The Stone Which the Builders Reject — The Dogma of Faith

The mission of the Catholic Church is a clear and simple one: to exhaust Herself for the salvation of souls. “Go ye therefore into all nations, baptizing them in the Name of the Father and the Son and of the Holy Ghost. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved, he that believeth not shall be condemned.”

The execution of this divine assignment is another story. For the Church is made up of men — the courageous and saintly, the rash and imprudent, the wise and knowledgeable, the sinful and hypocritical. Only those who strive for sanctity have the grace to sacrifice themselves to labor for the most exalted of purposes — the “one thing necessary,” to quote Saint Paul, “the salvation of souls.”

Envious of the Good available to creatures of a nature inferior to their own, Satan and his minions, who hate themselves for having forfeited this Good, work ceaselessly to lure men away from the path to salvation. At times, the arch-demon instigates the wicked to launch violent persecutions against the Church of Christ, hoping to frighten the weak into apostasy and despair; but for the most part, he only succeeds in increasing the population of the heavenly kingdom with a host of martyrs. More often however, when God is angry with His people, He eases His restraint upon the Prince of darkness, allowing him to try the faithful by tribulations, emanating from within the bosom of the Church itself.

The purpose of this monogram is to expose Satan’s latest attack from within, which has resulted in his almost total victory in muzzling the Church’s most foundational doctrine. He has struck at the very essence of the Church. His success required a hierarchy less virile in the Faith and a laity grown lax in morals. Today he has both!

We are often told by concerned priests that almost all dogmas are being denied today. This is obviously true. But the question that we continue to ask is — why? Why has the entire edifice of orthodoxy in faith and morals all but collapsed? Long before Vatican II, our Founder, Father Leonard Feeney, predicted the very catastrophes we are witnessing. He warned that, in compromising the salvation doctrine, liberals were undermining the very authority that gives the Church the right to demand obedience. Consequently, without this foundation of authority, or with a fractured one, the entire structure of the visible “ecclesia” could and, without divine sustenance, would crumble. And that foundational doctrine, taken for granted in the ages of faith, was that no one could be saved outside the Catholic Church.

A somewhat curious accusation frequently levelled against us is that we are “monomaniacs.” Our antagonists feel comfortable judging us as excessively preoccupied with preaching all the time about “No Salvation Outside the Church” and nothing else — as if we were programmed to do only this by a “charismatic” Founder who mesmerized us into specialized robotons. Anyone who has bothered to get to know us directly, or through our publications and cassettes, knows full well that we are a school of Catholicity. We offer an entire education in the Faith, the fruit of some forty years of prayer, study and missionary labor. But all of our efforts would be of no avail in stemming the tide of revolution within the Church if we were not, above all else, a Crusade. There is a purpose, more than just devotional, behind our persistence. We are engaged in a doctrinal battle which involves the preservation of the Church’s very foundation. Our mission is to defend the Faith in its entirety and to be of whatever influence we can on the Church’s hierarchy, moving them to proclaim clearly to the world where, alone, men can find the means of salvation.

Having allowed themselves to succumb to the omnipresent pressures of Masonic influence, the shepherds of our day have adopted the Masonized creed of salvation-through-sincerity. In so doing, they have, without realizing it, denied Christ. For they have denied, implicitly at least, that He is the only Saviour. But, not only is He the Saviour, He must be accepted as Saviour. He must be accepted, not as a mere spiritual benefit, but as a necessity of means in order that we may live with Him forever in eternity.

If we are indeed “monomaniacs,” it can only be in the sense that we have but one dominant concern — salvation for men. The whole world, as anyone can see, is starving for spiritual food. And the granaries are lying there, unadvertised, in the Catholic Church.

When a doctor examines a patient he is above all concerned with the cause of the poor man’s illness. He does not concern himself with the man’s heart if it is a tumor on the brain that is killing him. The tumor is diagnosed as the cause of many complications, hence the doctor directs all his efforts to remove it. Because the doctor is so preoccupied with this one consideration — health — would you call him a monomaniac? Hardly! A physician who is unconcerned with causes would be considered incompetent, and could quickly be sued for malpractice.

So let us be realistic. Every true Catholic ought to be “preoccupied” with the Church’s teaching on salvation. At least when we consider the hierarchy of ends. Our first charity to our neighbor, if we have the Faith, can be nothing less than assisting him in attaining the ultimate Good. And we religious, who are employed by Christ to announce His Name to all men, ought to be warning the whole world that whosoever is traversing a path outside the Catholic Church is heading toward a precipice that will drop him into eternal misery. Our tactics in applying the truth we defend may vary, depending on the grace and circumstance given. But we find it outrageously offensive to charity — not to mention faith — to compromise the infallible doctrine because of human fear or human respect. In so doing we gamble with another man’s eternal destiny.

