell. Now, he says that when he hears of people who say that Hell doesn’t exist, he knows they are wrong – he has seen it, smelt it even.
And, with the coming of Hell, so too arrived one of its occupants as the summoned demon now made an entry.
The reaction on seeing this shape was one of fear, a paralysing fear. The demon looked straight at the two men and then laughed at them, asking if they thought the circle would really keep them safe? Before any answer was uttered, Wolff’s companion was lifted from the floor and thrown against an adjacent wall approximately 15 feet away. At this, Wolff could take no more and fled horror-struck through the house before locking himself in a room.
How long he hid there, he still has no idea. What he does know, in retrospect, is that if the Hand of the Almighty had not sheltered him that night he is convinced that he would now be dead. Of this, he is certain.
His companion did not fare so well, however. When Wolff emerged and returned to the room where the ritual had taken place, he found him lying on the floor, foaming at the mouth. A police and ambulance were soon in attendance. The police did not believe Wolff’s story that he had just ‘happened by’ and found his friend in this state; but there was no overt evidence of violence or drug use and so the police let it go. Eventually, his friend was taken to a psychiatric institution on Long Island. He was to die there from self-inflicted wounds some years later.
Wolff had now seen too much. He wanted out. At last, he sensed the danger he was in. The next day, he told the other members of the coven of this desire to leave. They started to threaten him: no one was going anywhere; somehow, he managed to get away from them and ran to his car parked outside. But try as he might, the car wouldn’t start. And as he was sitting there, turning the ignition, suddenly, out of the building from which he had just fled, there appeared two witches. In the rear-view mirror, he could see that they had spotted his car. He watched as they seemed to cast a spell at Wolff and his vehicle. The next moment all he remembers was that the windows of his car blew out.
It was then the car started, and, seconds later, a dazed Wolff sped off into the night …
The following day when he went to get the glass repaired, the men doing so commended him for doing a ‘good job’. He did not understand what they meant. So they explained that obviously he had cleaned the inside of the car from all the broken glass. The only thing was, he hadn’t. To this day, Wolff is sure that something, or someone, had protected him from the force of the blast so as the shattering glass had been deflected away from him. He thinks this could only have occurred through the protection of his guardian angel.
At Wolff’s then work place, there was a Christian who had often tried to speak to him about Christianity. Wolff had never been interested. Now, when he met the man, he begged him to take him to church. Days later, at a Baptist church, watched by his surprised work colleague, Wolff accepted Our Lord as his Saviour. As he was to say later, after the night of that infernal ritual, he knew he needed a saviour; and, perhaps more importantly, he knew from what he was being saved.
The years that followed were far from easy. He got married, but the marriage broke down; he suffered from depression. His church attendance was sporadic. He had no firm adherence to any of the many Protestant groups he attended. There was a constant theme running through these groups though. It was a fear of Catholicism, often dressed up in arguments against or negative comments about the Church. Paradoxically, these polemics had the opposite effect on Wolff. He began to read books by authors such as Scott Hahn, Patrick Madrid and other Catholic apologists. The more he read, the more a shape formed in his consciousness, but one wholly unlike the hideous figure of that dreadful night many years ago. This was an altogether different one, and one whose beauty was true, for it was the Bride of Christ, His Church.
Now, at last, at that Easter Vigil in 2011, in a church dedicated to her who crushes the head of the serpent, Wolff attended a Holy Mass instead of the counterfeit he had witnessed in the past, and, having confessed all, received his Saviour in Holy Communion, and, with it, the peace and joy that casts out all fear.
K. V. Turley


K. V. Turley is a London based freelance writer and filmmaker with a degree in theology from the Maryvale Institute.

Tuesday, September 27, 2016

No Salvation Outside the Catholic Church? -Catholic Answers video : common mistake

