On February 2, Bishop Athanasius Schneider – “our hero,” according to Michael Matt, Founder of the #UNITEtheCONS movement – published a statement calling on Francis to rule decisively against the German bishops’ plans to enact the so-called “Synodal Path.”
According to Bishop Schneider, the “synodal path is ultimately an attempt to give official approval to truly heretical doctrines, with their correspondent sacramental and pastoral practices.” Specifically, he pointed to the effort to affirm “the legitimacy of heterosexual acts outside a valid marriage” and “the admittance to Holy Communion of people living in adultery” as being among the “clearly heretical” propositions that must be defeated.
He even went so far as to refer to those prelates who support such things as “these heretical bishops.”
In light of this, Bishop Schneider states:
Pope Francis ought necessarily to intervene and demand that the participants in the “synodal path” formally profess those truths and universal sacramental practices of the Church, which they are calling into question…
The Pope cannot passively stand by or be silent as he watches the “wolves” devour the flock or the “arsonists” set fire to the house…
Were the Pope not to correct the heretical decisions of the “synodal path,” he would thereby consent to them by his silence.
Bishop Schneider went on to cite the Arian crisis as a notable precedent for the divisions that the “synodal path” portends. At that time, he writes:
The criteria and guarantee for being truly Catholic was the communion with the Apostolic See in Rome and with the unchanging and constant doctrinal Tradition.
On February 7, I reached out to Bishop Schneider, who has been gracious enough to respond to my queries in the past, for comment. Specifically, I invited him to comment on the bewildering fact that he is calling on Francis to interrupt an “attempt to give official approval to truly heretical doctrines” that he has already approved via the document Amoris Laetitia.
I also reminded him of the fact that Francis ordered the Buenos Aires Bishops’ guidelines allowing for “the admittance to Holy Communion of people living in adultery” published in the Acta Apostolicae Sedis (AAS), along with his own letter stating “there are no other interpretations” of Amoris Laetitia.
As of this writing, Bishop Schneider, who is among the best of the “full communion” lot, has not responded. [NOTE: I hope to be proven wrong, but it seems that Bishop Schneider, like Cardinal Burke, may have narrowed his media contacts down to a handful of low-t “traditional,” fence sitting, closet neo-con cheerleaders who are willing to parrot whatever he happens to state unchallenged.]
In any case, we are left with more questions than answers concerning exactly what Bishop Schneider has in mind and what he hopes to accomplish via his recent statement. So, let’s consider a few…
Is it possible that he genuinely does not see the absurdity of his request for Francis’ intervention in the matter?
This was my first thought. In hindsight, however, it seems highly unlikely that Bishop Schneider could be so entirely disconnected from reality.
This leaves us with but one other option, at least insofar as I can imagine; namely, the possibility that he is taking the opportunity – stealthily and by way of implication alone – to accuse Francis of his own crimes. While this theory is perhaps more likely than the alternative, it too is rife with difficulty.
Readers may recall that Bishop Schneider went on record in May 2019 as saying that the Open Letter accusing Francis of heresy in light of Amoris Laetitia “went too far.”
Has he since come to the undeniable realization that Francis, by lending his “approval to truly heretical doctrines” vis-à-vis Amoris Laetitia has properly revealed himself to be “heretical”?
In asking Francis to demand that the German bishops formally profess those truths and universal sacramental practices of the Church, is he subtly urging Francis to reconsider answering the questions that are posed in the Dubia?
Is he suggesting that Francis’ silence in the face of the Dubia may rightly be considered his “official approval of truly heretical doctrines, with their correspondent sacramental and pastoral practices”?
Bishop Schneider went on to say in his statement that faithful priests and bishops “will not be able to maintain communion with those German bishops who advocate heretical teachings” such as those under discussion.
Is he hinting that remaining in communion with Francis, the putative Bishop of Rome – that is, treating him as if he were a true pope – is fast becoming untenable for those who wish nothing more than the “guarantee of being truly Catholic”?
Like I said, at this point we’re left with more questions than answers. Unfortunately, the further we delve into his statement, the worse things look for Bishop Schneider.
The consequences of Francis’ failure to “intervene with an unambiguous profession of the Catholic Faith and the perennial sacramental practice of the Church,” according to Bishop Schneider, would be such that “the Catholic Church would in appearance and practice be similar to the Anglican Communion or to a Protestant Free Church.”
Here, we have a genuine case of cognitive dissonance.
You see, if a reigning pope were to consent to “truly heretical doctrines, with their correspondent sacramental and pastoral practices” such as those mentioned in Bishop Schneider’s statement, it could no longer be said that the “Apostolic See in Rome” has preserved “the unchanging and constant doctrinal Tradition.”
In this case, we would be faced with far more than mere appearances.
In other words, the gates of Hell – understood as “the death-dealing tongues of heretics” according to the Second Council of Constantinople – will have prevailed.
As we have noted, however, this is no longer a matter of speculation as Francis has already officially approved – not only by silence, but by direct decree – these very same, truly heretical, doctrines!
So, have the gates of Hell prevailed? Certainly not!
The only possible answers to this conundrum are plain: The institution presently operating out of Rome under the direction of Jorge Bergoglio cannot possibly be the Holy Catholic Church, and this Francis person is most certainly not a true pope.
There are no other choices, folks.
In conclusion, even if Bishop Schneider’s statement is an effort to stealthily accuse Francis of being a heretic – the best case scenario insofar as his own Catholic credibility is concerned – he would emerge from this exercise far more the coward than the “hero.”
Publicly condemn that which is evil, Bishop Schneider. Anything short of that will land you in hell. The Novus Order sect has shown itself to be antithetical to the pre-Vatican II Catholic Church. It is, therefore, evil. Publicly condemn it. The Second Vatican Council is antithetical to all the previous councils of the Catholic Church. It is, therefore, evil. Publicly condemn it. The Vatican II popes, through word and action and, it must be said, inaction, contradicted the words and actions of the Holy Roman Pontiffs preceding them. That is, therefore, evil. Publicly condemn it.
