It is being widely reported that Jorge Bergoglio (or “Francis” as he is known and adored by enemies of the Church worldwide) has announced that the infamous Pachamommies have been rescued from the Tiber and will be brought to St. Peter’s Basilica for the Synod’s closing this Sunday.
That’s right, this Sunday, the Feast of Christ the King on the traditional (aka Catholic) liturgical calendar.
Is the timing merely coincidental, or has Providence seen to it that the contrast between the one true Faith and the paganesque nonsense presently taking place in Rome will be made so crystal clear that even a child will be able to see it?
Whatever the case may be, I am making available here an article (PDF) that was published in The Catholic Inquisitor last October, The Social Kingship of Christ: A doctrine no longer recognized. (You may also click the image of Christ the King above to access the article.)
If I may say, it brings into even sharper focus still the grave effrontery that is taking place before our very eyes as this man claiming to be the Vicar of Christ leads the innocent to believe that God can be worthily worshipped in false eco-religions.
Following is a brief excerpt from the article, which seems most apropos:
He [Pope Pius XI in Quas Primas] is telling us that the Eternal Word – the second Person of the Blessed Trinity – He through whom all things were made, has always possessed Kingly authority.
But to the God-man Jesus Christ, to the anointed one of God, has it been given. As such, it is right to recognize that Kingship belongs to Jesus Christ in His sacred humanity, “as man, in the strict and proper sense.”
How does this understanding impact the way in which the Church thinks of her mission and the way in which she addresses the world? Or at least we might ask how it should affect the way in which the Church addresses the world?
For one thing, this knowledge should move us to make it known that those who deliberately withhold honor and worship from Jesus Christ cannot properly honor and worship God, in truth, as is every man’s duty according to the first demand of justice …
So it is that the one true Church of Christ cannot content herself with simply encouraging non-Catholics to persist in a religion that simply acknowledges a Supreme Being. Much less can she do the same when it comes to the Muslims and the Jews who explicitly deny Christ the King.
If you are so inclined, please share the article widely, most especially with those friends and family members who have fallen prey to the conciliar church’s lies concerning the Kingship of Our Lord.
This foul man is truly sickening.
Oops, didn’t stay drowned! Italian police fished them out of the Tiber.
I thought this might happen. They didn’t follow the exact instructions: Break up and burn the idols.
“Their graven things thou shalt burn with fire … Destroy all the places in which the nations, that you shall possess, worshipped their gods upon high mountains, and hills, and under every shady tree: Overthrow their altars, and break down their statues, burn their groves with fire, and break their idols in pieces: destroy their names out of those places”. (Deuteronomy 7:25, 12:2-3)
Bergoglio “as a Bishop of the diocese” asks forgiveness from the persons who were offended by this (in other words, he declares his allegiance and gives the power of forgiveness to those to whom he really bows).
Archbishop Lefebvre defends the Faith
Quotes from 1986 declaration against Assisi
Made by Archbishop Lefebvre and Bishop de Castro Mayer
…”Rome has asked us if we have the intention of proclaiming our rupture with the Vatican on the occasion of the Congress of Assisi.
We think that the question should rather be the following: Do you believe and do you have the intention of proclaiming that the Congress of Assisi consummates the rupture of the Roman authorities with the Catholic Church?
For this is the question which preoccupies those who still remain Catholic.
Indeed, it is clear that since the Second Vatican Council, the Pope and the Bishops are making more and more of a clear departure from their predecessors.
Everything that had been put into place by the Church in past centuries to defend the Faith, and everything that was done by the missionaries to spread it, even to the point of martyrdom, henceforth is considered to be a fault which the Church must confess and ask pardon for…”
“Adopting the liberal religion of Protestantism and of the Revolution, the naturalistic principles of J.J. Rousseau, the atheistic liberties of the Declaration of the Rights of Man, the principle of human dignity no longer having any relation with truth and moral dignity, the Roman authorities turn their backs on their predecessors and break with the Catholic Church, and they put themselves at the service of the destroyers of Christianity and of the universal Kingdom of Our Lord Jesus Christ.
The present acts of John Paul II and the national episcopates illustrates, year by year, this radical change in the conception of the Faith, the Church, the priesthood, the world, and salvation by grace.
The high point of this rupture with the previous Magisterium of the Church took place at Assisi, after the visit to the synagogue. The public sin against the one, true God, against the Incarnate Word, and His Church, makes us shudder with horror. John Paul II encourages the false religions to pray to their false gods—an immeasurable, unprecedented scandal.
We might recall here our Declaration of November 21, 1974, which remains more relevant than ever.
For us, remaining indefectibly attached to the Catholic and Roman Church of all times, we are obliged to take note that this Modernist and liberal religion of modern and conciliar Rome is always distancing itself more and more from us, who profess the Catholic Faith of the eleven Popes who condemned this false religion.”
…”This denial of the whole past of the Church by these two Popes and the bishops who imitate them is an inconceivable impiety for those who remain Catholic in fidelity to twenty centuries of the same Faith.
Thus we consider as null everything inspired by this spirit of denial of the past: all the post-conciliar reforms, and all the acts of Rome accomplished in this impiety.
We count on the grace of God and the support of the Virgin Most Faithful, all the martyrs, all the Popes right up to the Council, and all the holy Founders and Foundresses of contemplative and missionary orders, to come to our aid in the renewal of the Church through an integral fidelity to Tradition.”
Christ Is King.
.
False Francis is a duplicitous mutt.
True. False Francis is a duplicitous, subversive, destructive, vile creature.
.
Our Lord Jesus, He Is King. He Is The Holy Teacher, The Giver Of Life.
Bergoglio is “In Your Face” anti-Catholic. Anyone who cannot see this is blind. Christ the King have mercy on us.
Well said Claire. Thanks for the quote too.
Interesting.
Dear Maryiloveher,
Thank you again for posting quotes of Archbishop Lefebvre—always a light in this present darkness.
But, would you kindly add the source to these his quotes? Not that there is any hint of reserve, only that I would very much like to delve further into his prophetic words.
God bless you.
“The high point of this rupture with the previous Magisterium of the Church took place at Assisi, after the visit to the synagogue. The public sin against the one, true God, against the Incarnate Word, and His Church, makes us shudder with horror. John Paul II encourages the false religions to pray to their false gods—an immeasurable, unprecedented scandal.”
John Paul the GREAT! (destroyer).
The contrast between the true faith that we, please God, will never abandon, and this demonic entity and his pagan festivals is so crystal clear at this point, it is growing harder to say these thing mislead the faithful. It should be obvious, and God gave us clear instructions in Galatians 1:8-9. Fence sitters can sit no more.
What truly saddens me is most of the people I love most in the world are either Protestants or have no idea at all what is happening.
Bergolio is a man under demonic influence. His glee at the torment of faithful Catholics and his mockery of Christ and the faith cannot be interpreted any other way. Only a man in this state would do these things.
I am stunned that in the face of these unprecedented sacrileges, there is not one who speaks contra. There are public acts of apostasy from the Pope on down. Pagans worship with their Wicca trinkets and chants in our holiest sites, backs and butts presented to our Blessed Lord. Idols are adored in the Vatican Garden, “Pope” presiding, “Pope” blessed by Shaman witchcraft spells and incantations.
Silence. SSPX – silent; not a word (publicly, commensurate to the blasphemy) of condemnation. FSSP, ICCK, Dominicans, all Bishops and Cardinals (except Muëller), silent.
I am now questioning all my base assumptions. I cannot participate in such a Church as this. I do not see alternatives, so I am broadening my scope.
Can anyone please explain briefly the logic behind the Seat Is Vacant position? How can I know the Seat first became vacant? Was it Roncalli? If so, what happened that made his election invalid. Why have all subsequent elections been likewise invalid? What is needed to get our Valid Pope back on his God-given Throne.
And then, in addition, what do those who hold this position do for Mass and the Sacraments?
Good Saturday morning mothermostforgiving,
Do not forget the reality that Lefebvre was an apostate, a definitive wolf in sheep’s clothing, whom our Blessed Lord Jesus the Christ Himself warned us would come, as Lefebvre assented freely to the false church of Antichrist, as he assented to the, “(destroyer)”, for one, as you properly classify him. He objectively died outside the Catholic Church where there is no salvation, deFide. He was a true charlatan, who held absolute contradiction in his will, as freely, as objectively evidenced in his assent to the false vicars. This truth is objectively irrefutable. Enough with the apostate Lefebvre. He could not both hold the divine and Catholic Faith and not hold the divine and Catholic Faith, at the same time, and under the same respect of what the true as divine and Catholic Faith actually is, as offered in the Universal and Ordinary Magisterium. Amen. Lucifer always masquerades as an angle of light. God bless and keep you. In caritas.
From the quote above, it appears to me he did not accept that “false Church of antichrist” at all. Quite the opposite. The whole quote is condemnation.
Hello Aqua,
Simple questions. Who did Lefebvre objectively assent to as Pope? And, did he sign any, as any or all, of the false council documents? These questions are of course rhetorical, as the objective reality itself speaks, which condemns Lefebvre objectively. Amen. It is utter contradiction to suggest that one can both hold and not hold the divine and Catholic Faith at the same time. That is what the wolf Lefebvre attempted, as objectively, to do, which is absurd, as in it cannot have being in reality as it is. I pray this helps. In caritas.
Thank you Fleur de Lis,
Someone kindly gave all of their old SSPX publications to me. I don’t know if those are still available. If you search Archbishop Lefebvre sermons or Archbishop Lefebvre 1986 declaration against Asissi, you should go right to various online sources. The SSPX has many of his sermons online. If you understand French you can find recordings of the Archbishop, I believe, on La Porte Latine, the SSPX French website. I highly recommend that site for research and learning even if you have to read via translation.
For that matter the man said it himself:
“To whatever extent Pope, Bishops, priests, or the faithful adhere to this new church, they separate themselves from the Catholic Church.” (Archbishop Lefebvre, Reflections on his suspension a divinis, July 29, 1976)
Too bad Fatima was ignored. 1960 has come and gone. This is our punishment.
We all know that This is our House. The brood of vipers has made our buildings their den. They have Infiltrated, coiled round The Mass, set their fangs into Lucia etc, etc.
We know all this. It is time to submerge into deeper waters of our faith. This is where we need to be now. With our Rosary and other powerful sacramentals. We always have The Faith. It is our choice as we await Her Triumph.
…”‘Tis a pageant to keep us in false gaze”.
Diabolical hogwash, In Caritas. Really, do spare us your “amens,” blessings, doxologies, and all the rest of your incessant virtue signaling. You’re the wolf in sheep’s clothing. A few of us here see through your act.
In Caritas:
Quote:
“We might recall here our Declaration of November 21, 1974, which remains more relevant than ever.
For us, remaining indefectibly attached to the Catholic and Roman Church of all times, we are obliged to take note that this Modernist and liberal religion of modern and conciliar Rome is always distancing itself more and more from us, who profess the Catholic Faith of the eleven Popes who condemned this false religion.”
…”This denial of the whole past of the Church by these two Popes and the bishops who imitate them is an inconceivable impiety for those who remain Catholic in fidelity to twenty centuries of the same Faith.
Thus we consider as null everything inspired by this spirit of denial of the past: all the post-conciliar reforms, and all the acts of Rome accomplished in this impiety.
We count on the grace of God and the support of the Virgin Most Faithful, all the martyrs, all the Popes right up to the Council, and all the holy Founders and Foundresses of contemplative and missionary orders, to come to our aid in the renewal of the Church through an integral fidelity to Tradition.”
End Quote.
That very clearly answers your question. Amen.
Thank you, Alphonsus Jr., for saying that. Someone needed to. This madness has gone on long enough and In Caritas is convincing others on this forum that there are no bishops, priests nor sacraments – nothing! So, sit home and pray, then die without the sacraments – good plan. It’s reckless and irresponsible and he needs to be kindly asked to leave. There is enough confusion in the Church right now without this kind of diabolical influence on a site where people come to learn the truth, not be lead to hell by an armchair theologian.
So, how DO we determine who is a valid bishop/priest in this mass of confusion? I thought I had found one back in the year 2000. He turned out to be a total fraud (and foul-mouthed, womanizing monster, as well). I cannot say that there are no valid bishops/priests left in the world, but I also cannot say that there ARE some.
Take it easy. I’m as frustrated as you are with the silence of the SSPX. I don’t know what binds them but the priests seem scared. They know the truth, but are being asked obedience to their Society and the heirarchy obviously doesn’t want them to speak. This is obviously problematic, but it does not invalidate their sacraments. They are simple mission priests and we must be simple pilgrims, keeping the faith and passing it on to our children. God does not ask us to be theologians, only his faithful children. If you haven’t already, I strongly suggest making the total consecration to the Immaculate Heart according to St. Louis de Montfort, and keep up those rosaries. Our Lady is the key to your peace in this crisis.
May God bless you.
If there are any, and I am of the mind that there are and this is my well-thought out logical opinion*, they are those who by the Grace of God and once enlightened to what was actually taking place never for a moment assented to any of the false Popes and fled. They would be approximately 85 years old and UP by now and are very hidden. They didn’t go off and create any illigitimate groups or sects of their own making. We know many priests left after Vatican II, so they would be some tiny portion of those men. It was the PUBLIC Masses/worship of God which ceased, because logic tells us that non-apostate priests still living could still say valid and licit private Masses.
Now when each and every one has died, or even if as of today they have all died, then Scripture tells us that St. John has not yet died. Where exactly he is we don’t know but he was to remain. He was also of course a Bishop, one of the 12 Apostles. He is also a key figure in the apparitions at Knock, and there’s an interesting connection there to LaSalette.