I mentioned in a previous post that 'The Remnant and Catholic Family News published a letter and a Liber of Accusation against Pope Francis entitled, “With Burning Concern: We Accuse Pope Francis” and have seen the subjectivism in Amoris Laetitia  but not the subjectivism in their interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) and Vatican Council II.
Nor have they seen the subjectivity  of the two popes in salvation theology.
Presently every priest has to accept this subjectivism in salvation theology to be incardinated ; to be accepted by the Vatican. This point was omitted in the Liber.
Even the Traditional Latin Mass today is modernist,Pope Francis only permits this Mass, with  subjectivism in salvation theology.The old ecclesiology is omitted.
It is obligatory for all Catholics to interpret the baptism of desire(BOD) and being saved in invincible ignorance(I.I) without the baptism of water, as being not subjective but objective, seen in the flesh in 2016.'

This is the mistake also made by Catholic Answers in the video above.It is assumed that the Catechism of the Catholic Church (846) refers to some explicit case in the present times (2016).So Catholic Answers cannot say every one with no exception; no known exception, needs to be incorporated into the Church as a member.
Since there are no practical exceptions.
There cannot be practical exceptions to the centuries-old interpretation of the dogma on exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church.
In the previous post I mentioned :- 
'This subjectivism which is the foundation of the Rahner-Ratzinger New Theology is being taught this semester at all Catholic universities and seminaries. Even Fr. Matthias Gaudron, of the SSPX in Germany, who was critical of the subjectivism in Amoris Laetitia, does not oppose this subjectivism in the interpretation of the new salvation theology.
The irrationality is  taught by Fr. Jean Marie Gleize at the SSPX seminary in Econe,Switzerland.It is the same at other SSPX seminaries.Yet Chris Ferrara often says that the SSPX is not teaching anything new.The SSPX is allegedly not saying anything new?!
Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre approved this error and did not know it was responsible for the hermeneutic of rupture with Tradition in Vatican Council II.
Without this subjectivism in the Rahner-Ratzinger new theology Vatican Council II can be interpreted as not being a break with Quanta Cura.The Council is not a rupture with the Syllabus of Errors.The Council is Feeneyite ( theology which says there are no known exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus) and traditional.'

Even Catholic Answers is not aware that without this subjectivism, the Catechism of the Catholic Church can be interpreted in harmony with 'the rigorist interpretation' of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
The blog post stated :
'So the Liber does not tell Pope Francis that Vatican Council II can  be interpreted without his wrongly assuming we can subjectively discern a BOD case in 2016.
'It does not say that we can re- nterpret LG 16, LG 8, etc  as not by being explicit and personally known, since they can only be personally known to God and not to us humans.
Vatican Council II will then be in harmony with the  dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus according to the 16th century missionaries  and not according  to Pope Benedict XVI.Since there are no 'practical exceptions', (a phrase used by Chris Ferrara) with reference to extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

For Catholic Answers the dogma outside the Church there is no salvation is in harmony with Pope Benedict and Pope Francis since there are alleged exceptions. It is a rupture with the 16th century missionaries who did not claim there are exceptions.Catholic Answers could not tell the Protestant that he was on the way to Hell.Since for Catholic Answers there are known exceptions. Without the subjectivism error, of Catholic Answers, the Protestant who called in could have been directly told that he was on the way to Hell, unless he formally converted into the Catholic Church.
The blog post states:
'Ferrara is saying that there are no 'practical exceptions' to the Feeneyite interpretation of EENS. However he is still not saying that there are no practical exceptions  in Vatican Council II to the Feeneyite interpretation of EENS.The Liber does not mention this.This is a very important point which he left out.'
The Liber also does not mention that Catholic Answers and so many Catholic organisations and apologists are confused on this issue. Explaining salvation in the Catholic Church has become complicated because of the political priorities which hide the truth.
The post stated:
It may be said that the issue of Fr.Leonard Feeney is of the past, an injustice was done to him for being faithful to the teachings of the Church.However the Liber does not say that the Fr. Leonard Feeney case determines how Pope Francis interprets Vatican Council II today.He assumes there are practical exceptions in Vatican Council II to the dogma EENS as interpreted by Fr.Leonard Feeney.So theologically he de-rails Vatican Council II with the past, with the popes and saints on exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church.
For me there are no practical exceptions mentioned in Vatican Council II.
So the two popes are wrong and so are the SSPX bishops.'