This is your chance.
If Benedict’s resignation was valid and Francis was a pope, his magisterium like that of Vatican II could be classified as authentic magisterium and simply fallible and heretical. In such a case, Fancis’s failure to answer the dubia would establish greater evidence that he revealed to the public that he was not Catholic and not the pope. Francis’s denial that “belief” itself is necessary in a “credo” (Apostles Creed, Nicene Creed, Athanatius Creed) religion, is sufficient proof that he revealed to the public that he is not Catholic or the pope.
That is the truth.
Louie said:
As Ratio said the above would be true “If Benedict’s resignation was valid and Francis was a pope.” There is obviously a lot of confusion around this issue. I know I am confused. But this very confusion has been prophesied in Daniel Chapter 11.
In Daniel 11, the “two kings” are discussed. Read “kings” as “popes.” This is the time period we are experiencing now. Understand that in the “end time,” after the ceasing of the Continual Sacrifice and the Abomination of Desolation, the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church will “fly [with the Blessed Virgin] to the wilderness on two wings of the eagle,” while the “Harlot of Babylon” who “rides the Beast” (the Counterfeit Church) will wage war on the Lamb and “the rest of her [the Virgin’s] seed.”
The process is gearing up slowly. It isn’t a light switch. The two “Churches” are currently mixed up in the same entity because there is still a lot of confusion among people of good will. Don’t lose heart. Keep to the Traditions of the authentic Catholic Faith and practice Charity to God and neighbor. This latter counsel is important in light of Jesus’s warning to the Church of Ephesus in Apocalypse 2. Always be charitable or you will regret it.
At some point, the leader of what will be called “the Catholic Church” (but will not actually be the OHCA Church) will clearly, for all of good will to see, fall away [apostatize] from the Faith. Getting angry about the process leading up to this apostasy is not helpful. It is God’s will to allow this to happen, as Apocalypse 17:17 says:
Everything that is happening and will soon happen is a divine reckoning for the spiritual adultery being committed by both clergy and laity of “the Catholic Church.” God is cleansing the filth from His Church through this process.
It makes no sense that the church would proceed on for almost 2000 years, then suddenly change direction and embrace a new theology.
We know God doesn’t change. So either the church got it wrong all those years or there has been a break with Catholicism. Bergoglio really can’t be pope.
We are witnessing Bishop Schneider’s “Spoink” moment while he processes the bamboozle of ‘cognitive dissonance’ as you say. Not quite sure he has definitively made his personal response that resolves the high tension the dissonance produces, but I do think you have resolved your own experience of the dissonance, by narrowing it down to couple of questions that demand a conclusion. This conclusion locks him into being either a coward or a hero, which he presumably can help resolve by at least answering your inquiry and request for a statement. But if it’s true he has narrowed his media contacts to the parrots of the United Clans movement, don’t hold your breath waiting for a response. Even publicly pressuring him won’t work, since someone caving to the pressures of cognitive dissonance will refuse to acknowledge any other inputs. They simply aren’t willing to live with the tension, and don’t mind making others bear that burden. So sure, you can make conclusions to resolve your own cognitive dissonance, but not assume his. If he is “stealthily” accusing Francis of heresy to avoid a direct confrontation, that does come across as cowardly. But whether he does or not, Francis has accused himself. Maybe all this is part of Bishop Schneider’s process of coming to an understanding of the problem, like so many of us who are grappling with the enormous gravity of it. That you can see through him is a gift from God. Therefore, if the Good Bishop does not respond, you must not give up on him, even if he persists in error. Seems like he is genuinely coming around, if not at the pace you were blessed with. Most of us out here are barely keeping up with the pace, yet hopefully, are persevering in the effort. You say the Gates of Hell have not prevailed? Maybe not at the moment, but it’s quite possible they slammed shut for a bit, but did not lock. Those Gates rotate on a ‘hinge’ (same latin word for Cardinal). If the hinges are failing, and those gates are flapping back and forth, some people are going to get banged up if they stay to close to the doors and don’t make their minds up to go in or out.
* Btw, i posted a picture of the classic Dilbert cartoon that illustrates the “Spoink” moment of Cognitive Dissonance on your Facebook page, since this platform does not accept graphics or memes. Or people can just Google it if they are not familiar. https://images.app.goo.gl/h9kB2gy2auMmTLMz8
“Do not judge lest you be judged.” You people are asking Almighty God to go over your lives with an electron microscope! Y’all better burn your computers and put on hair shirts.
MMF,
True, well stated.
.
Jesus Is Truth
Neither. He’s on the same team.
2Vermont, which team?
I must discern, conclude, “judge” based on their own statements and actions, which bishops and priests to trust and follow. It is impossible to follow our Holy Lord Jesus, and at the same time follow pro-homosexual false bishops such as Tobin, Dolan, Cupich…
Rushintuit:
”Jesus therefore said to them again: Amen, amen I say to you, I am the door of the sheep. 8 All others, as many as have come, are thieves and robbers: and the sheep heard them not. I am the door. By me, if any man enter in, he shall be saved: and he shall go in, and go out, and shall find pastures. 10 The thief cometh not, but for to steal, and to kill, and to destroy. I am come that they may have life, and may have it more abundantly. (Apostle John 10)
There are so many false priests, who have recently sexually abused Catholic young men, caused entire dioceses to become financially bankrupt, opposed our Lord Jesus” teachings, misled Catholics to embrace Muhammad’s gang and false jews… These are the destructive thiefs our Lord Jesus warns us of: Bergoglio, McCarrick, Ratzinger, Wuerl, James Martin…
The New Religion Team.