Fr. Demaris, Professor of Theology, Lyon, France, tells us during the French Revolution all that we are to do, TODAY. May his precious soul rest in peace:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=4qezpN2T5fs
I should have said if you have trouble with the link above, search “Youtube Fr Demaris letter they have taken away my Lord”.
With a true and valid Pope, you can have full confidence. Without a true and valid Pope, there is no way to be sure. “Strike the shepherd and the sheep will be scattered”.
Roncalli opened the door.
Montini made sure Satan’s laws got on the books at Vatican II.
Wojtyla put those laws into practical use so as to ensure the downfall of the Church.
Bergoglio is the provocateur, the monster unleashed to empty the churches.
And they WILL be emptied.
Thanks for that.
Well said! Without a true Pope we cannot be sure is we should all stay home like IC or if it is ok to seek out a valid priest who professes the Catholic Faith. Welcome to the end times.
It is certain that one cannot possibly go wrong by following the commands of Holy Mother Church (i.e. Christ) via the infallible Magisterial documents of her last true Pope, vs. making it up along the way to suit ourselves.
I do appreciate you, Tom A, as you’ve always been very respectful.
It is certain that one cannot possibly go wrong by following the commands of Holy Mother Church (i.e. Christ) via the infallible Magisterial documents of her last true Pope, vs. making it up along the way to suit ourselves.
I do appreciate you, Tom A, as you’ve always been very respectful, even when you may disagree.
Maybe the sword will come down on him for all to see on prime time television.
He also believed that people may be saved in other “religions”.
Bishop Marcel Lefebvre, Against the Heresies, Pages 217-218: “This is then what Pius IX said and what he condemned. It is necessary to understand the formulation that was so often employed by the Fathers of the Church: ‘Outside the Church there is no salvation.’ When we say that, it is incorrectly believed that we think that all the Protestants, all the Moslems, all the Buddhists, all those who do not publicly belong to the Catholic Church go to hell. Now, I repeat, it is possible for someone to be saved in these religions, but they are saved by the Church, and so the formulation is true: Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus. This must be preached.”
Don’t ask me, I haven’t the slightest clue what the hell he’s talking about.
I’m afraid you will have to refute what he said to be able to call it “diabolical hogwash”.
You can’t just make a claim like that out of thin air without first backing it up with proof.
Dear Maryiloveher, Do you believe that the current SSPX is distancing themselves from Archbishop Lefebvre even though they quote him occasionally. Sometimes I wonder if the New (and NOT improved) SSPX is being financed by the NO “church”.
All their mailings always include a plea for donations. Do you have any thoughts on this. Thank you and God bless you.
I’m afraid that isn’t what’s meant here, because we are forbidden to take questionable Sacraments. We cannot take Sacraments according to their “probability”.
Because of the lack of Papal jurisdiction, and the obvious break of Apostolic Succession, both the Priesthood and the Sacraments are highly questionable.
We cannot know without a true and valid Pope, who is the center of power and unity in the Church.
That is all very good, wise advice. Well taken. Many thanks.
“A Mission Society. We are pilgrims, passing on the Faith”. I can see that as an essential element of the Society. I respect that, and will remember.
Still, the Faith is built on the Cornerstone. The Cornerstone is seriously cracked. We cannot be silent or accepting about that. It is up to us all, especially the most orthodox and obedient among us, to come to Her aid in this hour of need. We must all, Priests included (especially Priests), be able to adapt to the times we live in. Our *first* obedience is to Jesus Christ, our Blessed Mother, Holy Mother Church and if orders from Superiors conflict we must be prepared to disobey one on behalf of the Other.
EG: it is invalid to force a Priest to accept an antipope as Pope. It is invalid to force a Priest to place a Pachamama statue on the Holy Altar. It is invalid to force a Priest to advise penitents in Confession they can receive Holy Eucharist while in a sodomitic relationship. Etc. If these things are being forced upon a Priest’s flock, and they are being spiritually harmed by them, it is invalid to force a Priest to be silent and allow his flock to go to hell because of invalid orders from his Superior. Even a Missionary Society is bound to Christ first; to their Superior under Christ second.
That is my addition to what you say, all of which I agree with and appreciate.
I note your use of last names.
Was Roncalli invalidly elected? Was the “Seat Vacant”, starting with him? If so, how? I am very interested in a concise explanation of how the Seat became vacant to start, (if you know). Is this a thing that can be clearly seen and objectively judged, or is it largely conjecture and supposition based on observation?
White smoke for Siri, ergo Siri was rightfully elected. Then black smoke (uh oh). Then white smoke for freemason Roncalli, ergo scam.
I believe that neither Roncalli was a valid pope nor any of his successors. It would be sinful for me to say otherwise.
@Aqua
I have a response to your original query from earlier, but it’s still pending moderation for some reason.
Is there anything more for Roncalli? (I have read a little about the Siri situation).
What are the reasons the other Popes were invalid?
That’s right, James. The true Church teaches that the Faith always, ALWAYS comes before Sacraments, and a doubtful Sacrament is NO Sacrament. Yes, I’d rather DIE without Sacraments then partake in doubtful, invalid and/or illicit Sacraments and commit Sacrilege.
People can growl and hiss and run crying to Louie about it all they want. I.DON’T.CARE. Get behind me, Satan. You’ve already lost this war.
Might I suggest you begin by reading “Cum ex Apostolatus Officio” by Pope Paul IV, for an ex cathedra teaching from a Pope on heresy; specifically regarding prelates holding any office within the Catholic Church. Also “Satis Cognitum” by Pope Leo XIII is very important.
Pope Pius XII, Mystici Corporis Christi (# 23), June 29, 1943:
“For not every sin, however grave it may be, is such as of its own nature to sever a man from the Body of the Church, as does schism or heresy or apostasy.”
Also:
St. Robert Bellarmine, Cardinal and Doctor of the Church, De Romano Pontifice, II, 30:
“A pope who is a manifest heretic automatically (per se) ceases to be pope and head, just as he ceases automatically to be a Christian and a member of the Church. Wherefore, he can be judged and punished by the Church. This is the teaching of all the ancient Fathers who teach that manifest heretics immediately lose all jurisdiction.”
In reality, you can’t even use the term “heretical pope”, it’s an absurd contradiction unto itself. It’s stupid. It’s mutually exclusive. The term is sometimes used for explanatory purposes only, by the theologians. But most believed that a validly elected Pope could never become a heretic in the first place; if he in fact become one after election, then it was because he was invalidly elected in the first place.
Sedevacante is not a position that anyone “chooses”, it’s rather something that’s in reality, forced upon you. Also, don’t let anyone plaster the label “sedevacantist” on anyone else, for recognizing that a heretic or apostate is claiming to be “pope”, when that person is merely applying Church teachings and Her judgments to reality. That’s just being plain Catholic, and applying your faith. Forget about the clans.
#forgetaboutthestupidclans
This is the “how” part you can begin with, to start to realize that the seat is indeed vacant. The “why” part requires a bit more study into the history of the Church in the last century and before. It takes time and effort.
Hope this helps for a start.
The above was answering Aqua, I’m sorry it was misplaced.
Never before in the 2000-year history of Holy Mother Church had any pope ever contradicted previous Church teaching on faith and morals. ALL of the VII “popes,” by their pronouncements and by their refusal to point out the contradictions contained in the 16 documents of VII, rendered them heretics and automatically banished from Holy Office—if they ever were valid occupants of that Office in the first place. This one fact will give anyone who is faithful to the entire corpus of pre-Vatican II Church teaching a glaring realization that what we are dealing with here are NOT popes of the Catholic Church but, rather, enemies of the Church. For a Catholic—a true Catholic—it’s a no-brainer. If you deny that there are blatant contradictions contained in the 16 docs, such as universal salvation, the inclusion of non-Catholic cults into the Body of Christ, and many others, then it can only be because of one of two things: either you have not bothered to study both that which the Church has always taught as well as the 16 docs (and are therefore ignorant), or you DO know both perennial Church teaching and the content of the 16 VII docs and choose to deny that there are contradictions therein. Only God can judge your level of honesty here. And He will.
Perhaps it’s was Providentially “misplaced”. Excellent, James O.
Faith comes first, which is to say truth comes first, which is simply to say, love of God comes first.
james_o: To summarize (paraphrase) your statement: the Popes from Roncalli on were validly elected, but then *lost* their Munus due to “manifest heresy” (Conciliarism?). True?
So, to summarize (paraphrase) what you are saying, like I did with james_o above: Roncalli was invalidly elected. The others were validly elected but lost their Munus due to the manifest heresy of accepting the contradictions to Dogma and Doctrine of the 16 documents of V II.
Is that a fair summary of what you believe to be true about all of the titular Popes from Roncalli to Francis?
Sorry. Been looking for it. Still pending, I guess.
False. If you study some of the history associated with these men you will find that these men were not Catholic in the first place, even before their election. For example, Roncalli, was a Modernist and Freemason for many years before his election, and favored communism as well, which was all previously condemned by the Church. Joining such a group puts anyone outside the Church automatically, as you already know. They all took the oath against Modernism.
Catholic Popes could not promulgate an evil/heretical Council, that would be a contradiction.
It’s the men of the Curia who became corrupted/infiltrated firstly, so that it then became possible to start “electing” men who were going to further their agenda. Catholic men fear God, they couldn’t ever do that.
The maliciousness of their actions is shown by the “bad tree” they’ve produced, which is bringing forth and producing abundance of evil fruit.
Alphonsus and Catherine,
These questions have to be asked though in these desperate times.
No one will simply accept what ‘A Simple Beggar’ an ‘In Caritas’ say, as it goes totally against what we want to believe and take for granted.
At least it should make us pray about where we can find true priests, the Sacraments and the Holy Mass.
Aqua said:
“The others were validly elected but lost their Munus due to the manifest heresy of accepting the contradictions to Dogma and Doctrine of the 16 documents of V II.”
But I did not say that. I said:
“…their pronouncements and by their refusal to point out the contradictions contained in the 16 documents of VII, rendered them heretics and automatically banished from Holy Office—[IF] they ever were valid occupants of that Office in the first place.”
That makes sense.
So, to make this serious judgement on your own (I recognize this can be our right and at times our duty) what do you base your judgement on? Private research, true, but that is limited by nature at the private level by education, technical skills, biases etc. Everyone has an opinion. Authority contains private judgement into Holy Mother Church rendering ultimate outcomes true by Her mystical Divine nature. It is dangerous (though not unheard of) to go outside of that. It is anarchy in the private sphere, where my opinion is of the same value as yours. (Not being argumentative, dismissive and insulting, working toward my main point, please bear with me).
A primary reason I converted from Protestant to Catholic is my desire to stop making private judgement on questions of eternal significance. Now, here is the “visible” Church saying one thing and “private” individuals saying another. It has the potential to become Protestant, without proper limits. I am not accusing you of *being* Protestant, mind you, truly. I think this is a valid question because authority and hierarchy is an essential element of our Faith.
So, again, what is the mechanism through which you cross that *authority line* and say “current authority is wrong, I am right”? And now, under your base assumptions (Faith), who is your living authority? Where do you go for Sacraments? Who do you submit to in the practice of your faith? In general, for those limited in options by geography, where does anyone go? One must have living authority, it seems, to be Catholic.
None of these are rhetorical questions, all intended in the spirit of inquiry.
I understand what you are saying. Thank you.
So now, in the area of private judgement and authority. The Catholic Church is based, by Christ, on an hierarchy of Authority. I understand that can be wrong, heretical even, at the practical, living level and in need of correction – no doubt. Normally there is some element of the hierarchical structure through which this correction takes place. It is really unprecedented for this correction to be applied at the purely private level.
My concern, as a former Protestant who grew up in a culture of “private judgement”, who ultimately became Catholic because I knew submission, authority and hierarchy were keys to salvation, my concern is upon what basis does one cross that line and assume personal authority against structural authority?
I don’t disagree with what you say here, but private judgement must get back – somehow – into the guard rails of hierarchical authority which is Holy Mother Church. There must be Bishops, Priests to which we can turn with Apostolic authority who are Magisterially connected to Sacred Tradition in these views.
In the realm of private judgement (I have seen how this works first hand) my view is as good as yours and the rule in this land is dissension. It is a dangerous place to be.
In sum: I agree with you intellectually, that these assertions are possible. But who rules, ultimately? Where is the living connection to the Apostolic line leading to Christ? What is a poor Catholic with a large family of special needs kids to do with no access to Mass or valid Sacraments on the terms you say.
There is a whole world of difference between “private judgement” and knowing what the Catholic Church teaches and applying it, in reality.
“Private judgement” is to make a “judgement call” on a situation or thing based on criteria solely held by the person making the judgement; in other words, there was no appeal to higher sources for reference to be able to make that judgement. It was made and based solely on that persons personal preferences, temperament, self-created “rules”, and disposition and lot in life. That’s what reduces their “judgements” to mere opinions, as there is no reference to God and to the higher authority He has given to His Church. This is definitely what we don’t want.
As far as the objective situation we find ourselves in, more and more “opinions” do not help but confuse even more. That’s why we refrain from making any “judgements” of ourselves at all, in these serious matters. In fact, we don’t have to make any “judgements” at all. It’s called discernment.
What we need to do is to learn what the Church has always taught and merely apply it to the current situations(s), and the Church will rightly divide it for us. If we go to the highest sources; Popes, Councils, Church Fathers, Doctors, and learn what they wrote and taught and then proceed to apply it, then it would be the Church Herself making the “judgement”. You will find that the Church has already taught about most everything we need to know.