The Foundational Dogma

Why then do we insist that this one dogma, above all the rest, deserves to be called foundational?

Our Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ, is not just another person. He cannot be rejected with impunity. His very Name ought to tell us that, for His Name means Saviour. “If you do not believe that I am He,” He told the Jews, “you shall die in your sins.” He Who promises to lift us up to a share in the Divine Life in eternity, can certainly lay down the terms required, and the consequences to be suffered by those who spurn His offer. The consequence of rejecting the gift of salvation, as the gospel (“good news”) relates, is very clearly spelled out: “He that believeth not shall be condemned.” And faith in Jesus implies a surrender of the will in obedience to all His commandments. “If you love me keep My Commandments.” And again, “Go ye into all nations, teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded thee. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved, he that believeth not . . . ” Belief implies obedience. They are mutually related in the supernatural order. One cannot believe with Divine Faith when one refuses to obey.

Now, authority is what ultimately matters when it comes to pleasing God by Faith. “Without faith,” to quote Saint Paul again, “it is impossible to please God.” Faith then is that supernatural virtue through which we believe all those truths revealed by God, without denying this one or that one, but believing all on the authority of God revealing and the Church teaching. Our Saviour did promise that He “would not leave us orphans” and that He would be with us “all days even unto the consummation of the world.” So there must be an authority speaking in His Name unto this day.

We know that when Jesus walked this earth He needed no credentials authorizing Him to promulgate His doctrine. He neither had nor sought credentials from the rabbis. The voice of His Father was enough: “This is My beloved Son; hear ye Him.” Christ began His public life by performing a miracle — the changing of water into wine at the wedding feast at Cana. Everyone who witnessed the event noticed that He called upon no power to assist Him. He commanded and the elements were changed. With such power, inherent in His Divine Nature, He would perform many more miracles as a testimony to His mission. Indeed, the jealous Pharisees did inquire as to the source of His authority: “Who hath given thee the authority to do these things?” they asked. But the more frustrated they became over this Nazarene’s popularity, the more did the crowds continue to flock to Christ. For the Scripture says “He spoke as one having authority, not as the Scribes and the Pharisees.”

His doctrine had a power of its own. When Jesus spoke, grace poured out over His audience, confirming in their hearts that such wisdom surely was Divine. How could this Galilean have such knowledge when He had not even studied in the levitical school? A mere carpenter’s son! Everything about this Man, the time an circumstances of His birth, His miracles, His wisdom, His magnetism, His awesome authority, convinced all those who relished spiritual things that, indeed, this One was the Messias, “the expectation of the nations.”

“A sign which shall be contradicted,” the prophet Simeon had foretold of Him; “the cause of the rise and fall of many in Israel.” Consequently, when words came forth from His lips, rapt attention followed. No, there was no applause, as one would expect for an orator. His listeners were too overwhelmed to applaud. It would have been totally inappropriate, considering the nature of the message delivered. The challenge of Faith that He offered immediately created two camps among those who heard Him. While the humble were “filled with admiration at His doctrine,” the proud Pharisees were “filled with rage” at the things He uttered. His words were a sword dividing the good from the bad, the proud from the humble. He was then, as He is today, a sign of contradiction. Divine Physician that He was, He upset consciences. He made men tremble, and He made them rejoice “with exceeding great joy.” It depended upon where your treasure was — in the heavenly Jerusalem, or in the earthly Babylon.

The Authority of the Church

When Christ completed His redemptive mission and ascended to His heavenly Father, He did not leave His flock to fend for themselves. As a wise, loving Master, He provided for His children, now become His brethren. His voice would continue to be heard upon the earth. He would bequeath an authority, His Church, to which His followers, the elect, were to submit in obedience. “Hear the Church,” the faithful were instructed by Christ; “And if he will not hear the church, let him be to thee as the heathen and publican.” And to provide order within this Society upon which He conferred His own authority, He appointed Saint Peter, and each of his successors, as its visible head. He gave to this Apostle the keys of the kingdom of heaven, the power to bind and to loose, and as the prophet Jeremias had foretold, the power “to root up and to pull down, to waste and destroy, to build and to plant.” (Jer. 1:10)

Now, of what value is that God-given authority residing in the Church if, in fact, one is free to reject it and still be saved? Perhaps those who are opening gates in heaven for non-believers have received keys of their own in some private revelation? We sincerely doubt whether these liberals, who seem to be far more “reasonable” than Our Lord Himself when it comes to the economy of salvation, really have any theological conception of what the essence of heaven is. They seem always to devaluate the quintessence of salvation — the sharing in the Beatific Life of the Trinity — while they never tire of exaggerating the accidental aspects of hell — the torments — over the essential aspect — the punishment of loss.