How is it possible to condemn the team you belong to?
“The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves.” -Vladimir Lenin
Yes, Melanie, that is what the Mason/Marxists and all the enemies of Christ did. To regain control, Our Lord’s Church needs a truly CATHOLIC Pope (a True Vicar of Christ). If that person in Bishop Schneider, he could be a Hero. Is such an election possible, considering that the Cardinals who will vote at the Conclave, are themselves enemies of Christ? I don’t have any answers except to pray and adhere to the beliefs and tenets of the Holy, Roman Catholic Church.
I have answers. You can’t go to some other false religion, especially not the Freemasonic New Order and ask them to pretty please elect a Pope for the Catholic Church. That’s answer #1. If the traditional Bishops of SSPX and sedevacantists are valid then they should be able to elect a Pope. Even it was supposed to be Cardinals, there are none, they are dead. The death of every single Cardinal means the end of Christ’s Church on earth? No, BS, that is a lie. So answer #2 is confirm which if any of these Bishops have valid Apostolicity and support them and pressure them into electing a Pope in conclave. Answer #3, if none of those Bishops are valid, spread the word so that Catholics are not receiving sacrilegious, invalid sacraments. Answer #4, pray the Holy Rosary and purchase piles of toilet paper, canned goods and water.
Thank you, Melanie. Your response make sense. However, I doubt that the valid Bishops of the SSPX and the valid sedevacantists Bishops will ever unite to elect a Pope. That really will be the hopeful defeat of the fake New Order.
Our Lord promised to be with His visible Church all days. We are sheltering in place. We have the Latin Mass, Rosary, and Catholic Devotions as always. The triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary is also a solemn promise. We wait for Our Lady’s victory over Satan. Period.
“Sheltering in place???” Only an emasculated effete would use a phrase like that. True Catholic men fight back. The first step being identifying the enemy. In this case it is the modernists NO institution and ALL who are in “union” or seek “union” with the heretical leader, Bergoglio and ALL who attend his “masses.” The next step is to elect a real Pope to lead the battle. Melanie is 100% correct.
St. Ignatius of Antioch, Disciple of the Beloved Apostle John said: “See that you all follow the bishop, even as Jesus Christ does the Father, and the presbytery as you would the apostles; and reverence the deacons, as being the institution of God. Let no man do anything connected with the Church without the bishop. Let that be deemed a proper Eucharist, which is administered either by the bishop, or by one to whom he has entrusted it. Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude of the people also be; even as wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church.” —Letter to the Smyrnaeans, Ch 8
So, what Bishop(s) do we follow today, right now, as Our Lord “Jesus Christ does the Father”? “I don’t know” is not an answer because invisible/unknown Bishops are the same thing as no Bishops or Apostolic Church left at all.
St. Ignatius of Antioch, Disciple of the Beloved Apostle John AGREES with Tom A: “See that you all follow the bishop, even as Jesus Christ does the Father, and the presbytery as you would the apostles; and reverence the deacons, as being the institution of God. Let no man do anything connected with the Church without the bishop. Let that be deemed a proper Eucharist, which is administered either by the bishop, or by one to whom he has entrusted it. Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude of the people also be; even as wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church.” —Letter to the Smyrnaeans, Ch 8
Dear Rushintuit,
Valid TLMs, celebrated by validly ordained SSPX priests or otherwise, are not accessible to most Faithful Catholics. While Faithful Catholics wait in “their sheltering place”, it is the absolute duty of the Church Militant to fight the enemies of Our Lord. An army which keeps the fort safe without ever leaving the fort to fight the enemy is cowardly, especially when the enemy is deemed “the official” church.
Many martyrs will be necessary.
@Anastagi: I don’t know where you are going with your “proof text”, but contemplating it crystallized a thought I have been entertaining.
–
The faithful may not think in these terms often, but the Church has a “constitution” of sorts. Aspects of that “constitution” establish a Church that is both episcopal and professional. The Church is episcopal because it is governed by bishops. The Church is also professional, because after formal acceptance into the Church, the faithful demonstrate continued membership in the Church by public profession of the faith of the Church. One, once a member of the Church, who willfully and publicly professes a faith alien to that of the Church demonstrates that at some point he or she have left the Church.
–
Yes, you say, that is obvious to all who have thought about it. So what? But the intersection of these two aspects of the “constitution” of the Church is exactly where the current problems in the Church originate.
–
Witness the spectacle of a shameless non-Catholic occupying the highest office in the Church who not only refuses to punish those in the hierarchy who spread error and division, but also participates in the spreading of error and division himself. What are the faithful to make of this?
–
Even though numerous learned “professional” Catholics have denounced the novelties perpetrated on the faithful as “heretical”, there has been effectively NO PUSHBACK WHATSOEVER from those tasked with governing the Church – the bishops.
–
Since it is a well-known maxim that not to denounce error is to assent to it, the faithful are confronted by a hierarchy that to a man almost all either endorse the errors emanating from the Vatican or assent to them by silence.
–
Well, that is their prerogative as bishops, and the faithful “couldn’t do nothing about it”. That neglects an essential condition precedent to the ability of the bishops of the Church to continue both exercising authority over the Church and governing the faithful. The faithful have no duty whatsoever to obey a bishop who is publicly and objectively identifiable to them as a heretic of apostate.
–
As a result, in these confusing times it is not sufficient to command the obedience of the faithful that a man merely be identified as the responsible bishop, he must also DENOUNCE THE ERRORS THAT ARE EMANATING FROM ROME. Otherwise, the faithful can only conclude that by silence he assents to the errors and is no longer a member of the Church. As a presumptive former member of the Church, he has no authority whatsoever to command the faithful.