Which is to say that you can know and be taught the faith(truth), and that by learning the faith you will come to know “Thee the only true God, and the one that You have sent Jesus Christ”.
Modernism actually denies this, that you can “know” the faith(truth), therefore denying that you can know God(!), and if you do call out on a certain situation or thing, discerning that it is evil, and if you’re doing it according to the teachings of the Church (your faith!), they will accuse you of being “judgemental”. Which of course is totally false, you are merely applying the faith in practice, because you really believe it is true.
If we could not learn the faith, know it, and apply it, then how could we ever have any faith at all in the first place? Learning the faith, and applying it is everything, and that is what it means to be Catholic.
@Aqua
Can a private individual recognize an uncondemned heretic?
Historically, canonically, and theologically speaking, the answer would appear to be yes: https://romeward.com/articles/239752647/can-a-private-individual-recognize-an-uncondemned-heretic
“The Catholic Church is based, by Christ, on an hierarchy of Authority. I understand that can be wrong, heretical even, at the practical, living level and in need of correction – no doubt.”
No, the hierarchy cannot be “heretical”. If they were indeed heretical, they couldn’t be hierarchs. They would be heresiarchs. Again we have a contradiction. Heresiarchs would lose all jurisdiction, for they have lost faith and would no longer be Catholic.
If the Magisterium could teach error, it would lose any and all credibility. Now then, who will decide what teachings are true, and which are false? The whole idea of an infallible teaching Magisterium would lose all meaning and value.
That would be faith-destroying nonsense.
What is the connection of St. John to La Salette?
Aqua, please see further down for a reply.
Hi georgianne,
This group is terribly confused and heretical, but there is a good 3-part series on the subject:
https://www.traditioninaction.org/religious/a056_Knock_1.html
Thank you, A Simple Beggar. I’ll take a look. I do know to be careful with Tradition in Action.
I’ve been reading, printing, highlighting, reading, note-taking, and praying, praying, praying. Thank you and In Caritas for the references and where to start. I’m grateful that, FINALLY, things make sense. It’s been a long road for me, too, to the point of going to a sede chapel for 5 years but not partaking of sacraments in case it wasn’t valid (was Lefebvre ok or not, I didn’t know)…one foot in, one foot out. I was utterly confused. Thanks for the help.
“Yesterday it was with real satisfaction that I put my signature on the Protocol drafted during the preceding days.”
Letter of Archbishop Lefebvre to Cardinal Ratzinger, 6 May 1988
“Be so good, Most Holy Father, as to accept the expression of my most respectful and filially devoted sentiments in Jesus and Mary.”
Letter of Archbishop Lefebvre to Pope John Paul II, 2 June 1988
Looks like, objectively speaking, he assented to JP2 as pope (“Most Holy Father” indeed!) and Ratzinger as JP2’s representative. All of his words about following “all the Popes right up to the Council” – as if to imply he doesn’t follow the ones after – is just rhetoric.
Oh’ you again Alphonsus Jr.,
Make your case counselor. As james__o so gently requests of you. Refute the positions that have been made. That’s simple, isn’t AlphonsusJr. Even for a mind such as yours? God have mercy on you, man. In caritas.
Hello georgianne,
Mine was an almost 5 year journey as well after having switched to the “Latin Mass” I became angry and started asking questions, and I never stopped having or asking questions. It seems that’s where many fall short in that they simply become comfortable in the traditional “trappings” and don’t bother to dig any deeper into “what really happened here, and how and why?” I guess I should say you’re welcome however as you said it’s not me who convinced you of anything just as it wasn’t any other person who convinced me of anything. I know well the disposition I had at the time and aside from that it was all by the Grace of God. This is a spiritual battle and when in all good will we ask God with all of our heart for the Truth of a matter, especially this matter, will He then lead us astray? Impossible. Toward the tail end of my agonizing search for answers and Sacraments I had, let’s just say, an “interesting” experience at the time of the consecration at a Sede chapel. This was after begging God to let me die rather than to commit idolatry ever again with a mere piece of bread. Needless to say I never returned, although I was still learning, praying and going through a few last “options” or positions.
By the way, for the last 1-2 years I’ve been praying twice per day “Oh sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary, pray for us who have recourse to thee.” I must have come across Bertha Petit somehow but I don’t recall doing so. I have to have confidence in the Blessed Mother because she literally saved my life at the right moment years ago and back then I was even in the N.O., not knowing anything else at the time. She has continued to be patient with me and save me time and time again. I hope and pray that she never, ever lets go of my hand because surely without her I was and am doomed.
I believe Sr. Lucia once said the answer for our time is found in Apoc Ch. 12. Following Our Lord to Calvary must include complete and utter abandonment, humiliation, desolation and deprivation. This path is the only path which mirrors that of Our Lord so closely, yet in reality we are not abandoned at all.
May God bless and keep you always, georgianne.
Dear James-o, I believe AB Lefebvre means that WITHOUT the Catholic Church, there is no salvation. Can we agree that God does not make mistakes? Therefore, every soul which has passed on is where they belong (Heaven, Hell or Purgatory) no matter their religion (or lack of) here on Earth. Is it too simple for great minds who comment here>
Well said. I agree with every word of it.
I also had an excellent discussion with my SSPX Priest today who answered all my questions.
Been getting some excellent guidance of late.
Thanks to this web site, and the advice contained therein, I am now the proud owner of Leather Bound copies of Angelus Press editions of Ludwig Ott’s Fundamentals Of Catholic Dogma and The Catechism Of The Council Of Trent. Reading through both will be my my project for 2020, (which lines up with your advice above).
Thanks for the helpful perspective.
Good Monday morning james__o,
Just a point of clarity. Remember that the wonderful holy Saint and Doctor of the Church was speculating at a time when such speculation was not heresy but prudent by an eminent theologian such as he, Saint Robert Bellarmine. Amen. Since the Authoritative as Infallible Vatican Council of 1870, it is now itself heresy to suggest that the Vicar of Christ can fall into heresy, and lose the Catholic Faith thus. Remember, as definitively taught by Pope Leo XIII in, “Satis Cognitum”, where there is NO DISTINCTION, NO EXCEPTION, can be made. Thus, as the Vatican Council in its 4th Session, July, 1870 infallibly declared, Peter and his Successors can never lose their personal faith, as they were given by The Christ, the gifts of truth and never failing faith. Amen. Alleluia. No distinctions made, thus no exceptions to the Authoritative proclamation. Amen. It is impossible for a true Vicar of Christ to lose the Catholic Faith, deFide, as since 1870, once defined in Council. Amen. Alleluia. It cannot matter what all the apostates on the planet who claim the Catholic Faith opine. Period and end. Let them hurl the ad hominem, as it only proves and again, their lack of holding the true Faith, as commanded by Blessed John the Apostle in His First Epistle. Amen. Alleluia. God bless and keep you, james__o. It is wonderful to bear witness to your holding the true Faith. In caritas.
Good Monday morning Aqua,
Yes, the faux election of Roncalli was invalid and this must be known with apodictic certitude, as to deny this reality as it is, is to deny the Authoritative Apostolic power of Blessed Peter in his Successor, as Pope Pius XII, in his Election Law, the Apostolic Constitution of 1945, “Vacantis Apostolicae Sedis”. In this law, he defines the period of interregnum as perfectly precise without one iota of wiggle room. Again, if anyone denies this reality as it is, they cannot at once hold the Catholic Faith, as they then are outside the Church in schism, in their denial of the One who holds the keys to bind and loose. Amen. Now find copied and pasted the pertinent part of the response to TomA:
It cannot now be argued to the contrary, that Apostolic Succession is now gone from the face of the earth, as to do so denies the Authoritative teaching of Pius XII, in his Apostolic Constitution, which pertains to the election of the Vicar of Christ, defining the period of true, “interregnum”, thus. He made the specific point that it is especially true that nothing can be altered in Apostolic as Magisterial teaching, which applies to the election of the next Vicar of Christ. Amen. Read, “Vacantis Apostolicae Sedis” (VAS), very carefully again and again, begging the Blessed Virgin for the light of Faith. There were a maximum of 18 days given to accomplish the Papal election after October 9, 1958. Period and end. Another point of fact, regarding the illegitimacy of so called, “John XIII”, in truth a false pope of the church of Antichrist, is that he was purportedly, “elected”, 19 days after the death of Pope Pius XII on October 28, 1958, placing an affront to Pope Pius XII’s Authoritative Papal election law, which he commanded with all of his Apostolic power, could not be altered, as in one iota. Amen. God bless and keep you Tom A. In caritas.
We must assent to this reality as it indeed is, Aqua, as it is a definitive as Authoritative command of the Successor of Blessed Peter, as the Vicar of Christ. Amen. I pray this helps. In caritas.
Dear mothermostforgiving,
Siri assented to the false Pope Roncalli, therefore he was an apostate, and therefore he could never have actually been elected as a true Pope. Amen. This as per the definitive as Authoritative and binding, with the assent of Faith, teaching of Pope Paul IV, in his singular, Apostolic Constitution and during the Council of Trent, “Cum Ex Apostolatus Officio”. I implore your reading of it, over and again. God bless and keep you. In caritas.
And again Aqua,
Once Apostolic Succession is broken, it cannot be restored, deFide. There was to be only one prophesied time this would occur, the loss of Apostolic Succession that is, and as per the prophet Daniel, as in 9:27. The Early Church Fathers in unanimity, declared then as a matter deFide, that Daniel foretold of the prophetic time, as the singular and only time, when the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass would fail, as in leave the earth, and this would be the time of Antichrist. Again, this is a matter deFide, as the Magisterium binds us with the assent of Faith to anything the Early Church Fathers taught about Bible prophecy in unanimity. Amen. You cannot have a true Pope living on the earth and lose the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, just as you cannot have the true as Holy Sacrifice of the Mass present, in the absence of the Pope. The Vicar of Christ and the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass are implacable bound.
Do not fall into the diabolical trap of the purported illicit Masses that could still be occurring. The Apostolic Constitution of Pope Paul IV, “Cum Ex Apostolatus Officio”, of 1559, Authoritatively commands that any Bishop or Cardinal who EVER, “deviates from the Faith” or falls into heresy, by that very fact, he is deemed to never have attained the Ecclesial Episcopacy nor the Cardinalate, no matter how much time transpired between their purported ascendency and when the, “deviation from the Faith” or heresy occurred. Amen. Anything that he did or ordered to be done is as null and void, anything, as in ordinations, etc., giving, “no stability nor right to anyone”, who may have received anything from them.
Anyone who denies this teaching with the full Apostolic power of Blessed Peter in his Successor Pope Paul IV, simply does not as he cannot hold the Catholic Faith, deFide. One who denies Blessed Peter his Authority in Faith, Morals, and Governance, is simply outside the Church where no salvation is to be found. Amen. I pray this helps you understand the Faith. In caritas.
My2cents, If someone dies in a false religion, i.e. without converting to the Catholic Faith before the moment of death, they will not be saved. This is Catholic teaching. Lefebvre’s interpretation (as stated above) is, at best, misleading, and the statement “It is possible for someone to be saved IN these religions” is wrong.
IC, you are making dogmatic, the things that pertain to Church governance. And you continue to misrepresent sacramental theology. A bishop or priest NEVER loses his episcopal powers. Heretical clergy lose all jurisdiction and all of their official Church decrees are null and void. This does not apply to sacraments conferred. If you want to convince me of that, go find some supporting references in sacramental theology books.
Dear Ursula, I feel at peace believing that Almighty God, Our Creator, decides the fate of all the deceased because He and He Alone, can read Hearts and judge souls. Does that make me a bad Catholic—-a bad person? Is it equally wrong to believe that we on Earth, mere creatures, have the right and/or intelligence to make these horrendous eternal judgements? Is the tail wagging the dog? God is in control of His Creation.
” Since the Authoritative as Infallible Vatican Council of 1870, it is now itself heresy to suggest that the Vicar of Christ can fall into heresy, and lose the Catholic Faith thus.”
That would mean that none of the so-called VII popes were EVER validly elected.
October 28, 1958—the day the Big Show began, 61 years ago today.
I would gravely warn you and advise against associating yourself with such dangerous groups as the SSPX.
The most malicious conspiracy ever perpetrated.
What madness.
Good Monday morning mothermostforgiving,
And indeed it would mean that. Almighty God as Simplicity Himself, allows for His perfectly miserable children, the Baptized who truly hold the Faith, to know these things, simply. Also, as has already been written now twice, the Authoritative Election Law of Pope Pius XII, circa 1945, in his Apostolic Constitution, “Vacantis Apostolicae Sedis”, demonstrates WITHOUT DOUBT, thus with apodictic certitude, that Angelo Roncalli could never have been Pope, simply because the Election Law of Pope Pius XII was broken in his faux election. Day 19, his faux election occurred, while Pope Pius XII allowed for ONLY as ONLY, a MAXIMUM of 18 days for the true, “interregnum”, thus, and his faux election was then, the genesis of the church of Antichrist, as it occurred on day 19, October 28, 1958. Amen. Alleluia. Apostolic Succession was in that ONE DAY, thus lost to the world unto the Last Day, as foretold by the prophet Daniel and further edified as inerrantly, by the Apostle Paul in 2 Thess 2. Amen. God bless and keep you. In caritas.
God bless you, mothermostforgiving. The most near perfect deception that the world would ever know or have known. Amen. The church of Antichrist, all dressed up Catholic, yet as the, “abomination of desolation”, perfectly devoid of all things Christ Jesus, as His Vicar, His Sacraments, and His Gospel. We are indeed living the epoch of the end of time. Amen. Hold fast to Tradition, Holy as infallible Tradition, not faux tradition, as the Apostle Paul forewarned also in 2 Thess 2. Amen. Alleluia. In caritas.