Even Catholic Answers is wrong. 
This is an important issue since the canonical requirement for the SSPX is that they accept Vatican Council II with 'practical exceptions'.They need to point out this error to the Vatican.Vatican Council II can be acceopted also as having not practical exceptions to the old ecclesiology. There are no practical exceptions to EENS in Vatican Council II(Feeneyite). The ecclesiology is traditional without the Rahner-Ratzinger theology.
They need to point out the error to Catholic Answers.
The regularisation of the Franciscans of the Immaculate also depends on their accepting the Rahner-Ratzinger new doctrines on salvation,based on 'practical exceptions' to EENS.Pope Francis   was not asked to correct his error.
They are also using the Rahner-Ratzinger New Theology as is Catholic Answers above.
Vatican Council II with this error, is the reason for the sedevacantists ( MHFM etc) being sedevacantists during the pontificate of Pope John Paul II.They do not know that the baptism of desire refers to imaginary cases and so never were relevant to EENS.This is a mistake of the Vatican Curia too.It was important for the liber to have clarified this point.The problem again is subjectivism in salvation theology.
Catholics Answers criticizes the sedevacantists and Radical Traditionalists but all of them use the new theology based on irrational subjectivism.
-Lionel Andrades

Is Salvation Possible for Non-Catholics? : Trent Horn at Catholic Answers assumes Lumen Gentium 16 is not a hypothetical case but refers to someone personally known

In a previous post I had mentioned that :
'Heresy is not believing in the teachings  of the Catholic Church, which are obligatory.However  heresy results also when we assume hypothetical cases are personally known in the present times,example the baptism of desire.
Since by mixing up what is imaginary as being objective there results a different belief.There is a new doctrine a different conclusion.With a new premise a new conclusion is created.
The result is non traditional and heretical.In this case the heresy is not intentional and may also be unknown.'
Trent Horn, the Apologist at Catholic Answers in the video above also assumes that Lumen Gentium 16 is not a hypothetical case but that it refers to someone personally known.
In the blog post I mentioned:
'The Baltimore Catechism(1891) brought heresy into the Church with the subtle reference to the hypothetical catechumen being explicit like the baptism of water.Catholics have accepted the baptism of desire of an unknown catechumen as being a concrete case,presently visible.This was inferred by the magisterium at that time. They referred to the new baptism, the baptism of desire, as a Sacrament like the baptism of water.This was even though it could not be seen or administered like the baptism of water.
Q. 653. Is Baptism of desire or of blood sufficient to produce the effects of Baptism of water?
A. Baptism of desire or of blood is sufficient to produce the effects of the Baptism of water, if it is impossible to receive the Baptism of water.
 (How did they know? Who saw or met someone saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church?
They assume these are objective cases. They mix up what is invisible as being visible, hypothetical as being objectively seen)

Q. 654. How do we know that the baptism of desire or of blood will save us when it is impossible to receive the baptism of water?
A. We know that baptism of desire or of blood will save us when it is impossible to receive the baptism of water, from Holy Scripture, which teaches that love of God and perfect contrition can secure the remission of sins ; and also that Our Lord promises salvation to those who lay down their life for His sake or for His teaching.
(Yes, theoretically, hypothetically, as a possibility known only to God.So why is it mentioned here with reference to all needing the baptism of water with no exceptions?
It is mentioned here since it is inferred that the baptism of desire refers to a known case.)