–
So back to your “proof text” commanding the faithful to obey and follow their bishops. In this age, I ask you who exactly is my bishop? It can’t be one who publicly professes error. I can’t be sure that it is one who by silence assents to error. So who is my bishop? Ultimately that is a ridiculous question since the faithful shouldn’t have to identify who their bishop is on their own! The Church is supposed to do that for the faithful!
–
So, apparently, one can only conclude that the Church is effectively being held hostage – I prefer obscured – by the faithful bishops WHO SIN AGAINST THE BONDS OF UNITY OF THE CHURCH BY REFUSING TO DENOUNCE ERROR.
–
I guess that frees the faithful from responsibility for the situation, or does it? No, the bishops are effectively a mirror being held up to the purported faithful. If the faithful were every Sunday shaking their fists at milquetoast bishops who weren’t doing their job, and passing the collection plate without contributing, would this be happening? Not to the extent it is. What does that say about the faithful?
Every last one of them is a coward, with the possible exception of Vigano.
They ALL knew for years.
Sister Lucia, before she was silenced by the Vatican, later to become a prop for JPII, said: “The chastisement from Heaven is imminent.” “Diabolic disorientation will cause the loss of countless souls because of a crisis of Faith and the failure of Pastors.” “Grave Pastoral negligence of the upper Hierarchy.” etc.
None of you have been able to do anything to stop this. Only spiritual warfare will finally bring this to an end. If you are going to a TLM, saying a Rosary a day at least, the Five First Saturday Devotions, Brown Scapular, sacrifices, etc., you are doing what Our Lady requested. There is nothing cowardly about this course of action. Talking a big brave game about some kind of grass roots human action, hasn’t done one bit of good.
This crisis of Faith will only end when God says, it is finished. This China virus could be the beginning. At least it shows how something like Corona virus could be a world changing event.
PS: I haven’t forgotten about fire falling from the sky, per Akita.
Sister Lucia was replaced with an imposter. This has been proven by experts. Look at Dr. Chojnowski’s site https://sisterlucyimposter.org/about-dr-peter-chojnowski/. Many have noted that the imposter doesn’t even remotely resemble the real Sister Lucia but it has also been verified by experts in facial recognition, plastic surgeons and periodontists.
Yes, the new “Sr Lucia” not only looked nothing like the original, real Sr Lucia, but her demeanor, and theology, etc. were all changed radically. Lord, have mercy upon us.
I very much appreciate your thoughts on this. So, when you state: “I ask you who exactly is my bishop? It can’t be one who publicly professes error.” I agree that this must be true in the current state of obscuring emergency. So when I hear the voice of say, Bishop Sanborn or Bishop Kelly, I say there are my Bishops whether they recognize each other as such or not!
Question for Louie (and I think it is the real burning question here):
If the whole institution in Rome headed by Bergoglio is not the Holy Catholic Church, then where is the Holy Catholic Church?
Who or what body would you propose to elect a Pope at this juncture?
my2cents- I’d say that what you propose is about as likely as Bergoglio becoming Catholic.
I’d suggest that, theologically speaking, The Church has tread down some very suspect pathways even from the early centuries.
In particular, I’d suggest that its esteem of Augustine and much of his theology has been…well…poison and even deadly to faith and Tradition in the long term.
But that’s far more than can be addressed in a mere combox.
If the imposters are capable of deceiving the world in this ugly way, what else are the capable of?????
We live in a time where it seems we may not know where the Holy Catholic Church is, we only know where it is not. Tough days.
They are capable of tricking 1.2 billion people into believing that the New Order is the one holy Catholic and Apostolic Church founded by Jesus Christ even though they preach Freemasonic communism and they’re degenerate sodomite criminals. There are 1 billion protestants in the world also, so evidently we’re not really that hard to fool.
You people are sick. Everything is a conspiracy theory. You have these plans to fix everything. You, a few disgruntled nut jobs. If Sister Lucia was a fake, why did she tell JPII that the Consecration was not done the way Our Lady wished. She told him that over a few years. Not a very good fake if you ask me. They could have just as easily drugged the real one at a certain point to change her mind on things.
Sister Lucia was a real Saint with real humility. She would have done as she was told by her superiors. Why go to the trouble of setting up a fake version?
I’m waiting to see your plans put into motion. What’s it been? Sixty years? C’mon macho Tom I’m waiting to see you clean out the college of Cardinals and start things from scratch. What is your next move, 2cents? The vast majority of Catholics as you call them are waiting on little old you to do something. What’s the timetable?
It’s such a joke to come back here after a couple of years and see the same cracker jacks spouting the same BS. A real sick and pathetic joke. The SSPX is looking real good compared to you punks.
The SSPX has Parishes full of big families raising their kids in a traditional Catholic environment. I guess this is dragging on so long to give you kooks a chance to see the light. At this pace it may never end.
Traditionally Catholics follow the Pope, Rushintoit. If you believe that Benedict XVI was or is the Pope then you and the SSPX do not obey his authority when he says, “ In order to make this clear once again: until the doctrinal questions are clarified, the Society has no canonical status in the Church, and its ministers – even though they have been freed of the ecclesiastical penalty – do not legitimately exercise any ministry in the Church.” I do not wonder at all that this little demon Jorge likes SSPX to remain in this irregular state. The Devil loves disobedience. The Saints never disobeyed proper authority but +Lefebvre did and for this he is pronounced a Saint by the rad trad recognize and resist Matt and Marshall fanboys. Don’t do anything Rushintoit, remain in schism if you will but you aren’t going to be earning a crown in Heaven for that. CLOWN.
http://www.vatican.va/content/benedict-xvi/en/letters/2009/documents/hf_ben-xvi_let_20090310_remissione-scomunica.html
Well it’s just a combox so better to simply do an anonymous, undefined smear on a Saint and Doctor of the Church and leave it at that.
Maybe you’re a fake Sister Lucy. Send us a selfie right away. You’ll be judged on how well you pass along thirty year old rumors about the SSPX.