And again Tom A,
As the perfectly miserable creature that I am and can only be, this side the veil Tom A, I am perfectly incapable of, “convincing you”, or anyone else, of ANYTHING. Amen. You continue to edify, for all those with eyes which see, your abysmal understanding of Catholic Truth as Authoritative teaching. Amen. Here, once and again, to assist in your salvation, Tom A, is the Authoritative and binding, with the assent of Faith, GOVERNANCE with the full Apostolic Authority of Pope Pius XII in, “Ad Apostolorum Principus”, given to the Universal Church. He pristinely as precisely commands, that we are bound with the assent of Faith not only to the Vicar of Christ in matters of Faith and Morals, but also and equally without distinction, therefore without exception, to “hierarchical subordination and true obedience”. Find it copied and pasted again here:
“46. “We teach, . . . We declare that the Roman Church by the Providence of God holds the primacy of ordinary power over all others, and that this power of jurisdiction of the Roman Pontiff, which is truly episcopal, is immediate. Toward it, the pastors and the faithful of whatever rite and dignity, both individually and collectively, are bound by the duty of hierarchical subordination and true obedience, not only in matters which pertain to faith and morals, but also in those which concern the discipline and government of the Church spread throughout the whole world, in such a way that once the unity of communion and the profession of the same Faith has been preserved with the Roman Pontiff, there is one flock of the Church of Christ under one supreme shepherd. This is the teaching of the Catholic truth from which no one can depart without loss of faith and salvation.”
Make especially clear in your intellect Tom A, his final command of this paragraph:
“This is the teaching of the Catholic truth from which no one can depart without loss of faith and salvation.”
And so again Tom A, what precisely as exactly is your point when you write this?:
“IC, you are making dogmatic, the things that pertain to Church governance.”
May Almighty God have mercy on you and me. In caritas.
Good catch, Incaritas, that’s right. That quote from St. Robert was out-of-place because that was settled later at the Council.
Thanks for that, and may the Good Lord bless and keep you as well.
Librorum: I accept all Popes up to the current Pope Benedict XVI.
Bergoglio is an antipope, so whatever it is he’s doing is irrelevant to the discussion.
When a Pope departs from Dogma and defined Doctrine, he must be confronted and corrected on that point(s). The error must be rejected by individuals immediately according to their knowledge of Sacred Tradition and collectively by the Church over time according to their knowledge and Apostolic authority *in submission to Jesus Christ and the Deposit of Faith* who rules us all.
That is what Arbp LeFebvre did and he was correct.
In Caritas: I am a reasonably well educated man and I find it almost impossible to understand what you are saying.
I don’t think Doctoral level knowledge is required to properly practice the Faith.
I liked how my SSPX Priest put it, when I asked him if my faith and opinions were acceptable to him as a Priest to receive the Sacraments. His response was that there are some things that are De Fidei that must be believed. Other things are matters of opinion, and are not essential to the Faith.
We must believe in the Office of St. Peter to be Catholic.
We can disagree (and previously have) over who holds that Office and each still remain Catholic.
That is my summary of what he said. I fundamentally agree with him. God bless the SSPX!
James_O: What is your solution for remaining with the Sacramental Roman Catholic Church, given your belief set?
And where do you go to Mass in the Roman Catholic Church under the current fallen state?
Dear my2cents,
Jesus the Christ commanded us, “You will know them by their fruits”. To know is to place judgment, as judgment cannot occur without first KNOWING what to judge. Judgment then in the will, follows knowing in the intellect. Amen. That which a 12 year old must understand. Amen. The Christ further commanded, “an evil tree cannot bear good fruit, just as a good tree cannot bear evil fruit.” And He then commanded yet again, “You will know them by their fruits”. It cannot matter that you, “feel at peace”, my2cents, as it is not with certitude your, “feelings”, which will get you to the Beatific Vision, rather you must, “know”, the Truth as Christ commanded: “He who KNOWS My commands and follows them, loves Me, and as I Am in the Father, you are in Me and I in you. I pray this helps you. In caritas.
Amen.
Dear Aqua,
Pray and submit, that you may eventually receive the Catholic Faith. Amen. May God have mercy on you and me. In caritas.
Dear Aqua,
To actually hold the Catholic Faith, one must assent to the reality as it actually is. The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is objectively now gone from the face of the earth as per Magisterial teaching, already sited in this space time and again. Study, “Cum Ex Apostolatus Officio”, “Satis Cognitum”,”Vacantis Apostolicae Sedis”, and “Ad Apostolorum Principus”, begging the Blessed Virgin for the grace of the intellective Lights to see these utterly simply truths, which all but all in the world simply remain blind to, as in receiving, “the operation of error to believe lying”, as the Apostle warns would come to pass in its prophesied time, as in 2 Thess 2. Amen. I pray you are helped. In caritas.
Tom A,
Since when are Catholics allowed to receive Sacraments from any sort of heretic? That’s a mortal sin.
ASB, never. Nor do I advocate anyone receive any sacrament from a heretic.
He doesn’t, but chooses to stay home and die without the sacraments of the Church. Does that sound like a wise decision to you?
Dear IC–Again, I thank you for taking the time to response. To coin of phrase of St. Padre Pio: “We will find out when we get THERE.” Let us hope and pray that THERE is Heaven.
Dear Catherine Sarto,
If you held the divine as Catholic Faith, you would know with apodictic certitude that it is impossible to have them with the loss of Apostolic Succession, and its associated apostasy writ large, as Authoritatively and infallibly taught in, “Cum Ex….”, “Satis Cognitum”, “Vacantis Apostolicae Sedis”, and “Ad Apostolorum Principis”.
You appeared genuine in your first query of me. Obviously that is not the case. You are utterly fearful of the position held by the free assent of your will, as you should be. Your anger evidences your fear, as objectively. These realities as they indeed are can be denied but cannot be changed, as objectively witnessed. “You will know them by their fruits”. Amen. Even if your false sacraments were valid, as has been pointed out to poor, poor Tom A time and again, you would be damning yourself with each and every reception, as the mortal sin of the utter sacrilege, of receiving illicit Sacraments. I pray this admonition helps you as you pursue the Catholic Faith. In caritas.
Please don’t patronize me. I am not angry, but do have a problem with your incessant need to show off your intellectual prowess with many words that don’t make much sense. You are trying to convince others on this forum that they should commit mortal sin by not attending Mass nor receive absolution from a validly ordained priest. If you truly believe there is no visible church on earth, that is your free will to do so. In this time of confusion it would seem to be the safest option for a Catholic to err on the side of caution and strive to live in a state of grace by seeking the sacraments from those priests who have been ordained in the traditional rite thanks be to God through Ab. Lefebvre’s intervention.
And by the way, the faith is and should be as simple to understand for a seven year old to grasp.
Become as little children – let our Father, through His priests feed us and give us the graces necessary for our salvation. We are given all that is necessary, but we need to cooperate with that grace and accept it not refuse it.
Dear Catherine,
If you don’t mind me asking, have you read the 4 infallible Papal documents which IC has presented?
I’m afraid at times you are putting words into IC’s mouth.
As for me, I reached the conclusion that I must abstain from all Sacramental “options” prior to the time that IC did, and therefore he has not led me to do anything. In fact, I no longer allow anyone’s mere opinion to influence me. I look only for the cold, hard facts as to what the Church actually has to say on any matter, regardless as to whether or not the answer is pleasing to my delicate senses. If as in 2 Thess Ch. 2, even the elect might be deceived, then one must question “popular opinion” heavily.
As for IC’s writings, I have no problem at all with understanding what he writes. That’s not to say that people possess different levels of reading comprehension nor do I knock anyone for that or look down upon anyone for having lesser abilities. But the fact of the matter is that only God can open our eyes and allow us to “see”. In order that He may do so, however, we must set aside our pride and be ready and willing to follow the Truth wherever that may lead and whatever that may cost us, as in conform our intellect to reality as it is, before He will do so.
Catherine Sarto said:
“You[In caritas] are trying to convince others on this forum that they should commit mortal sin by not attending Mass nor receive absolution from a validly ordained priest.”
As for me, when I find someone who is without a doubt a “validly ordained priest” I will receive the sacraments from him.
BTW, interesting how you can peer into In caritas’s soul and judge that he is deliberately trying to convince others to commit mortal sin.
Aqua:
I wish you wouldn’t put it that way, because you’re begging the question.
I had hoped from writing to you above that you would understand that I’m not the slightest bit interested in “my own opinions” or “my belief set”, and heaven forbid, actually be trying to teach that to others.
I am striving to know and hold/keep the Catholic faith whole and inviolate as best as I possibly can, as She has always taught, and also doing my best to conform myself and face reality head on, as it is. And that’s about it. And that has always been the Church’s “solution” for remaining in the Catholic Church. The faith comes first, which is to say, love of truth and therefore God. That’s all that matters in times of severe persecution. That’s everything.
Oh yes, and always have a good close look in the mirror every day, to make sure we’re not heretics, apostates, or schismatics, like that publican over there.
James_O: Where do you attend Mass?
InCaritas: Looks like you have it all figured out.
Thank you. I will consider that for sure. Great link.
InCaritas: So I gather you don’t go to Mass.
Hard pass on that one.
That paragraph is the craziest collection of words I have ever seen. You need help, man.
So where do you go to Mass? It’s a really important question.
Aqua,
Feel free to accept my challenge for Tom A, or anyone, within my last posted comments.
Location. Please show your hand (proof):
https://akacatholic.com/traspontina-desecrated/#comments
Location. Please show your hand (proof):
https://akacatholic.com/traspontina-desecrated/#comments
Reply
Accept my challenge, man. The burden of proof does not lay on this side of the court.
Aqua:
In the end, when all is said and done, Abp Lefebvre recognised these men as popes. Paul VI introduced new beliefs and new forms of worship which were alien to the Catholic faith; JP2 introduced a new Code of Canon Law in line with Vatican II, and allowed false gods to be worshipped at Assisi, among many other things. Abp Lefebvre even mused that there might be a day when we have to judge that these men were never popes in the first place. The correct thing for him to do would have been to tear the mask off those heretics and denounce them as false popes, like what you have done with regards to Bergoglio. But no, the heretic JP2 was “Most Holy Father”. And you might not believe Bergoglio is pope, but Abp Lefebvre’s priests do. Over 600 of them. What a legacy.
(Help, as in the SSPX Priest kind of help)
I am not sure what the challenge is.
I am simply asking where do you go to Mass? After the SSPX is ruled invalid, where else can one go? So, where do you go?
Aqua:
I heartily concur with the advice to read Paul IV’s Bull “Cum Ex Apostolatus Officio” (1559). Sadly, your SSPX priest will probably tell you it is no longer in force, if he has even heard of it. Paul IV decreed that no heretic can be validly elected, even if all the cardinals elect him. It is Divine law that no heretic can be the pope. It is a little known fact that St Pius V confirmed Paul IV’s Bull. St Pius X was also going to include it in the 1917 Code of Canon Law, but he died before it was promulgated and it wasn’t included. However, Canon 188.4, at least, cites “Cum Ex Apostolatus Officio” in the footnotes.
There are some excellent articles at traditionalmass.org by Fr Cekada and Bishop Sanborn that can help, including some very good articles that give the other side to the story concerning Abp Lefebvre/SSPX and the Nine sedevacantist priests who left in 1983. Don’t just rely on what the SSPX tell you concerning these good priests. And don’t fall for the home aloner argumentation that has been clogging poor Louie’s comments boxes recently.
The challenge is located at the link in a response to you above, in 2 longer comments of mine toward the end of the comments on the linked page.
And yet again Librorum,
Prove the validity and licity of the false sacraments which you freely receive. False as per, “Cum Ex Apostolatus Officio”, that same Apostolic Constitution which you claim to hold in your intellect. With the assent to the false pope Roncalli, all as every single Bishop and Cardinal who assented, apostasized in their assent, ipso facto, proving that they never held the Bishopric nor the Cardinalate, as deFide, as per paragraph 6, “Cum Ex…”. Now prove your conjecture using the Magisterium, as nothing, as NOTHING else counts for your salvation. I pray you are helped. In caritas.
Dear Librorum,
Please read my two comments toward the bottom of this comment section, and then refute the “argument” you deridingly speak of with all of your Magisterial evidence.
After reading, you will see that the burden of proof does not lay on this side of the court.
Sorry, Librorum. I forgot the link:
https://akacatholic.com/traspontina-desecrated/#comments
Dear my2cents,
Not so fast. Who was it that claimed Pio as its saint? The false church. Secondly, to make such a statement about the Beatific Vision as,’ “We will find out when we get THERE.” ‘, does not instill a firm as utter grasp of the Truth through the Faith, rather that statement injects utter doubt about what is to come. Contemplate that for awhile. God bless you. In caritas.
No thanks, on looking for that challenge. Pass.
Here is a good resource.
http://archives.sspx.org/miscellaneous/sedevacantism/little_catechism_on_sedevacantism.htm
I align with everything stated therein.
That’s all you have? I’m sorry but I’ve been there done that already; all it left me with is the same old doubts and questions.
Accept my challenge, man. The burden of proof does not lay on this side of the court.
You see, Tom A, it is YOU who bears the burden of proof, not us, for Holy Mother Church teaches us:
1) The Faith comes before Sacraments 2) A doubtful Sacrament is NO Sacrament 3) We MUST know from whence our pastors come (John 10:1-6)
You want a theologian? Well then, is Dom Guéranger good enough for you?