Of what use is this power of binding consciences if no one (except those who already accept the Church’s authority) need submit to be saved? The Pope, as Christ’s vicar, legislates for all baptized Christians. These baptized are bound to obey his moral teachings and to believe in his dogmatic definitions. It is precisely because they do not want to obey the authority that God established, an authority that they cannot misinterpret to suit their whims, that Protestants are Protestants. All non-Catholic Christians share this one fact in common — they will not obey the Pope. Indeed, each individual in these denominations has made himself the ultimate authority. And, conveniently, that is a whole lot easier than submitting to the “narrow road” of the Catholics. If God Himself has established an authority 1 upon earth for our governance, then we cannot be saved if we protest, saying “We will not have this man rule over us.” It is manifest that this God-given authority is not, thank God, the individual subjective conscience, but rather, the objective and visible authority of the Roman Pontiffs.

Can one have an implicit desire to obey the Roman Pontiff while explicitly rejecting the Catholic’s authority? No! Can one have an implicit desire to obey the Roman Pontiff if one believes in Christ but has never heard that there is an ultimate ruler of the Church? Yes! This could happen in those mission lands where a missionary plants the seeds of faith in the heart of an ignorant native. The native responds to the grace offered him through the instrumentality of God’s servant, is moved by grace to make a supernatural (divine) act of Faith in the redemption by Christ, but is left without further instruction due to his instructor’s departure. Such a one, from the very fact that his faith is true and inspired by the charity of God, would have implicit faith in those truths that he had not as yet heard. For the act of faith is not made in parts. It is one, total, integral surrender of the mind and heart to God’s revelation of Jesus Christ to believe “all things” He has revealed in Scripture and transmitted by the Catholic Church. So too, to deny one revealed doctrine is to deny all, but one cannot truly believe with Divine Faith (which is more God’s work than our own), in the Saviour, while at the same time rejecting the means (sacraments) and the authority (the Bishops and supremely, the Pope) He has established to conduct us to eternal happiness. To have supernatural, sanctifying Faith we must “observe all things whatsoever He has commanded us.” (Matt. 28:20)

Unilateral Disarmament

The Church in our times seems to have wandered from Her own identity, which is the Mystical Body of Christ Himself, in her teaching methodology. She must, if She is to be His extension in time, teach as He taught — with authority. Thus we find throughout the glorious history of the Church an institution defining, disciplining, anathematizing heresies, and excommunicating dissidents who stubbornly oppose Her. She has this duty in charity. As Her Founder drove out the buyers and sellers from His Father’s house, so too must the Church drive out of Her Body those who would corrupt the good leaven of the faithful. By neglecting to make use of the Divine authority entrusted to Her, the Church today, for whatever reason, seems to have forfeited Her birthright. This could be due to the cloud of anti-authoritarianism which has so successfully permeated every facet of society. And this is nowhere more manifest in the modern Church than in Her avoidance, even to the point of phobia, of Her own saving doctrine on salvation. This is the one dogma “unacceptable” — to borrow a condescending term nauseously used by the high priests of today’s Illuminati — to the Masonic “New World Order.” Having forfeited the very doctrine that heralds the Divine presence in Her voice, the Church today is marching into the devil’s arena unarmed.

This Catholic dogma, “No salvation outside the Church,” is the salt that gives flavor and power to all our dogmas. It is the hair of Sampson if you will. Without it, what authority does the Church have? She has reduced Herself to exactly what Her enemies hoped for all along — just another voice, an opinion giver, in the cacophonic new world Babel. To demonstrate what we mean by the power of a God-given authority, imagine this absurdity: Suppose Billy Graham, or even the great Dalai-Lama of Tibet, were to sound his trumpet and come out with a resounding ex-cathedra pronouncement on a matter of faith or morals. Imagine how comical it would be if either of them ended his pronouncement with an anathema sit upon anyone who would teach contrary to what he had determined. Of course it would be absurd. And these men, who know that they have no authority from God, are also smart enough to realize that they had better not claim it or, at least, publicize that claim to mankind.