Rushintuit,
You didn’t reply to my statement. You stated that we should not judge.Bishop Athanasius, yet there are known bishops such as Dolan of N.Y., Cupich of Chicago, Tobin of N.J… who are pro-homosexual. There are also bishops who oppose direct teachings/commands of our Lord Jesus. Are you against Christians discerning/judging bishops and their actions, at a time when they are literally worshipping mother earth and demons at the Vatican?
Ahh, we can just feel the hate oozing from your rotten soul. You’re going to lose, of course, just like your father, the devil. So, keep it up if you like. We don’t cringe while waiting for you to pounce again. At this rate you’ll wind up in hell. That’s sad, but it will be YOUR problem.
@Rushintuit: Does the SSPX instruct you to come onto this blog and behave the way you do, or do you take it upon yourself? Although I have no reason to believe one way or the other, it would not surprise me that they do because John Salza and Robert Siscoe behaved the same way in many circumstances when engaging Catholics who disagreed with them. Why is this important? Because the SSPX SPONSORED John Salza and Robert Siscoe.
–
In contemplating your behavior, I am reminded of Galatians 5:
–
“I say then: Walk in the spirit: and you shall not fulfill the lusts of the flesh. For the flesh lusteth against the spirit: and the spirit against the flesh: For these are contrary one to another: so that you do not the things that you would. But if you are led by the spirit, you are not under the law. Now the works of the flesh are manifest: which are . . . ENMITIES, CONTENTIONS, EMULATIONS, WRATHS, QUARRELS, DISSENSIONS, SECTS, . . . and such like. Of the which I foretell you, as I have foretold to you, that they who do such things shall not obtain the kingdom of God. But the fruit of the Spirit is, CHARITY, JOY, PEACE, PATIENCE, BENIGNITY, GOODNESS, LONGANIMITY, MILDNESS, FAITH, MODESTY. . . Against such there is no law. And they that are Christ’s have crucified their flesh, with the vices and concupiscences.
–
If we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit. Let us not be made DESIROUS OF VAIN GLORY, PROVOKING ONE ANOTHER, envying one another.” [emphasis added]
–
The admonitions in Galatians 5 against the behavior you here manifest are so powerful and definitive, I would question the legitimacy of any institution claiming to be Catholic that instructs you to act in the manner you do.
Papal elections have taken on many forms over the centuries. There is nothing dogmatic in how a Pope is elected.
Your question is based on a fallacy. Just because no one here can point to where the Church is, does not mean the clowns in the Vatican must be the Church by default. That is essentially the proposition you pose with that question.
The problem with the question is the word “If”.
Oh’ the imbecilic, pseudo-intellectual fool as the belligerent heretic yet again demonstrating, as objectively, himself to be the unceasing protagonist of concise, heretical platitudes, the now infamous Tom A,
Know this Tom A, as it damns you to Hell, as you offer utter heresy as though it is true, when you write this:
“Papal elections have taken on many forms over the centuries. There is nothing dogmatic in how a Pope is elected.”
The now prevailing and unto the Last Day, Papal Election Law of Pope Pius XII, the final Vicar of Christ this world will ever know, as his Apostolic Constitution, “Vacantis Apostolicae Sedis”, offered with his full Apostolic Power of infallibility in teaching and governing, with the divine Gifts of, “truth and never failing faith”, as also, “the keys to bind and loose”. The son of his Prince Lucifer, Tom A, tacitly suggests that because a Vicar of Christ as the true Pope,— the singular man in the cosmos— who as exclusively can change his Papal Election Law, that same Papal Election Law which stands in the time in which it does, as, “Vacantis Apostolicae Sedis”, does now, as commanded by the Vicar of Christ, as Pope Pius XII in 1945, it is somehow NOT BINDING ON THE FAITHFUL. You cannot make-up this truly sophomoric idiocy which the hideous miscreant fool Tom A parlays as truth. “You will KNOW them by their fruits.”, as commanded by the Incarnate Son of God, Who at the same time commanded that an evil tree cannot bear good fruit and He commanded further that He will gather the evil trees and cast them into Hell. Tom A is objectively on his way to Hell as is anyone who assents to his deceptions as truth. Amen. Alleluia. You will be celebrated in Hell by the Blessed Virgin as Queen of Heaven and earth, as by all of the Angels and Saints. Amen. Alleluia.
Now and yet again as again and again, find copied below the Authoritative command as deemed by the last Vicar of Christ this world will know, Pope Pius XII, from his infallible, “Ad Apostolorum Principis”:
“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 Vatican Council commanded and as affirmed by Pope Pius XII in, “Ad Apostolorum Principis”, that we must offer the same free assent of faith to the Pontiff’s governance and discipline as we do his teaching on Faith and Morality, at the very pain of Hell in consequence of rejection. Reject any of this and you reject the entire Roman Catholic and Apostolic Faith, deFide, and you are on your very own sure as certain path to Hell with your Prince, Lucifer. I beg Almighty God your submission into the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church, unchanged as by one iota in Her foundation in this time as the End of Time, as in any other time, since conceived by the Incarnate Son of God and instituted by His Holy Ghost at Pentecost. Amen. In caritas.
The poor, poor hideous as heretical fool Tom A, again and again spews his heresy, as you wrote this:
” Just because no one here can point to where the Church is,…”.