“Sad indeed was the ruin of such pillars as these! Peter’s hand had placed them in the Church. They had merited the love and veneration of men, but they fell; and their fall gave one more proof of the solidity of that edifice, which Christ Himself had built on Peter. The unity of the Church was made more visible. Obliged by the treachery of Her own favored children to deprive them of the privileges they had received from Her, Rome was, more evidently than ever, the sole source of pastoral power. We, then, both priests and people, have a right to know whence our pastors have received their power. From whose hand have they received the keys? If their mis- sion comes from the apostolic see, let us honor and obey them, for they are sent to us by Jesus Christ, who has invested them, through Peter, with His own authority. If they claim our obedi- ence without having been sent by the bishop of Rome, we must refuse to receive them for they are not acknowledged by Christ as His ministers. The holy anointing may have con- ferred on them the sacred character of the episcopate: it matters not; they must be as al- iens to us, for they have not been sent, they are NOT pastors. Thus it is the divine Founder of the Church, who willed that She should be a city seated on a mountain, gave Her visibility; it was an essential requisite; for since all were called to enter Her pale, all must be able to see Her. But He was not satisfied with this. He moreover willed that the spiritual power exercised by Her pastors should come from a visible source, so that the faithful might have a sure means of verify- ing the claims of those who were to guide them in His name. Our Lord (we say it reverently) owed this to us; for, on the last day, He will not receive us as His children, unless we shall have been members of His Church, and have lived in union with Him by the ministry of pastors LAWFULLY constituted.”
See: The Liturgical Year, Vol 4, Pages 282-287
IN case you missed it above, I am anxiously awaiting the evidence that, without a doubt, I can receive the Sacraments SOMEWHERE without committing Sacrilege given the circumstances of our time. I’ll fly across the world for them if need be:
Dear Tom A,
Once and for all, why don’t you lay out all of the absolute proof that you have that the Sacraments you receive are WITHOUT A DOUBT (as it must be so or we cannot receive them) valid and licit.
That should clear up the matter for everyone, right here, right now.
Adding:
I suppose we need a theologian to explain this one, too, from the 4th Lateran Council (1215):
“Surely NO one can accomplish this Sacrament except a priest who has been RIGHTLY ordained according to the KEYS of the CHURCH, which Jesus Christ HIMSELF conceded to the Apostles and to their successors.”
Tom A, or anyone else, PLEASE show me your hand. I, too, would love to have access to the Sacraments, but you must PROVE IT leaving NO DOUBT WHATSOEVER. Don’t be afraid to type and make extremely long, skinny comments. I can handle it. If anyone can’t, then it’s doubtful that they have even bothered to read the Magisterial documents recommended here, or any for that matter.
The clock starts NOW….
Aqua, they don’t go anywhere because they say priests can only say Mass and administer the sacraments if there is a pope to give them jurisdiction.
Think about what happened between the death of Pius XI and the election of Pius XII… were there really no Masses of the Dead offered for Pius XI? Were there no Masses said for the Election of a Supreme Pontiff before the election of Pius XII? Because according to the home aloners here, that was a complete and utter no-no and the Masses were invalid. Ridiculous!
Aqua, would you ask the Coca Cola factory what they think of Pepsi? It’s no use going to the SSPX for a balanced and unbiased opinion on “sedevacantism”.
If you haven’t seen or read this article, please give it a go:
Traditionalists, Infallibility and the Pope
http://www.traditionalmass.org/images/articles/TradsInfall.pdf
Btw, Aqua, I’m not aligned with the Sede SECT, much less the SSPX sect. I reject both because they are thieves, robbers and liars, whether as individuals they know it or not. Your beloved SSPX recognizes Francis as Pope of the HOLY, Roman Catholic Church. Enough said. You need to start praying hard because you’re being deceived. You went to the wrong man for answers. What else was he going to tell you but exactly what you wanted to hear and what he wants to believe because anything else will at this point cost him EVERYTHING, and so few are even willing to give up everything for the TRUTH. May God help you and fast.
Librorum,
None of what you say is true. You must not be interested enough in the Truth to at least READ what has been presented, especially prior to making such utterly ignorant comments. You disprove nothing.
Dear My2cents,
As you can confirm yourself by checking a pre-Vatican II Catechism, I stated the teaching of the Catholic Church, which does not (and cannot) contradict the justice of God.
Aqua:
Firstly, and before I answer that, do you mind if I could ask you a question?
If you will…
Do you and your family confess Francis to be the Pope, the true vicar and representative of Jesus Christ here on earth?
And yet again Librorum,
As ASB has admonished you, “none of what you say is true”. You can prove none of what you merely opine as being true, using the only Authority in the cosmos, the only Authority there has ever been in Christ’s Church—the Holy and Infallible, Governing Magisterium. Amen. Alleluia. You remain perfectly BLIND to what true, “interregnum”, indeed is. Pope Pius XII, definitively as Authoritatively defined precisely what it is in 1945, with his Apostolic Constitution on Papal Election Law, “Vacantis Apostolicae Sedis”, which implicitly holds, “interregnum”, as part of it, as it is implacably inseparable, that is, “interregnum”, from the time of the death of one Pontiff unto the canonically valid election of the next. Amen. This is Catholic 101. He Authoritatively commanded in VAS that a MAXIMUM, WITHOUT DISTINCTION THUS WITHOUT EXCEPTION, of 18 days could pass from the death of one Vicar of Christ unto the day that the Cardinals would meet to canonically elect the next. He commanded that whatever number of Cardinals were present by day 18 and again MAXIMUM, they MUST then undertake the business of the election. You do know that, “18”, IS NOT, “19”, do you not, Librorum??? Roncalli underwent his non-canonical as faux assent to the See of Peter on day, “19”, as on October 28, 1958, when the Angelic Pastor, Pope Pius XII died on October 9. 28-9=19. DONE Librorum. OVER and DONE. That one day of separation forever ended Apostolic Succession. That, by definition then, and with apodictic certitude, allows us to know that this is NOT A PROLONGED INTERREGNUM, since Oct. 9, 1958, rather it actually is the LOSS OF APOSTOLIC SUCCESSION. If you deny this Librorum, you objectively demonstrate that you cannot hold the Catholic Faith, already known of you as res ipsa loquitur, because you then deny the Apostolic as Supreme Authority over the Church and Her election law, as codified and commanded by the last true Vicar of Christ. Amen.
Lastly for now, the example you give of the time between Popes Pius XI and XII, was indeed canonical interregnum when the usual Jurisdiction of the Bishop is preserved unto the next canonically valid election under the specific law of same. Amen. I pray this assists you in your pursuit of the divine and Catholic Faith. Amen. In caritas.
A Simple Beggar,
I suppose that means you’re pretty smart. But, where is your sensus Catholicus or basic common sense?
As for me, I will remain dumb and unenlightened, according to your standards, in that way I will know I’m on the right path.
Catherine,
It was you who stated that the words of IC “don’t make sense”. The on’y reason that they don’t make sense to you (a person of obvious intelligence) is that you don’t WANT them to make sense, and in all probability you didn’t even read all of the words or if you did you rejected them before even reading them. Being a little child involves doing exactly what the Church commands us to do and not doing what She tells us not to do. That is all I am doing. You are deciding for yourself what you should do and not do in this horrifying situation, therefore, and objectively speaking, it is in fact you that has less of the little child within.
To summarize “In Caritas” argument: The Apostolic Line was broken and dissolved 61 years ago. Thus, the Catholic Church came to an ignominious end. The Pope; Bishops in union with the Pope; Priests in union with their Bishops; the Sacraments that flow from heaven through them to us – severed with “apodictic certitude”. “OVER and DONE”. “Forever”. Amen. The Eternal Sacrifice Of The Mass, offered up on altars around the world, actually ended 61 years ago. Dead.
Nobody knew this happened, except for a few.
And, if you don’t believe this, then you cannot be Catholic.
!!!
What a strange place this is.
Aqua, yes that is what he is saying. And we are suppose to believe this based on a few magisterial documents that are dealing with canonical situations (licit) and not sacramental theology (valid). And we just have to take his word for it. I have asked him to produce some pre v2 commentary to support his opinion, but so far, nothing. It is ironic because his position would make a lot of sense based on what we are observing in Rome today and what was once the Catholic Church. It would clear up a lot of the confusion and mystery. But church teaching on sacramental theology does not support his premise of lack of papal mandate invalidates an episcopal consecration. It simply makes it illicit and sinful.
Aqua;
IC is advising all to extreme prudence and to tread super-careful in an hour of darkness and deception and fraud, and takes pains to only quote from the first and the highest sources of the Church, and recommend that people not be lazy but actually READ them themselves, and not follow anyone else. From what I have always seen, he’s only been presenting the evidence, not “his interpretation”. But inevitably, that’s unpleasant to hear, and that would not appeal to people who want their ears scratched, and go on believing that fairy tale that things aren’t so bad after all, so they can go on playing the victim.
But you mock that approach, call it “strange” and reject those who in charity take the time and effort to advise you, as madmen. How convenient.
Well, go on believing that fantasy, hail Francis and the SSPX, and that whole mess of faith-destroying vipers, and attack the persons of those who will try to warn you, and run from all the persecution that it would impose on you.
But in the end, it will avail you nothing.
No, not judging a soul. How very protestant of an accusation.
Dearest james__o,
The ineffable joy as the ineffable sorrow, which you bear witness to, that anyone who holds the One as true Catholic Faith, as you evidence yourself to hold, is in this time, as it would be in anytime, True and Beautiful and Good. May Almighty God continue to especially bless you and yours’ james__o. Amen. The blind here lead the blind, as the willfully, spiritually blinded cannot stand the Light of Truth, as it again increases their blindness in its Singular Brilliance. This is exquisitely painful as we bear witness to them. We do know there pain, as we were there, each and all who, by the reception of the grace of God alone, now see. Amen. The blind claim the Truth to be mere human opinion, as that is all they hold, is their own or the other’s mere human opinion. They are blind to the Apostolic Authority of Blessed Peter in his Successors and claim it to be less than it is—-SUPREME—–as the Voice and Command of the Word Himself, Amen. They suggest that there is, “no authority to impose it”, blaspheming God in that very suggestion as though He could abandon His Church. Amen. They are perfectly blind to the teaching of Pope Leo XIII in, “Satis Cognitum”, whereby he defines the two part visibility of the Holy and true Church, in the, “Unity of Faith”, and in the, “Unity of Communion”. It is the, “Unity of Communion”, which is now lost to the world. Amen. He also infallibly teaches us there in, “Satis Cognitum”, that aspects of the true Church can and have been be lost to the assail of Satan, but that the Church in Her holy foundation remains, as the foundation protects the whole in spite of its parts. Amen. Alleluia. We continue to bear witness in the time after Antichrist, the time of utter desolation that the prophet Daniel foretold would remain unto the consummation, as the very end, the Last Day, of the world. Never to have the Vicar of Christ return thus, with Apostolic Succession lost, never then to have the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass offered, as without the Pope the Mass cannot continue and without the true Mass, the Pope cannot be present on the earth. The two are implacably bound, Amen. We know this through the inerrant teaching of the Early Fathers in unanimity, Amen. Also in the teaching as prophetic warning of the Apostle in 2 Thess 2.
The blind as liars then place words into our mouths, as though what is written is ours, as they remain blind to the reality as it is, that it is the Magisterial teaching, as you edify, which is being written, free of fallible opinion. They seek yet more and more fallible human opinion, as from theologians, which of course in truth, there simply are none to seek in this time of desolation. Amen. They remain obstinate in their false belief that theologians of the true Church, now long dead and gone, could have possibly known precisely what would occur in the time of Antichrist and after him, as the time of desolation. Amen. That itself, blasphemes God, as only He has known unto eternity His prophetic Word, as to its proper time and place and specific occurrence, until it is revealed in its singular as prophetic time. Amen. Then each of us is commanded by Him to know the prophetic season in which we live. It has been pointed out that even the holy Saint as Doctor of the Church, Robert Bellarmine as theologian, was ultimately wrong in his time about suggesting even the possibility, that the Vicar of Christ could lose his personal faith. Amen. And of course it was proper for an eminent theologian as he to speculate as such, before the definition came, as deFide then, in Council, July, 1870. Amen. Thus, it is now heresy to suggest that the Vicar of Christ can lose his personal faith. This understood, they still yearn for fallible human opinion to direct them in this time. May Almighty God have mercy on them and us, james__o. In caritas.
James O. But IC has introduced his own conclusion and interpretation by claiming Apostolic Succession is now lost due to lack of Papal jurisdiction. He can point to no source that agrees with his conclusion. In fact I have pointed to Pope Leo XIII’s Apostolicae Curae in which Pope Leo XIII declares Anglican orders null and void due to improper form and not because they went into schism and lost jurisdiction. I admit, this does not give us carte blanche to attend sspx and sede chapels. Each and every Catholic must fully understand the una cum issue, supplied jurisdiction (if it even applies), and the novus ordo new rites of ordination. If this sounds too complex, well too bad. If ones soul is at stake and one is truly concerned, one will take the time and effort to investigate these matters before assisting at any Latin Mass. It may be the most prudent thing to stay home. But that is a decision that has to be made by an informed Catholic and cannot come from any authority, since none exists. No one should should avoid these issues because the consequences could be so drastic and unpleasant. It is good to remind ourselves that we should never approach doubtful sacraments. If one has a doubt, stay away until the doubt is removed. The truth as IC says is an objective reality that does not depend on our interpretation or conclusion. It is known only by the authority of Christ thru his Church and the Pope. If lost Apostolic Succession is an objective reality at this point, then so be it. But that answer cannot be known because there is no one in authority to say it is lost.