Catholic Answers has also assumed that the baptism of desire refers to an exception to the Feeneyite interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS).
The blog post says:

Then in 1949  it was stated clearly that there were exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus as it was known over the centuries.
That is why for a person to obtain his salvation, it is not always required that he be de facto incorporated into the Church as a member'. -Letter of the Holy Office 1949
So again over Church history the  invisible was considered visible.
The Church had always taught that every one needs to enter the Catholic Church to avoid Hell. Every one.So the native American in 1000 A.D was oriented to the fires of Hell.
However with the New Theology based on the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 the Native American would be an exception since he was in ignorance.
1.Being saved in invincible ignorance refers to known cases, personally known exceptions to the dogma EENS.
2.Also a case of invincible ignorance in 1000 A.D is an exception to the dogma EENS in 2016!
This is the reasoning of Catholic Answers above. They are trying to adapt the dogma EENS to the Rahner-Ratzinger new theology approved by the Left.
The blog post states:
'Subjectivism was brought into salvation theology.It is similar to the subjectivism in moral theology.It is there in the work of Fr.Charles Curran and can be read also in Pope Francis' Amoris Laeitia.
'Subjectivism in moral theology is being able to judge an exception to objective mortal sin( as if one can read the soul)  and in salvation theology it is being able to see an explicit baptism of desire case,which is an exception to the dogmaextra ecclesiam nulla salus. The  dogma EENS suggests that it is  always required that a person be  de facto incorporated into the Church as a member for salvation.'
If 'someone did not have a chance to know Jesus and was saved' it would only be known to Jesus.A possibility cannot be subjectively known to us human beings.
Catholic Answers is here teaching a new doctrine on salvation, based on the objective error in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949.The error was carried over into Vatican Council II.
I would affirm the dogma EENS first.Then point out that there are no exceptions.There cannot be any known exception.So if there are no known exceptions to the dogma 'the man in the forest' or 'the native American in 1000 A.D' is not relevant or an exception to the dogma EENS.It is simple this way. Explaining Catholic salvation does not become complicated.
The post stated:
Without the Baltimore Catechism error, the Jesuits and the Archbishop of Boston Cardinal Cushing were in heresy and not Fr. Leonard Feeney.Now all the Catholic Encyclopedias irrationally assume Fr.Leonard Feeney was in heresy.
The Vatican Council Fathers also accepted that hypothetical cases are objectively known. So they mention the baptism of desire etc which are zero cases in our reality.None of them knew of any person saved with the baptism of desire or in invincible ignorance without the baptism of water. Yet they mentioned these 'exceptions'(AG 7, LG 14). This error is all over Vatican Council II and it should be enough for any one to reject the Council if they wanted to.
Catholic Answers is not aware of this error. The Principle of Non Contradiction is violated with the theology.The new theology is based on hypothetical cases being practically known and then becoming practical exceptions to the traditional interpretion of the dogma EENS.
I have mentioned in the previous blog post that the  Letter of the Holy Office 1949 has heresy and upon this heresy so much of Vatican Council II is based.Also Bishop Fellay's understanding and interpretation of Vatican Council II is heretical.There is a choice. We can interpret Vatican Council II without the irrational premise and conclusion.
Catholic Answers is not aware, like Ralph Martin who is recommended, that we can interpret the Catechism of the Catholic Church and Vatican Council II without the irrational premise and conclusion.
The apologists use the irrational premise and conclusion in their theology.
The blog post stated:
So much of Vatican Council II is based upon an irrational reasoning.This is the heretical reasoning used by Bishop Fellay and no one from the SSPX has been able to deny it over the years.
The laws of nature, like the laws of reasoning, apply to all I  mentioned in a previous post.The laws of gravity apply to the two popes and all the cardinals and so does the Principle of Non Contradiction.Bishop Fellay like the Vatican Curia violates the Principle of Non Contradiction.
The laws of reasoning also apply to the apologists at Catholic Answers. Here we see them violated.
-Lionel Andrades

Is Catholic teaching on salvation too complicated? : Catholic Answers violates the Principle of Non Contradiction

The following web page is recommended by Catholic Answers on this video above.
Salvation Outside the Church