You poor, poor, non-Catholic miscreant on your very own personal road to an eternity in Hell with your Prince. Of course you cannot, “point to where the Church is,…”, because you simply do not hold the divine and Catholic Faith. This reality itself screams from the highest mountaintop as res ipsa loquitur, you blasphemous, imbecilic, sophomoric moron. “Satis Cognitum”, teaches infallibly that those who do not hold the Faith will be as worthless, sterile sand, as they do not hold the Faith, they are not in the Church, regardless your claim in fiat, which you can only remain blinded to thus. “You will KNOW them by their fruits”. Your fruits are as rotten poison Tom A, you pseudo-intellectual fool. Amen. Alleluia. And here as again, the infallible teaching of, “Satis Cognitum”, which damns the heretical miscreant, as Tom A:
“And so Hilary: “Christ teaching from the ship signifies that those who are outside the Church can never grasp the divine teaching; for the ship typifies the Church where the word of life is deposited and preached. Those who are outside are like sterile and worthless sand: they cannot comprehend” (Comment. in Matt. xiii., n. I). ”
As you simply cannot comprehend where the Mystical Body of Christ is, you blasphemous, sacrilegious fool Tom A, you simply cannot hold the divine and Catholic Faith, as res ipsa loquitur. You just claimed as, “Yes”, to the question of whether you go to, “mass”, while at one and the same time you claim that you cannot prove, because you do not know in your blindness, where the Catholic Church is, while at once you claim to receive Her holy Sacraments, while you objectively posit that you don’t know where the Church is to receive those same sacraments, which you freely choose to receive, thus damning you to Hell with the mortal sin of sacrilege. Amen. Alleluia. Your utter stupidity as in contradiction is so profound, that you cannot glimpse just how utterly stupid that you are, as your intellect is blackened by the power of God, as by your very own willful as personal reception of, “the operation of error to believe lying”, which the Apostle commanded would damn the soul who receives it to Hell. Amen. God have mercy on your putrid soul Tom A. In caritas.
I completely agree.
Electing the Pope of Rome, or any bishop for that matter, is really nothing more than an act of church administration. It certainly isn’t “an act of the Holy Ghost” as some people would like to believe.
I would suggest that we all are going to have to discard the hyperpapalist model which the institutional Church been laboring under for so long now. It’s become a juggernaut, and it is obliterating Tradition as well as faith within individuals.
In other words, what worked at one time no longer works anymore. People are have to think creatively and on their feet if Apostolic Tradition and faith in Jesus is going to carry on.
But yet
Just to be clear, I agree with you, Tom A.
Tom A- just to be clear I wasn’t suggesting that I personally think that the whole edifice headed by Jorge Bergoglio locates in Vatican City can legitimately call itself the Holy Catholic Church.
I was simply putting the question “where is it?” out there. I don’t presume to know the answer clearly myself.
And of course, you perverse, devilish, non-Catholic, heretical, pseudo-intellectual fool, as so called, “NobisQuoquePeccatoribus”. You, also on your most sure and certain personal, as wide road to Hell, where you too will serve your Prince in unspeakable misery and torment into eternity, should you die in such a state as you now evidence yourself to most certainly be; as Jesus the Christ commanded: “You will KNOW them by their fruits.”. Your fruits are putrid as they are profoundly evil, you miscreant slave of Lucifer and Jesus the Christ commanded that He would gather the evil trees, as you objectively evidence yourself to be by your fruit, and cast them into Hell. Beg the forgiveness of God as you blaspheme Him. I pray that you do. In caritas.
And of course you don’t, “know the answer”, yourself, as your fruits objectively evidence that you could not know, as you edify an adherence to, while at once being a proponent of the, “religion of man”, you godless, miscreant heretic. What you, “personally think”, is objectively leading you to Hell. Amen. It is impossible to objectively evidence the rotten fruit that you do, you pseudo-intellectual, imbecile, while at one and the same time holding the divine and Catholic Faith, which you actually as literally evidence your profound hatred of, as you blaspheme the Faith, as you affront the divine, living, perpetual as unchanging and unending, Ordinary and Universal Magisterium, on your certain path to Hell, as extra ecclesium nulla salus, you heretic. “You will KNOW them by their fruits.”, commands the Incarnate Son of God. You are known heathen. I pray you convert to the divine and Catholic Faith or be damned to Hell with your Prince. In caritas.
The Secret Of La Salette “The Church will be in eclipse, the world will be in dismay.”
In Caritas: What precise error or errors did Tom A and NQP profess to cause you such consternation? I have an idea, but I am not absolutely sure so I would appreciate it very much if you pointed them out with precision. It would help me avoid being wooly-headed in the future when thinking on these matters.
–
One other thing, young people have an abbreviation that they use when they find it too tedious to read a “wall of words” post like some of yours are – “TL;DR”. TL;DR means too long; didn’t read. Sometimes the problem results from not using paragraphs to set apart and separate your ideas. In any case, I look forward to your reply.
St. Cyprian- young people have another abbreviation they use as well: DNFTT.
Just a suggestion.
@Rushintuit: In questioning your behavior I was motivated to accuse you and whoever you are working for as being motivated by filthy lucre. Since I have no first hand knowledge of that fact I minded my tongue. I do not accuse you now. I DO question the motives of those like Chris Ferrara, John Salza and in turn the SSPX based on these developments described by Ann Barnhardt:
–
https://www.barnhardt.biz/2020/02/20/qa-ann-i-keep-hearing-that-antipapacies-can-only-be-determined-after-the-putative-pope-in-question-is-dead-so-why-bother-worrying-about-this-now/
–
I always suspected that the effectively heretical/minority/anachronistic position adopted by the SSPX regarding the papacy in case of an heretical claimant was A FILTHY MARKETING PLOY. It has nothing to do with what the Church actually teaches! The SSPX is in competition with other Catholic congregations that immediately recognized the questionable status of the NO ”church” and there are limited funds available to those entities and the SSPX to finance their activities. This is not confirmation, but it raises serious suspicions that the whole “sedevacantists are heretics, protestants, apostates etc.” effected by lay spokesmen of the SSPX like Salza and Siscoe have always been about money, and to make sure that all the money that is up for grabs in this situation flows in one direction, and one direction only – towards the SSPX and those in league with the SSPX. If this is true, you people are thoroughly disgusting!