Here is what is at play, and we ALL go through it or we wouldn’t be human, i.e. DUMB SHEEP in need of a Shepherd, or a POPE to lay it all out for us in NO UNCERTAIN TERMS:
Cognitive Dissonance
In the field of psychology, cognitive dissonance is the mental discomfort experienced by a person who holds two or more contradictory beliefs, ideas, or values. ***This discomfort is triggered by a situation in which a person’s belief clashes with new evidence perceived by the person.***
Normalcy Bias
The normalcy bias, or normality bias, is a belief people hold when there is a possibility of a disaster. It causes people to underestimate both the likelihood of a disaster and its possible effects, ***because people believe that things will always function the way things normally have functioned.***
Amen.
Great points you’ve made there, especially from Pope Leo XIII. Thanks.
Lord have mercy.
Poor poor as obstinate in error, Tom A,
You continue to manifest obstinate error. You continue to blaspheme God by suggesting, “no authority is present”. The Authority present is firstly Almighty God, as Head of His Church, Who commanded that He would be with us unto the consummation of the world, and then visibly, the Authentic Universal and Ordinary Magisterium, as it has always been, Blessed Peter in his Successors. Amen. Christ commanded the faith as a child to enter His Kingdom, not the absence of holding the Faith, as you objectively continue to do in your witness and obstinately. I oppose your error as no longer for your benefit, as you evidence an implacable state of ignorance to Truth. Your profound error is opposed for the benefit of the likes of dear, “georgianne” and “Ursula”, and any others who may be there silently.
And again Tom A, you are a liar, placing words here that are yours’, while at once you claim them as mine, as here in your opening salvo:
“But IC has introduced his own conclusion and interpretation by claiming Apostolic Succession is now lost due to lack of Papal jurisdiction.”
Do you even know what you are writing here, as I rhetorically query, in your display of utter ignorance to Truth? “Apostolic Succession”, Tom A, that which is the singular wellspring of , “Papal Jurisdiction”, as Blessed Peter in his Successors as alone, as singularly, as in NO ONE ELSE, received the gift of Jurisdiction, deFide, as per, “Satis Cognitum”. Amen. You posit absurdities as though they could even exist, yet alone be true. True, “Apostolic Succession”, is the font of, “Jurisdiction”, as the wellspring. Jurisdiction is the object of the subject of Apostolic Succession. The object cannot yield the subject, as the subject holds the object. “Ob”, Latin for, “before”, and the Latin root of “ject”, meaning, “to throw”. Object, then is, “to throw before”. I did not write that, “Apostolic Succession”, is lost due to absence of Papal Jurisdiction. What I did write, is that Apostolic Succession was lost due to the violation of the Apostolic Constitution of Pope Pius XII, as his election law, given with his supreme as Apostolic Authority, “Vacantis Apostolicae Sedis”, was affronted in the faux election of Roncalli. Amen. Pope Pius XII very precisely as Authoritatively and as exactly commanded how the true, “interregnum”, was to occur. The College of Cardinals, however many were present, must, as in must and only could have, met by a maximum, as the definitive end number, of 18 days. Roncalli under went his false assent on day 19. Amen. I pray this assents anyone open to Truth. In caritas.
Hi Tom A,
And I asked for proof that without a doubt I would NOT commit sacrilege should I receive Sacraments from the priests from whom you receive them, or any other priests that we know of for that matter. In the face of this critical matter your request is irrelevant, so says Dom Guéranger, the saintly theologian, a quote from whom I provided for you.
I’m still waiting. No one has come forth.
And the other elephant in the room is that even if there WAS someone from whom I could receive Sacraments, I would first need to make an Abjurarion of Heresy (former Novus Ordo, “Trad” etc etc.,), and then a public Profession of Faith and have my censures removed by a VALID and LICIT Bishop of the Roman Catholic Church, THEN a General Confession. Only after all of which might I THEN receive Communion (assuming my Baptism was valid).
If anyone knows to whom I can go to begin this process (or who even follows this “old” Church procedure) MINUS ANY DOUBT WHATSOEVER, please respond.
“assents”, should have been, “assists”, in the final sentence.
THEOLOGIAN DOM GUÉRANGER was not good enough, apparently:
“Sad indeed was the ruin of such pillars as these! Peter’s hand had placed them in the Church. They had merited the love and veneration of men, but they fell; and their fall gave one more proof of the solidity of that edifice, which Christ Himself had built on Peter. The unity of the Church was made more visible. Obliged by the treachery of Her own favored children to deprive them of the privileges they had received from Her, Rome was, more evidently than ever, the sole source of pastoral power. We, then, both priests and people, have a right to know whence our pastors have received their power. From whose hand have they received the keys? If their mis- sion comes from the apostolic see, let us honor and obey them, for they are sent to us by Jesus Christ, who has invested them, through Peter, with His own authority. If they claim our obedi- ence without having been sent by the bishop of Rome, we must refuse to receive them for they are not acknowledged by Christ as His ministers. ****The holy anointing may have conferred on them the sacred character of the episcopate: it matters not; *****they must be as al iens to us, for they have not been sent, they are NOT pastors. Thus it is the divine Founder of the Church, who willed that She should be a city seated on a mountain, gave Her visibility; it was an essential requisite; for since all were called to enter Her pale, all must be able to see Her. But He was not satisfied with this. He moreover willed that the spiritual power exercised by Her pastors should come from a visible source, so that the faithful might have a sure means of verifying the claims of those who were to guide them in His name. Our Lord (we say it reverently) owed this to us; for, on the last day, He will not receive us as His children, unless we shall have been members of His Church, and have lived in union with Him by the ministry of pastors LAWFULLY constituted.”
See: The Liturgical Year, Vol 4, Pages 282-287
Thanks for telling us. I will make a private abjuration for now.
^^^^^”THEY ARE NOT ACKNOWLEDGED BY CHRIST AS HIS MINISTERS.”
But you said ““You[In caritas] are trying to convince others on this forum that they should commit mortal sin…”
Anyone reading that would say that it’s very clear in its meaning. Maybe that wasn’t your intent. Maybe you could rephrase it?
Dearest ASB,
And of course you rhetorically query poor, poor Tom A, a man objectively as obstinately in rejection of the divine as One and true Catholic Faith. It is highly unlikely that he will attempt to present any evidence for you, in your truly as authentic Catholic challenge, to his being outside the Church, where no salvation rests, deFide. Amen. This would as you’ve just elsewhere written, bring him unmitigated cognitive dissonance, as the pain for him utterly then, facing the reality as it indeed is, that there cannot possibly be any licit Sacraments now present on this earth. That reality though he remains willfully blinded to, as he objectively is in the reception of, “the operation of error to believe lying”. Amen. The reception of the illicit Sacraments, if there were in truth any to be had, would take him to Hell, and he has objectively stated that he knows illicit Sacraments to be mortally sinful. He plays his obtrusive game of cat and mouse, as though he holds the secret to, “valid and licit”, Sacraments, without saying so. And in truth, as though Jesus the Christ would allow His true Sacraments to be somehow, “hidden”, for the few, the gnostic. Another blasphemy of Christ that he is perfectly blinded to. Amen. May Almighty God continue to bless and keep you and the Blessed Virgin hold you in her Immaculate Heart. Amen. In caritas.
Is there a forum/message board that is used by Catholics that understand all of this?
Is there a way to meet with other Catholics?
If not, if I set up an email, would you be willing to answer my questions as they come up?
In Caritas:
It strikes me that Tom does actually agree with you on most all topics, but when it comes to this particular subject of Apostolic Succession, he likes to play “the Devil’s Advocate”, possibly because he’s still working it out in his mind.
I could be wrong, but I think he agrees with you much more often than he openly admits.
Hey Tom, am I right or wrong about this?
Tom,
I think you are making some excellent points here. But when it comes to the Anglican Orders, they were much more concerned with Cranmer and his changes to the form in his “new” Ordination Rite. But I don’t think anyone at that time even stopped to question whether or not Henry VIII & Co. was in schism after he declared himself “Head of the Church of England”. Schism would be considered a forgone conclusion, and jurisdiction gone along with it.
Did Leo XIII bring up the subject of schism or jurisdiction in Apostolicae Curae? I haven’t had the chance to read that whole document yet. But I should.
After Henry VIII broke from Rome, they went into schism which quickly led to heresy. Shortly afterwards, they altered their ordination rites enough to invalidate the sacrament. Fast forward a century or so and the Anglicans re-introduced language into their ordination rites that would make their rites valid if used by a Bishop. It was at this point that Pope Leo XIII issued Apostolicae Curae telling us that because so much time went by with Anglicans using improper form they lost Apostolic Succession and that fixing the form at that point was too late. That is the basic point Pope Leo XIII made in his historic Bull.
That would explain why some of the Anglican “Bishops” around the turn of last century were looking towards a few Eastern Orthodox “Bishops” for a “conditional Ordination” to try to make themselves valid again.
That’s much fancy footwork for nothing.
James O, I agree with most of what IC says. On this point he is wrong. He does not need to prove Apostolic Succession has ceased in order to justify home alone. That can easily be justified using the argument that supplied jurisdiction does give bishops authority to ordain. If he used that line of reasoning, I never would have said a word against any of his posts. His assertion went against everything I came to understand about sacramental theology and the distinction between validity and licitity.
Tom,
The answer was provided by the saintly THEOLOGIAN Dom Guéranger. It matters not because such ministers as may be ordained by those who were consecrated without the necessary Papal Mandate, are not recognized by Christ as ministers of His Church. Guéranger has already interpreted it all for you and concisely so.
What I meant to say is that if Christ doesn’t recognize such men as His ministers, then how can Apostolic Succession be carried on through them? It can’t.
I provided a theologian’s clear explanation as you requested but you choose to reject it.
JOHN CH 10:1-6
6….”BUT THEY KNEW NOT WHAT HE SPAKE TO THEM.”
It seems to me that speaking of “valid” or “invalid” orders outside of communion with the Pope would immediately strike most as being purely academic, and quite useless on a practical level. Especially under the present circumstances.
Who would want Sacraments from a “valid” but illicit Bishop or Priest anyway? From what I gather from ASB’s quoted source above, “licit” is just a word meaning “recognized by Christ”.
Which of course it must follow: “Ok, then without the Vicar of Christ there can be no licit & valid clergy”. And since this has long ceased many years ago, since Pius XII, and the dark “advent”, of Roncalli and his band of brigands, then so much for Apostolic Succession.
Therefore, we must have the jurisdictional authority of a true Pope to lead all, and also to have BOTH licit & valid Clergy, so we can be confident and sure of the Sacraments.
So, if I’m not mistaken about this, what’s the beef again?
I believe Tom is currently of the mind that Apostolic Succession continues with the illicit (at best) Sede bishops of today, and feels that there has been a lack of proof as to otherwise. Do I have that right, Tom?
Dom Guéranger (quoted) would disagree.
Yes James O, on a practical level it matters not if its valid but illicit. The result is the same, avoid if its illicit.
ASB, yes you are correct. That is what I believe based on all that I have read. Granted, there is so much more that I have not read.
Ok good.
Dear james__o,
You are probably not aware that the recent writing between Tom A and me is just that. The nascent genesis goes way back to a time well prior to when Louis closed his combox. Tom A was as obstinate in error then. Of course, whether Tom A and I, or anyone else, “agree”, on anything Magisterial matters not one iota of an iota, as it relates to the Authoritative teaching and commands as they remain forever untouched, as they are the Truth with Authority. Amen. An agreement of opinions will take souls to Hell all day and everyday, which I attempted to make very clear to Tom A and long ago.
In truth, the Anglican situation plays not a roll in understanding the current problem of the implacable loss of Apostolic Succession. It is purely as utterly distraction and diversion, as another tweak of Tom A’s intellect by the Serpent, as ASB has pointed out already. The understanding of the loss of Apostolic Succession rests firstly in the utter simplicity of 19 days versus 18 days. It is that simple, as Almighty God is Simplicity Himself. The true as actual period of, “interregnum”, was specifically codified in Law by Pope Pius XII in, VAS. It is unchangeable now for the obvious reason. It was denied in the faux election of Roncalli. No one has to know anything else about Roncalli, as a 12 year old may not, yet that same 12 year old knows with apodictic certitude that 19 is one more than 18. Pope Pius XII with all of his power of Apostolic Authority made it preciously as pristinely clear that the Cardinals, “must”, meet by a, “maximum”, of “18 days”. He was so precise in that number, “18”, that he declared it did not matter how many Cardinals were present, thus there could have been 2, rather what was all important, was that how ever many were there, they would meet for the business of the election of the next Pontiff by day 18. Period and end. Tom A will place an affront to this and posit the claim that it is, “Church law which is trumped by Divine Law”, which he has done. I then provided Magisterial teaching to him from, “Ad Apostolorum Principis”, whereby Pope Pius XII definitively and Authoritatively proclaims contra to Tom A’s mere wretched as fallible opinion as here:
“46. “We teach, . . . We declare that the Roman Church by the Providence of God holds the primacy of ordinary power over all others, and that this power of jurisdiction of the Roman Pontiff, which is truly episcopal, is immediate. Toward it, the pastors and the faithful of whatever rite and dignity, both individually and collectively, are bound by the duty of hierarchical subordination and true obedience, not only in matters which pertain to faith and morals, but also in those which concern the discipline and government of the Church spread throughout the whole world, in such a way that once the unity of communion and the profession of the same Faith has been preserved with the Roman Pontiff, there is one flock of the Church of Christ under one supreme shepherd. This is the teaching of the Catholic truth from which no one can depart without loss of faith and salvation.”