However this webpage is also based on the Rahner-Ratzinger New Theology. It violates the Principle of Non Contraduction.It contradicts the Church Fathers on extra ecclesiam nulla salus.It would suggest that LG 16 refers to a known case of salvation outside the Church. So there is known salvation outside the Church and the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, defined by three Church Councils would now be meaningless.
It does not mention that LG 16 could be interpreted as being hypothetical and referring to imaginary cases.So then it would not conflict with the Feeneyite interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
According to the Feeneyite interpretation of the dogma all Protestants are on the way to Hell unless they convert into the Catholic Church.
Ad Gentes 7 in Vatican Council II says all need faith and baptism. Protestants do not have Catholic faith, which includes the Sacraments and the faith and moral teachings of the Church.
-Lionel Andrades

Justification, Baptism, & Salvation Through the Catholic Church

Salvation is Only in the Catholic Church

Pakistan: Muslims rape and murder Christian boy, police register death as natural and not suspicious


“The brutal nature of the crimes inflicted on Christians in Pakistan is the product of their vulnerability and the warped minds that breed in the nation. The levels of rape, sodomy and murder in Pakistan are reaching unprecedented levels. Christians and other minorities are a natural target as they are disenfranchised by the country’s laws and statutes, which confer second-class citizenship upon them.”
Indeed. And why are Christians second-class in Pakistan? Because it’s commanded in the Qur’an (9:29).
“Faisalabad: Christian teenager murdered after being sodomized!,” by Wilson Chowdhry, British Pakistani Christian Association, September 16, 2016 (thanks to The Religion of Peace):
A 14-year-old Christian boy was murdered and his dead body was left hanging in a tree in a place called Gosh Nagar, Faisalabad.
Zeeshan Masih had been visiting his uncle’s cattle farm at Shreejan Wala Dhera and gone out to buy a soft drink on the 23rd of August 2016, but never returned home. He was later found hanging dead from the branch of tree only a short distance from where his uncle’s buffaloes would go out to graze.
Despite medical evidence that Zeeshan had been sexually molested and some witnesses implicating two unknown Muslim men, local Police initially registered Zeeshan’s death as natural and not suspicious.
The Deputy Superintendent of Sadar Police constabulary, Saleem Warraich has stated that Zeeshan died of a heart attack, which he claims was induced by drinking a soft drink after eating fruit. The crass statement was made during a press conference with national media groups including Duniya News and Express News.
BPCA obtained a copy of the post-mortem examination. The part highlighted in yellow describes a dilated anus and other tell tale signs of sodomy. There is a belief that local Government Ministers and Police are in cahoots with a paedophile ring. Our officer met with the family and the local community and uncovered this more sinister plot. We now know that other children are complaining about sexual abuse and it is believed that Zeeshan was killed for threatening to tell his parents.
Despite forensic evidence and a few witnesses local police has made little progress towards resolving the case. After pressure from the BPCA, local church Christ Assemblies International and Bishop Farhad Bhatti of Pakistan Christian Post, the local police authority agreed to register a First Incident Report (FIR)….
Kanwal Amar Lead reporter for the British Pakistani Christian Association, said:
“This family are deeply traumatised. They have lost a son to an extremely heinous crime and the chance for them to get justice is limited. The manner in which police officers have attempted to camouflage this crime has hurt and angered them. They are calling for an independent inquiry into the handling of their son’s death.”
Wilson Chowdhry, Chairman of the BPCA, said:
“The brutal nature of the crimes inflicted on Christians in Pakistan is the product of their vulnerability and the warped minds that breed in the nation. The levels of rape, sodomy and murder in Pakistan are reaching unprecedented levels. Christians and other minorities are a natural target as they are disenfranchised by the country’s laws and statutes, which confer second-class citizenship upon them. In the main Christians are poor, illiterate and hold a pariah status culminating in an ineffectual response from statutory authorities when help is needed, who deem them worthless. No amount of laws can ever change a deeply entrenched community mindset that believes Christians are anathema – so crimes like this will continue and justice will fail time after time.”