Dear St. Cyprian,
The reality as it is that you ask these questions does not bode well for you, as these heresies scream out as res ipsa loquitur. Instead then, find copied and pasted what you wrote above:
“Witness the spectacle of a shameless non-Catholic occupying the highest office in the Church who not only refuses to punish those in the hierarchy who spread error and division, but also participates in the spreading of error and division himself. What are the faithful to make of this?”
You must know as with apodictic certitude that what you wrote is heresy. It is a matter deFide, since Authoritatively defined in the Fourth Session of the Vatican Council, 18 July,1870, that Blessed Peter as in his Successors received the divine Gifts of, “TRUTH and NEVER FAILING FAITH”, which means it is utter heresy to suggest that an heretic can occupy the Papacy. You parlay absolute as utter contradiction as though it could possibly have being, when you wrote this–“a shameless non-Catholic occupying the highest office in the Church…”. These words you utter simply rock the cosmos in unmitigated absurdity. So called, St. Cyprian, suggests that a, “non-Catholic”, as one who simply DOES NOT hold the divine and Catholic Faith, is therefore not a member of the Catholic Church, deFide, actually now as St. Cyprian posits, “is occupying the highest office in the Church…” Please help us all understand now, St. Cyprian, how an human person who does not belong to the Catholic Church as you properly reason, while at ONE AND THE SAME TIME, this same non-Catholic person, HOLDS the HIGHEST OFFICE in that same Catholic Church, to which he simply does not belong? How is that possible in this cosmos in which we were created, ex nihilo, dear St. Cyprian???
Perhaps now you can glimpse just why you simply CANNOT SEE TOM A’S PROFOUND HERESY, as time and time and time and again he spews his rotten fruit. I pray that you receive the divine and Catholic Faith as freely, before you draw your final breath. In caritas.
In caritas: You accuse me of professing heresy. If you read the portion you reproduced from my writing it ended with the sentence: “What are the faithful to make of this?”
–
From that sentence alone it is clear that I was not taking a definitive position proclaiming that a non-Catholic could occupy the Papal office, but rather raising a doubt about that very fact!
–
Since you are so quick to jump to the worst possible conclusions about people – even to the point of positively representing what they say – I repeat here the portion of Galatians 5 I reproduced elsewhere in this thread for your benefit. I hope you take it to heart:
–
“I say then: Walk in the spirit: and you shall not fulfill the lusts of the flesh. For the flesh lusteth against the spirit: and the spirit against the flesh: For these are contrary one to another: so that you do not the things that you would. But if you are led by the spirit, you are not under the law. Now the works of the flesh are manifest: which are . . . ENMITIES, CONTENTIONS, EMULATIONS, WRATHS, QUARRELS, DISSENSIONS, SECTS, . . . and such like. Of the which I foretell you, as I have foretold to you, that they who do such things shall not obtain the kingdom of God. But the fruit of the Spirit is, CHARITY, JOY, PEACE, PATIENCE, BENIGNITY, GOODNESS, LONGANIMITY, MILDNESS, FAITH, MODESTY. . . Against such there is no law. And they that are Christ’s have crucified their flesh, with the vices and concupiscences.
–
If we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit. Let us not be made DESIROUS OF VAIN GLORY, PROVOKING ONE ANOTHER, envying one another.” [emphasis added]
Judging from the photo at the top of the article, Bishop Schneider appears to be having a “deer in the headlights” moment.
Oh’ St. Cyprian,
You must know and again, that heresy is heresy without any shadow of a doubt; as you profess doubt once and again in your reply to me, evidencing your, “theological speculation”, a question which you definitively posit, about that which has now been unquestionable as a positive Magisterial reality as it is, deFide thus, since 1870. “You will know them by their fruits.”, as commanded by the Incarnate Son of God, as you parlay your accusation of me as here: “Since you are so quick to jump to the worst possible conclusions about people…”. Amen. Alleluia. Your fruits speak objectively, as res ipsa loquitur St. Cyprian, as do all miserable creatures’, while you as all but all who breathe today, look at them more affectively than you do objectively, as is commanded by Jesus the Christ. Amen. Anyone as everyone who holds any iota of any shadow of any doubt as is evidenced in opinion per se, or in commentary as you’ve now written once and edified yet again, which at all puts into question settled Magisterial questions which are as thus matters deFide, is an heretic, pure and simple. The divine and Catholic Faith is a perfect Gift both freely given and completely undeserved. Any human person evidences in his fruit as perfectly and objectively, as commanded by the Incarnate Son of God, whether they hold this Gift or they do not. “Let your yes be yes and your no be no, anything else is evil”, commands Jesus the Christ, our Lord and God. Amen. Alleluia. “You are either with Me or you are against Me.” There is no, “possibly”, nor is there any, “maybe”, poor, poor St. Cyprian. Again, you wrote this: “What are the faithful to make of this?” One who actually holds the divine and Catholic Faith knows the answer to your question without posing the question, deFide, as there can be no question, speculation, debate, discussion contra, and etc. about any as all matters which have been defined and settled thus by the Vicar of Christ, deFide, and at the pain of Hell in any denial. Amen. Alleluia.
And you wrote this: “From that sentence alone it is clear that I was not taking a definitive position proclaiming that a non-Catholic could occupy the Papal office, but rather raising a doubt about that very fact!”