The key command for our discussion being:
“Toward it, the pastors and the faithful of whatever rite and dignity, both individually and collectively, are bound by the duty of hierarchical subordination and true obedience, not only in matters which pertain to faith and morals, but also in those which concern the discipline and government of the Church…”
Tom A never even acknowledges reading these truths, yet alone seeing and holding them, as he objectively denies them, time and again. Pope Pius XII then closes his Apostolic Command there with, “This is the teaching of the Catholic truth from which no one can depart without loss of faith and salvation.”
Then Tom A in his unmitigated hubris declares that the perfectly miserable wretch that I am and can only be this side the veil, is the one who places Judgment on him as being outside the Church where there is no salvation, deFide. Amen. And again and again it is pointed out to him that it is the Magisterium which places Judgment.
We can then get into, as has also been written many times now, the Authoritative reality of, “Cum Ex…”, paragraph 6, and how that infallibly declares that those Bishops and Cardinals who apostasized in their willful assent to Roncalli, as though he was the Vicar of Christ, not only lost the Faith in apostasy, but ipso facto then also proved that they never were valid Bishops nor Cardinals, as in they too were only faux. That is the Authoritative teaching of the Church, anyone who abjures this, cannot hold at once the divine and Catholic Faith. Amen. And of course that would be so, as it is the Holy Ghost, in Truth, Who selects the Shepherds as Bishops, as the Successors of the Apostles, which the Magisterium also has always taught. Amen. Alleluia. To suggest that these men were actually who they and the entire Church may have then thought they were, is to place an affront to the Blessed as Divine Paraclete Himself. I now rest. God bless and keep you james__o. In caritas.
georgianne:
I take it you might be addressing A Simple Beggar or In caritas?
I personally don’t know of any forum, it would be good to have one though. They may know.
Georgianne,
I’m working on getting a message to you, but if you’d like to set up an email that would work as well. You could use the forum for that and then delete it later.
And again james__o,
The other point that I wanted to clarify was Tom A’s straw man of, “supplied Jurisdiction”. He doesn’t want to believe there is loss of Apostolic Succession because he willfully chooses to remain in the deception that valid and licit Sacraments remain as hidden (blasphemy again) on the earth, whereby in reality as it is, any Sacraments, as any at all but for Baptism, are now in their external signs gone from the face of the earth and unto the consummation. There is no divine prophesy of restoration of the Holy Sacrifice after the reign of Antichrist and the time of utter desolation, which the prophet Daniel, through the Early Church Fathers, commanded would remain unto the consummation of the world. Period and end, as Magisterially commanded. He has been warned now time and again about this deception of, “supplied Jurisdiction”. It is a basic matter of infallible and Authoritative Magisterial teaching as in, “Satis Cognitum”, as edified for Tom A multiple times now, that as Peter in his Successors are gone from the earth, so is ALL AS ANY JURISDICTION, as this Gift was given the Vicar of Christ, as immanently and EXCLUSIVELY. Jurisdiction no longer remains in the cosmos, no matter what any fool’s opinion is. The analogy as, you simply cannot offer the water in your cup to your thirsty neighbor, when your cup is empty, as you cannot offer the water that IS NOT THERE. No Pope—–NO JURISDICTION TO SUPPLY. It really is that simple. The blindness is legion. Amen. In caritas.
In caritas
Thank you very much for taking the time to write this.
And now it’s been 2 years in the desert, and you know what I mean by that.
The direction that you point to in your words have been very helpful to me. May the Good Lord bless you and grant you peace.
Also, I’ve noticed, that term “supplied jurisdiction” has been wielded about quite a bit.
MHFM claims this for their position, which comes to mind. And of course, SSPX, CMRI, SSPV, etc.
Those MHFM liars. Astonishing liars. I think they’re the most twisted of them all, and something tells me that they know exactly what they’re doing.
Yes, James_O, I was addressing them. It would be good to know others and be connected somehow. I do have a few questions, too.
Thank you, A Simple Beggar.
A Simple Beggar:
If you have any warnings about MHFM, I would appreciate knowing about them, at least briefly if you could.
In caritas,
What I asked of ASB, I ask of you as well. If know anything about MHFM, or if you have any warnings about them, I would appreciate knowing .
Thanks.
Hi James o,
For one, they send people to their “secret” list of N.O. priests, ordained prior to 1968, for Confession. We are forbidden to receive Sacraments from heretics. Here is a letter that pretty much lays it out, although I haven’t read the entire letter lately and it comes from the Siri people (Siri could not have continued to be Pope after assenting to Siri in the external forum; I, myself, don’t know what was said to him or what was in his heart, except obviously great fear which dominated his actions, unfortunately for him)):
http://www.todayscatholicworld.com/dims-refuted.htm
Sorry, I meant after assenting to John XXIII (who took the name of an old anti-pope*, another large hint).
Good Friday morning james__o,
I’m sure ASB simply didn’t see your request of her, then allow me. Keep it really simple. MHFM is opposed to Christ as He commanded, “You are either with Me or you are against Me.” Amen. Anyone and of course, who places an affront to the holy Magisterium in any iota of way, shape, or form, in truth as Truth, hates Jesus the Christ, and again as only He could command as in John 14, 21: He who knows My commands and follows them, loves Me, and as I Am in the Father, you are in Me, and I in you. Thus, if we either do not know His commands or know them and disobey them, we simply, and as perfectly understand as from the Mouth of the Word Himself, cannot love Him. Period and end. As we are either with Him or against Him, we in Truth then can only love Him or hate Him. You know james__o what he commanded about the, “luke warm”, as He would vomit them out of His holy mouth. Amen.
His commands of course are the holy Magisterium. Those who continue to play the diabolical game of gnosis, as Tom A, are utterly blinded to this pristine reality as it is, truth thus, that which a 10 year old would know when taught and fully assent to. The Magisterium is the Magisterium. The Magisterium is the divine Word speaking to, as teaching and governing His Church, through the infinite Power of the Holy Ghost. Amen. Alleluia. Tom A, as the R&R crowd, has now evidenced as objectively, that the Magisterium can be sifted and sorted, stating that there is no deFide assent required in matters of discipline and government and further, the Vicar of Christ, “is not protected”, and according to the warped mind of Tom A, when governing the Church as canonically. This is so absurd that the cosmos shudders in disbelief. The Church has always taught the understanding of the, “negative protection”, of infallibility there, such that and absolutely as infinitely understood and of course, Christ cannot bind His Mystical Body, His inviolable Bride, the Church, to ERROR, thus the negative charism of infallibility, so called. It is referred to this way because the Holy Roman Pontiff’s governance as Jurisdictional Laws, the keys to bind and loose, can change, and as Truth cannot change, the canonical Law is not infallible then per se in a positive sense, while at one and the same time it simply cannot be in error, such that it would bind the faithful to error. Amen. The simplicity and beauty of Christ’s Bride and of course itself speaks. God has provided thus in His infinite Providence and Beatitude, this most simple as infinitely perfect assurance of His Truth as Truth Himself. That which a 10-12 year old can understand and assent to. The Holy Roman Pontiff teaches as Vicar of Christ anywhere, at any time, and to anyone, and it then immediately as immanently applies perfectly to the Universal Church, as if it did not, he could not have been the visible sign of the, “Unity of Communion”, as Pope Leo XIII infallibly taught in, “Satis Cognitum”, Amen.
I would avoid all of the charlatans as going to them is tantamount to entering the Enemy’s camp to discover the Truth. Amen. The holy Magisterium, the Angelic Doctor and his enlightened, “interpreter”, if you will, as the most profound Thomist of the 20th century, Fr. Reginald Garrigou LaGrange (who Mr. Robert Barron, while simply dressed as priest and bishop, despises by the way). Read his books, “Reality”, “The Essence and Topicality of Thomism”, and his master stroke on Spirituality. That last one can be purchased through old booksellers and you can obtain an old, “original”, if you will circa perhaps 1950’s in almost new condition.
May Almighty God continue to bless you james__o, as you objectively bear witness to His holy Faith. Amen. Alleluia. In caritas.
Yes ASB, the Truth can be very inconvenient. That is why the vast majority walks away from it when it is presented to them. When Christ told the crowd to eat His Flesh and drink His Blood, most walked away. If you warn others that Bergoglio can not be Pope, they call you a nut job. Warn them their sacraments are invalid or an affront to God and you are ostracized.
So true, Tom. It is very inconvenient as well as painful. Come to think about it, it seems like John Ch. 6 in reverse, here near the end of time.
Oh’ Tom A, you jest?
Abjure your profound error as you wrote that the Vicar of Christ receives no divine protection when governing and disciplining Christ’s Church, as you yet again place an affront to the divine Magisterium in your deceit. And further, abjure your error in stating that, “Vacantis Apostolicae Sedis”, has no meaningful import, and as you tacitly intoned, could be changed as by one iota, by the Cardinals in canonical Conclave, because there was no true Vicar of Christ to do so, and by your saying that it is, “changed”, by Popes all the time, and of course it was, as they alone hold the keys to bind and loose. Amen. Abjure Tom A, as you simply cannot both hold the divine and Catholic Faith and reject the divine Magisterium at one and the same time. Amen. God have mercy on you, man. In caritas.
ASB,
Thanks for the reply.
Yeah, when they were ordained doesn’t really matter, if they are NO “priests”. Same goes for the Eastern Catholics, their ordination rites weren’t changed, but it matters not, because they are right “on board” with Vat II & the whole mess. There can be no help from heretics.
Again, no jurisdiction.
A very good All Saints Day to you, In caritas,
You always present much to think about. I will look for Fr. Reginald Garrigou LaGrange’s writings. Thanks, again.
Are there any decent Catholic sites you could recommend?
IC, the Pope is protected from error in all of his official actions as Pope. He cannot promulgate error in Faith and morals nor will his disciplinary commands contradict faith or morals. I hope that clears it up on this point. I can see how you could misinterpret that point. What I meant is that disciplinary matters that do not pertain to faith or morals may change and are not infallible. Such as the number of days a conclave must be held after a Papal death.
Tom,
What does infallibility have to do with this? It has nothing at all to do with it. His COMMANDS were in full force as far as the 1958 Conclave was concerned, and they STILL stand could we even have another authentic Conclave at this point. Look what we got, and you don’t think there’s any connection? Tom, please…
ASB, how can a law be in full force if there is no one to enforce or dispense one from the law?
Tom,
You did NOT just ask that question. Too many beers this evening perhaps? What – was he speaking of PAST Conclaves? I gotta go…
ASB, if your assertion that the law is still in full force, then you should have no problem answering the question of who enforces it and who dispenses the law.
Tom,
You’re making no sense whatsoever. Do you or do you not believe that Pius XII was the last valid Pope? If so, then he COMMANDED – his words not mine – that the next Conclave (obviously the next one following his death – DUH) must produce a Pope within NO more than 18 days. Case closed. Only the next valid Pope could THEN make any changes to that rule, which would apply to any subsequent Conclaves until if and when another Pope changed the rules.
You are either playing games here in a malicious fashion to confuse people, or you are simply afflicted with the malignant spirit of disobedience. I refuse to believe you are as stupid as you sound right now, and if you’re not stupid or playing games then you’re blind.
On that note just remember: you can read and read all you want and think you’re really clever and all of that, but only God can remove blindness and allow you to see.
No ASB, you are the one who puts us all in a contradiction. We have to obey a law and there is no one to enforce it or dispense with it.
ASB, you and IC claim there are no “lawful” masses because there is no Pope, but then you go on to claim there are still laws for a conclave. Who decides which laws are still in enforce. When you need papal authority for your argument you say it still exists, but when you need there to be no more papal authority to fit your predetermined narrative, you assert that it no longer exists.
I do no such thing and right there you lie.
No rules can be changed during an interregnum. The command itself stands and as such IS in force during that time. Tell me WHY then, did POPE Pius XII, or any previous POPE, make rules for subsequent Conclaves in the first place if they didn’t need to be obeyed, because as “TOM A” says, after his death there’d be no one to enforce the rules or dispense of them anyway? THEN tell us all what entity it was that decided to IGNORE the rule and then WHAT happened after that? I suppose the horrifying result is just a “coincidence”, right, Tom?
You’re showing your true colors right here for all to see. You’re also insulting the intelligence of any readers. I’ve answered your questions, now answer mine and stop attempting to play mind games because it’s not working.
Look ASB, you and IC offer a lot of evidence to support your conclusion about the state of the Church. You may be right. But your conclusion is absolutely not doctrinal in the least. The evidence may be doctrinal, but your conclusions are not. I hope everyone here sees the fallacy of the reasoning you employ. Cite numerous authentic documents out of historical and theological context, and slyly present a non doctrinal conclusion as doctrinaire. It may fool those who are usually gullible and impressed with erudite sounding prose, but you don’t fool me. I am done with you two charlatans.
Tom you are malicious. You know darn well why there are no lawful PUBLIC Masses at this time and that it has to do with the lack of necessary Papal MANDATE for the consecration of bishops, who in turn ordain valid and licit priests, who in turn offer valid and licit Masses and dispense valid and licit Sacraments. I have asked you several times to produce PROOF of your position, and nothing was produced obviously because you have none. No one has produced any proof. Now you want to confuse the issue for others who might be sincerely seeking the Truth and perhaps haven’t followed or read the EVIDENCE that has been presented in the comment sections of this blog which conflicts with YOUR position (i.e. mere opinion).
As stated before, YOU are the one who bears the burden of proof, because if we are not 200% sure that the Sacraments we receive are valid and licit, then we must avoid them lest we risk committing sacrilege. That is the teaching of the Church and I know you’ll say you agree but therein you only display your malignancy.