But we know of one man who does claim this authority — Pope John Paul II. And he has two hundred and sixty-two predecessors who also claimed this authority, having received it from Christ Himself through Saint Peter. Despite this most audacious claim, even the Pope’s most avowed enemies take him absolutely seriously.

The Bishop of Rome is the only religious leader in the world, with the exception, perhaps, of a few cult chieftains, who claims personal infallibility when defining on faith and morals. And he is either cheered or hated for the authority he claims, but not mocked. This one man, alone, Christ’s Vicar on earth, can end a definition with a thundering anathema upon anyone who would assume to teach contrary to what he has determined, in or out of council. Mystically enough, he remains respected by his worst adversaries —indeed all the more so because of who he claims to be. If a Pope refuses to wield his God-given authority when circumstances necessitate it, he is in effect submitting to spiritual disarmament He has received a sacred trust that demands that the keeper of the keys speak as Christ spoke, as Saint Peter spoke — with authority. Negligence in this responsibility, be it due to ignorance of the nature of the holy office he holds or whatever is self-defeating, and ends in more general harm to souls. A Pope without authority reduces himself to a religious leader instead of the religious leader. He has participated by inaction in the enthronement of “supremacy of conscience” over objective faith.

It is because he is the Vicar of Christ that the Pope must gird himself with the breastplate of Divine authority. We would respectfully suggest that the present Holy Father consider this before engaging in ecumenical dialogue. If he were consistently teaching that no one can be saved outside the Catholic Church, all of his pioneering endeavors to make his august person more accessible to the world would be a refreshing effort, perhaps more necessary in these times than in the past. Although, even in the past, one would not have been disrespectful in criticizing certain of the ceremonial proceedings that somehow crept into the routine of papal protocol. All these things involve policy — and policy can change, provided it be for the good of souls, which is, again, “the one thing necessary.” There is certainly nothing wrong with the Pope, or anyone else, bending over backwards to make conversions easier to the one true Church, provided he keeps his feet planted firmly on dogma, which implies also orthopraxy.

The ecumenical movement attempts to justify itself by emphasizing those things we Catholics share in common with the religious systems of the world, while forgetting about those “less important” things we do not have in common — like, perhaps, Our Lord Jesus Christ. The fact that some religions profess a belief in One God and the immortality of the soul is well and good, but it is not enough to save them. The faith that justifies a man is the faith in God’s Incarnate Son and His redemption, no other. This is the minimal, explicit knowledge necessary in order to make an act of faith sanctifying. There is no other Divine Faith. God cannot be sanctifying souls all over the world by His grace when they are rejecting that grace by clinging to false religions. The Catholic Church does not have parts which intertwine with parts of other religious systems. What kind of Mystical Body would this be? Such a church would not be a recognizable body at all, but a disorganized conglomerate, a multi-headed monster.

One is incorporated into Christ’s Mystical Body by Baptism, and one is nourished therein by His flesh in the Holy Eucharist. A sick member is restored to health or, in the case of mortal sin, to Life by the sacrament of confession. And all are obedient to the visible head of the Body, the Sovereign Pontiff. What unites the members within the Body is the Holy Ghost, Charity, the “Soul of the Church,” working through the One Lord, the One Faith, the One Baptism. The Church has never identified herself in any other terms than these. She is not a vaporous intangible Body, but a visible one, a city “seated on a mountaintop,” recognized for what She is by Her visible marks.

Reaffirmation of this Dogma is Essential

Returning to our theme, we ask again: Of what value are the Church’s definitions if these teachings can be explicitly rejected with impunity? We ask our allies in this battle, the traditional priests who are faithful to the Catholic liturgy of the centuries: Of what value is your undertaking, or what sense does it make, if the Holy Mass is not necessary for salvation? If sincerity is the way to heaven, then are not most priests who prefer the new “Liturgical Celebration” sincere? You know that you are right and they are wrong. That is an objective faith judgment. But what difference does it make who is right and who is wrong if the True Faith is not necessary for salvation?