Produce the PROOF that you have that your Sacraments are BOTH valid AND licit and thus NOT sacrilegious.
I will not respond to you any further because it’s a waste of my time. There is only black and white with God; you’re either with Him or against Him.
YOU say that it was perfectly acceptable for “them” to ignore the COMMAND of Pope Pius XII with respect to the next Conclave, i.e. the 18 day limit. Then guess what, Tom, you just revealed for all the world to see that you’re on THEIR side. Congratulations. You might as well attend a New (World) Order abomination tomorrow.
God help you.
You are the charlatan who is willing to risk sacrilege for the sake of your own comfort, and blatantly ignore the infallible commands of the Popes on these crucial matters. You are the one placing yourself above the Popes, picking and choosing what pleases you and what YOU decide to be doctrinal, infallible or even applicable to our unprecedented times. YOU are the one placing the affront to Almighty God Himself, not I, implying that God would not prepare and protect His Church for this time, and that He did not foresee it and make CLEAR PROVISIONS for it. You are a devil.
And you STILL give NO EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER to SUPPORT these malicious and false accusations.
You have none or you would. Let the reader beware.
Tom, I am a bit confused by your point….can you be more specific with it?
I don’t claim to know everything and never did, nor do I even have to because I have the Church and the true Popes to guide me. That being said, some of the other issues raised are simply a mystery.
I do know the Church teaches that we must know from whence our Pastors come, and that we are forbidden to receive doubtful Sacraments. FORBIDDEN.
You have failed to offer even an ounce of evidence in support of your man-made and Protestant position; in fact, you haven’t even tried.
In addition to that horror, what Pope removed your censures for heresy, Tom? Because as a former Novus Ordo (at the very least) you were an heretic and as such are forbidden to receive Sacraments until that time when you are received either into or back into the Church. This involves the Abjuration, public Profession of Faith, and then the censures for heresy removed by the Pope. THEN and only THEN would you be permitted to partake in the Sacraments of the Church. So anyway you look at it, Tom A, you are in deep trouble because you are making your own rules, where I AM NOT. Do you think you can outsmart Satan? Apparently you do.
With that I am finished.
2Vt, either there is or there isn’t papal authority still enforce. It cannot still apply to one situation (conclaves) and not apply to another (ordinations and masses).
Important announcement to all who recognize that the Seat is vacant: “Do what thou wilt” is the whole of the law according to the previous commenter (ala the Satanists). All of the silly old, infallible Papal commands and laws don’t apply because there’s no one to enforce or dispense of any of them, according to him.
Take your chances and do what THOU wilt, Sir, but I’ll continue doing what the true VICARS of CHRIST tell me is HIS Will. Your answers (lies) are simply not going to cut it at Judgement.
I would think it would be Jesus Christ Himself, who is eternally Head of the the Church, who perpetually enforces and dispenses all that’s true & just. It was He that has worked through all the true Popes of the past and that binds us. There could never be anymore than a temporal gap or interregnum here on earth, where there is “no one”. We also have the communion of Saints in Heaven, even if there can be few on earth.
Ultimately, the Church could never be without “no one” to enforce and dispense. That would be thinking of the Church in a far too base and earthly fashion.
James O, Christ will always be the Judge of Divine Law. We are always bound by Divine Law for He is eternal. The Church currently is eclipsed so it follows that its laws must also be eclipsed. We can continue to follow the once lawful disciplines of Holy Mother Church out of respect, tradition, and conscience, but what happens if we need a dispensation for some reason? To whom do we make an appeal? To whom do we ask for guidance? Who has the authority from Christ to instruct us on the law and interpret the law? ASB and IC act as if they did. The assume they know the mind of the last known lawgiver, Pope Pius XII of happy memory. Believe them or me at your own peril. Look it up for yourself and let the facts or lack of facts draw you to your conclusion. But in the end, that is all we have left. Our own conclusion, since there is no one with any authority to bind any of us to any understanding of this Great Apostasy. Nor is there anyone with any authority to bind you to any manner to observe your Divine obligation to make holy the Lord’s Day. Just know that the minute you think your conclusion is a doctrinal fact is the minute you become a fool.
“As above, so below.”
Where in Church teaching are we instructed that in the absence of a Pope, for any reason, we are not to follow Her instructions which came from Her previous valid Popes? Christ left us His Church THROUGH which HE instructs, commands and governs, and it was HE foresaw and prepared the Faithful for these times and most recently and forcefully through Pius XII; Pius XII who was quoted as saying toward the end of his life, “After me, the deluge”.
He who poo poos prophecy now conveniently brings up the eclipse of the Church. Anyone who has witnessed an eclipse knows that a bit of light around the perimeter remains. What the eclipse is referring to is the fact that some OTHER heavenly body has obstructed the sun’s view, but not entirely (i.e. the Counter church of Antichrist).
Obedience is always the safest route to take and the one which as little children we know to be the Will of our Father in heaven. Good little children don’t decide things for themselves but obey. A fool doesn’t place an affront to Almighty God by taking it upon themselves to decide what applies and what does not at the end of time or at any time. It is the fool that thinks he can figure it out for himself and follows the sweet, prideful, suggestions of the devil.
“Unless you become as little children you shall NOT enter the Kingdom of Heaven.”
Listen to this astonishing statement of Tom A, and what he DARES to write for all the world to see:
“Nor is there ANYONE with ANY AUTHORITY TO BIND you in ANY manner to observe your DIVINE obligation to make holy the LORD’S Day.”
Again, “As above, so below.” (Satanist’s mantra)
Tom A has dispensed us all from the obligation to obey the FOURTH COMMANDMENT of GOD and tells us we need to reach and follow OUR VERY OWN conclusions when it comes to matters which will determine our ETERNAL fate.
According to Tom A, God has completely abandoned us, and left us to fend for ourselves at this time by relying on OUR OWN LOUSY OPINIONS.This is nothing less than diabolical. He is extremely dangerous, disoriented and needs to step away from the keyboard. It could be him that assists Satan in dragging at least one poor and confused reader’s soul to hell for all eternity.
The above should read the THIRD COMMANDMENT; I had a distraction.
“To whom do we make an appeal?”
Christ Himself, through His Blessed Mother.
MMF, yes you are exactly right. Make your appeal to God Himself for there is no Church authority to be found.
ASB, all the Commandments of Sacred Scripture are Divine Law and are enforced by God Himself for all eternity. Please learn the distinction between Divine Law and ecclesial laws. It really is not that hard a concept to grasp.
Oh you are so devious. Those were your words not mine. You said that there isn’t ANYONE with any authority to bind us. It’s recorded. Forever – trust me.
Jesus Christ has ALWAYS been the HEAD of His MYSTICAL Body and He STILL IS only without a Vicar (representative and mouthpiece) on earth as that is His Will at this time. If you think for one moment that Jesus Christ the KING has dispensed with ONE iota of HIS Magisterial teachings, instructions and commands simply because there is no Pope, then Satan has sold you a nice, hot, little cubbie hole in hell complete with all the implements of torture you’ll ever need for all of eternity.
Stop throwing Divine Law around because it’s you who doesn’t know what you’re talking about, and I know all about that “party” line I’ve already been there and heard it all before. You still FAIL to present PROOF in response to questions regarding YOUR conclusions. You reject Jesus Christ Himself as you reject His authentic Magisterium and believe that He left HIS children abandoned at this time, thereby calling My Lord a LIAR. How DARE you. You are wicked.
YOU choose disobedience and to dispense with the Magisterium of Holy MOTHER Church in its entirety following the death of Pope Pius XII, and I choose obedience. Do what THOU wilt is your rule of law.
“You will have the power and the time; do with THEM what thou will.” (Jesus Christ to Satan, Pope Leo XIII vision)
While a distinction can be shown between Divine law and Ecclesiastical law, I don’t think we should ever separate them in practice. Church Laws proceed from the Divine laws, and were put in place to support and promote them.
The Divine law is also what gives the Church laws their full weight and power. And because Church laws were promulgated by true Popes, who can, by their power bind the faithful, and because “he who hears you hears Me”, they must remain and be honored whenever possible by all, for guidance, and to keep order and sanity. Especially in times of persecution and in absence of a true Pope.
But also, because of the present and most grievous circumstances we find ourselves, we also understand that in some cases it’s impossible to fulfill some of these laws, because the means are simply not available to us. But nevertheless, those laws still stand and remain and are of themselves objectively good.
However, those same laws could be twisted against us, if we recognized and applied them to heretics, and “granted” them jurisdiction in our minds as though they were the valid Hierarchy. Then they could destroy us.
If we honor the old and venerable Church laws as best as humanly possible, then we also honor the Saints who obeyed those laws, and give glory to God who is the Author of all.
James O, well said. We do well to keep those laws as best we can while remembering that the supreme law of the Church is the salvation of souls.
And yet again, the malevolent one,
The holy Magisterium is the Word of God, protected by Him from any iota of any iota of error. It flows from His holy Mouth through Blessed Peter in his Successors, to His Mystical Body and Bride, His Church. The holy Magisterium is Christ teaching His Church the Faith and Morality and it is Him governing Her, through His Vicar. That is who the Vicar is, after all, Christ in this world, while He is sensually invisible. Amen. This is Catholic teaching, oh’ malevolent one. Peter in his Successors are protected with the charism of indirect or so called, “negative infallibility”, when the Vicar governs and disciplines the Church, as we are bound with the assent of faith to submit to his Absolute Authority and God cannot bind us to error. The governance can change and thus it is not infallible per se, while it cannot contain error, as God cannot bind us to error, as He commands it to be.
You are really not as stupid as you pose to be Tom A. There is a particular as pernicious rancor about you, yes. God have mercy on your obstinate as pride riddled soul. “You will KNOW them by their fruits. Amen. In caritas.
Oh’ the malevolent one,
Your error and conflation of error with truth in syncretic construction is legion, as the demon, as it is Antichrist. Tom A would have all believe that because the judge has just died and the governor has not yet appointed another, hence no one there to interpret and enforce the law in your district, for a time, therefore, you are now free of the law, thus you now have, “freedom as license”. But as you well know, “ignorance of the law is no excuse”. Steal as you wilt, speed as you wilt, riot as though wilt. Freedom is now your license to do what though wilt. This would be gut wrenching laughable, if it were not once again objective evidence of poor Tom A on his own personal path to Hell. While he yet again blasphemes Almighty God, suggesting tacitly that this time has been unknown to God. As Tom A suggests, it would follow then that God did not prepare His true Church in His perfect as infinite order, for this very time. Thus, Tom A suggests chaos, which is Lucifer’s signature, and as The Christ commanded that He would be with His true Church unto the consummation of the world, Tom A then affronts Christ Jesus Himself. This is Antichrist. Further, The Christ commanded, “seek the Truth and yea shall find it.” Amen. Alleluia. If we were not bound with the assent of faith in submission to Church Law, as the perfect order that it is, then God would have indeed abandoned His Church to the wiles of Satan, the Church would have fallen to heresy, and this again blasphemes God, Who cannot abandon His Church as only He commands. Amen. Alleluia. And again, “You will know them by their fruits”. The few that evidence the true Catholic Faith, discovered it in the same holy Magisterium that Tom A suggests no longer binds us, nor can it teach us, because Tom A needs a, “theologian”, to interpret that which has been infallibly interpreted for the flock by Christ’s Vicar. Tom A affronts Christ’s commands again in this false as Antichrist belief of his, as Christ Jesus our Lord and our God commanded: My sheep hear My voice and they know Me. They follow Me. Tom A denies that in his vile language.
Tom A chooses to conflate the now absent Jurisdictional power in this world, known as res ipsa loquitur, which is that Gift as Charism given to Peter in his Successors alone, as immanently and exclusively, to teach and govern Christ’s Church, with freedom as license, which is fully Antichrist. Amen. This loss of Jurisdictional Authority, as now and since Oct. 9, 1958, is objectively evident, and it must be, as it only can be, the result of the loss of Apostolic Succession, which has led to the absence of valid and licit sacerdotal ministers in this world, as now and unto the Last Day, Amen. He intones then, that if there are no true Masses, because there are no true as valid and licit Bishops or priests, that Christ has abandoned His Church to the wiles of Satan, as chaos. Amen. This is fully Antichrist, this line of reasoning which Tom A proffers, as he proclaims membership in some sect of the Church of Antichrist, as anyone who intones or claims to be receiving valid and/or licit Sacraments in this time, when there simply cannot be, as objectively understood from the Universal and Ordinary Magisterium of the One, True, Church. Amen. The holy Council of Trent teaches as infallibly and of course, that for a man to be able to validly receive Holy Orders, he must first be, “tonsured”, which then makes him a, “cleric”, as the proper metaphysical matter to receive the Sacrament of Order, a cleric. “Tonsure”, as the Church teaches in Her canon Law, is not a power contained in the Sacrament of Order, rather it is a, “sacred ceremony”, as a Rite of the Church. This Rite of, “tonsure”, is a matter of Jurisdictional Authority, flowing immanently from Blessed Peter in his true Successors, and then to those true as valid Bishops in union with him. Tonsure is a power of Jurisdiction contained within the Office of Ordinary, in union with his true Pope. Amen. And again, as infallibly taught by Trent, a man is not proper matter to receive Holy Orders unless he has been tonsured by a valid and licit Bishop, as that Bishop must have Jurisdiction to tonsure, therefore he MUST AS HE CAN ONLY BE LICIT, to have Jurisdictional Authority from the Pope, whom he is in union with. This is Magisterial teaching sited now time and again. Amen. Enough correction of profound error as Antichrist, from Tom A for now. God bless and keep all those in true pursuit of Christ’s Church. In caritas.