Again we turn to authority. Christ is denied today not only by those who deny His Divinity, but also by those who say there are other means of salvation, extraordinary means if you will, paralleling the means Christ historically established two thousand years ago. Jesus is not only the Truth, He is the Way, and the Life — the way to Life. Has He told us of other ways? No! Then isn’t it rash, and most uncharitable, even to speculate on the possibility of the existence of other ways? When Saint Thomas speaks about extraordinary means, he is clearly referring to the method by which the Faith can reach us. Philip the deacon was transported by the angels so that he might instruct the eunuch of Queen Candace. With the entire Faith inchoative in the brief lesson he received from Philip, this Ethiopian was ready for Baptism, and he was baptized then and there. The means was extraordinary by which he was led to the means that were necessary — water and the form of the regenerative rite. (We have other publications which deal with this at length. For now we must keep to our topic.)

If we are going to convert the world, or attempt to, we are not going to succeed if we enter into the conflict with our hair shorn and no salt in our preaching. Our own clever explanations and Biblical expertise, although of great value for the exceptionally docile, of themselves are not going to convert the nations and save millions of souls, currently enslaved to Satan, from falling into the abyss.

Those who claim that they truly believe — not just admit, but believe — the Church’s doctrine on salvation ought to see, by a more universal vision, how much depends on not only holding, but preaching boldly, that there is no salvation outside the Church. This doctrine is the foundation upon which all dogmas stand or fall. It will be the cause of the rise and fall of many. Never before was it questioned by the faithful until this age of “enlightenment” darkened the planet. Those who are striving to defend it are striking at the devil’s most sensitive nerve. Why? Because, due to our fallen nature, it is easier to be proud than to be humble, to sin than not to sin. The vast majority of the citizens in God’s Triumphant Kingdom got in because someone “scared hell” out of them by preaching about hell. Satan knows this well. Consequently, he is infuriated at anyone who would unveil his strategy in lulling souls to sleep, content in their sincerity. Pride is what keeps people out of the Catholic Church. It is the root of all evil. This one sin alone sent the devil and his followers to hell, and this one sin alone can send the vast majority of mankind to the same place. And behind every proud man you will find an impure man, for impurity is the more visible manifestation of that rebellion against Divine authority.

The Saviour of Mankind preached no doctrine as often as He preached about hellfire. This does not mean that we are obliged to go around telling everyone we meet who is not a Catholic that he is headed for hell. It does mean that when we are giving someone the Catholic message we ought to grace him with the truth that salvation can be found only in this One Church. This is what Saint Paul meant when he said our speech should be “always in grace seasoned with salt.” For salt purifies and smarts. If we, the clergy preeminently, are not upsetting consciences, then we are not speaking as Christ spoke. And the first conscience we ought to upset is our own. Yet we must have great charity. Salt does not exclude honey. The honey is the Truth; the salt is the consequence of rejecting the Truth. And if we are asked outright if someone who dies outside the Catholic Church is damned, our answer must be “Yes!” This is how Christ answered His interrogators. In truth it is the highest sense of what Jesus meant when He said “Let your words be ‘yes, yes, no, no.’ Anything above this is of the evil one.”


We have attempted to explain why we are so preoccupied with this one dogma. We have not attempted to defend the dogma itself so much as to defend the necessity of its being preached. For that is why dogmas are defined. Remember that Saint Louis de Montfort said that, in order to be a true slave of Mary, one must “teach the narrow way of the gospel in truth.”

We believe we have pinpointed the ultimate cause of the mortal illness, with all of its complicated side-effects, infecting the Church today. Yes, we know full well that the present confusion is a chastisement for sin. Our Lady made this clear at Fatima. But she also made something else clear at Fatima which even today remains a secret. And part of that secret concerns the denial of the Dogma of Faith. Judas was a sinner (a thief for one thing) and no doubt his sins made him susceptible to the diabolical temptation to betray his Master. But, if he had converted from his sin of avarice and pride, he would not then have committed his treacherous act. If the sins of God’s children have moved Him to punish us by allowing the majority of bishops to blind themselves with regard to this most foundational dogma of salvation in order to please the world, then our duty is to fight the sin and its effects as well. And the effect of sin has certainly been infidelity to God’s saving truth by way of false ecumenism, and the toleration and assistance given to this new humanistic creed of salvation-through-sincerity. Sin and liberalism make a two-headed monster. Both of them have to be fought at the same time. It is much easier for the Church to fight sin (and false religion is a sin against the First Commandment) when She is loyal to Her God-given authority, insisting in Her teaching that there is no salvation possible for those who disobey Her. Then we shall see conversions — en masse conversions — and, for the worthy, persecution.

1 That is to say, of course, when that authority uses the grace entrusted to it by Christ of binding or loosing, or “confirming the brethren,” within the limits prescribed by our Savior Himself.