And again to edify your utter heresy St. Cyprian, look now at this part of your OBJECTIVE statement, which speaks as res ipsa loquitur, which means that it needs NO FURTHER INTERPRETATION by you or anyone else. You have written what you have written. Your internal contradiction and affective distortion of the intellective operation of your soul have nothing to do with any other’s reading what you have written, as this thing itself does speak. And again as commanded by the God-Man: “You will KNOW THEM by their FRUITS.” What is it that you deny about what the Incarnate Son of God has commanded about the creature KNOWING the other in his midst by knowing what he objectively offers as his fruit? Know that you deny God when you deny that you can be known by your fruits, so called, St. Cyprian. So now look to what you wrote as here: “”From that sentence alone it is clear that I was not taking a definitive position….” Your statement objectively as definitively, as for all other eyes to see, states that you are in doubt ( “…I was not taking a definitive position…” ) about that which can have no doubt, if one holds the divine and Catholic Faith. For pristine clarity now, read these words of yours: “I was not taking a definitive position…”. You plainly stated that which a 10 year old would definitively comprehend, St. Cyprian, “I was NOT taking a DEFINITIVE position…”, on that which one can ONLY BE DEFINITIVE ABOUT, if he holds the divine and Catholic Faith. You cannot both hold the Faith and know with apodictic certitude that Jorge Bergoglio simply has not one iota of possibility in the cosmos of being the Catholic Pope, while at the same time have ANY SHADDOW OF ANY DOUBT ABOUT THAT apodictic certitude. Amen. Alleluia. You evidence internal contradiction that rocks the cosmos, Amen. What do you not see here, as your intellect is darkened by receiving, “the operation of error to believe lying”? This is very tedious St. Cyprian but necessary to break it down for you to see, by your reception of the grace of God alone. Amen.
Lastly for now, you wrote this:
“Since you are so quick to jump to the worst possible conclusions about people – even to the point of positively representing what they say”
The only, “conclusions to jump to”, are those which you objectively evidence in your language. What is human language, St. Cyprian? It is the operation which Almighty God gave us, in order to communicate that which is in our intellect to the other. Pure and simple. When you write language you communicate to the other in your midst what you are thinking, your doubts, and what you claim to know, whether it is rightly as properly reasoned or not. You have no power over this reality as it is poor St. Cyprian. Amen. I don’t, “positively represent what you say”, as I don’t control your keyboard for you. You, “positively represent what you say”, and if you deny this, you deny Jesus the Christ in His command: “You will KNOW THEM by their FRUITS.” Amen. Alleluia. You now stand corrected St. Cyprian, by the grace of God alone. All that you have offered contra to that which has been written by this perfectly miserable wretch now writing you, is a soft ad hominem attack of me. You have not proven anything that was written to be other than that which was written. May Almighty God shower you with His infinite Beatitude St. Cyprian. In caritas.
Now I understand. The ironically-named “In Caritas” is about as charitable as a ball-peen hammer. Do you find that humorous? You’re not supposed to laugh at your own jokes, especially since you have been using the same old tired joke for months.
–
If St. Paul had foreseen such a one as you, he would have added “prolixity” to his list of the works of the flesh!
@The Ironically-name “In Caritas”:
–
P.S.: TL;DR
@The Ironically-named “In Caritas”:
–
P.P.S.: Since it is clear to me now that your “shtick” is not meant to be taken seriously, I recommend that you reconsider your approach.
–
Although your prolixity may have been mildly humorous at the first instance, it is now tiresome, boorish and overbearing.
–
Since your prolixity is in all likelihood an ingrained “bad habit”, I suggest you make a lifetime-commitment to strive for brevity in all your writings from this moment onward.
–
Brevity, as they say, is the soul of wit! Who knows, after a few years of striving for brevity, others might find your writing occasionally humorous!
Poor, poor so called St. Cyprian,
Now obstinate in your heresy, you pathetic fool. Do you happen to know, “A Simple Man”, as you write much like him, you jingoistic fool, adhering to heresy, as you St. Cyprian deem it to be, “Catholic”, you illiterate fool. You claim repetition and yet you remain perfectly blind on your sure as certain path to Hell with your Prince, Lucifer, you miscreant, pseudo-intellectual heretic. The true Church sees heresy as a worse crime than murder you imbecile and so your point, as you had this to say, purely objective evidence of all that you have at your disposal is the ad hominem attack of the other, evidencing the intellect and demeanor of a spoiled child–heretic:
“Now I understand. The ironically-named “In Caritas” is about as charitable as a ball-peen hammer. Do you find that humorous? You’re not supposed to laugh at your own jokes, especially since you have been using the same old tired joke for months.”
This is the proof offered by so called, “St. Cyprian”, that he is not an heretic. You poor, poor miserable moron remaining on the ride road to Hell, as the Incarnate Son of God commands: “You will know them by their fruits.” Do you deny this Truth, so called, “St. Cyprian”, you heretic? You think that the proof of the divine Magisterium, as perfectly evidencing your heresy is a joke, you belligerent, imbecilic fool. Beg Almighty God His forgiveness you pseudo-intellectual heretic. I pray that you do. In caritas.
@The Ironically-named “In Caritas”:
–
You’re making progress already! Work on using paragraphs next!
–
Until you do, though, I have to repeat: TL;DR!
St, Cyprian, a few words about Ann Barnhardt:
Her entire ideology seems to be based on several points, as far as I’m able to tell from reading the things she posts on her blog:
1) The notion that there is a “Petrine Office” which has a supernatural character.
2) The related but distinct notion that there is a “Petrine Ministry” with a likewise supernatural character.
3) The assertion that Ratzinger is a Catholic
4) The insistence that Ratzinger’s resignation was “partial” and thus “invalid”.
Regarding points one and two, they’re highly dubious because there is little in Scripture or broader Tradition to offer evidence that either the “office” and “ministry” are real things supernaturally bestowed by Jesus. The common argument for their existence is based the record in Matthew’s Gospel in which Jesus renames Simon “Peter”, but this is a weak argument at best. It is true, based on historical record, that the Pope of Rome has enjoyed a sort of primacy within the Church down the centuries. But in no wise does that point to some supernatural “Office” and “Ministry”.
As far as point three is concerned, Ratzinger was and has remained one of the vanguard of Nouvelle Théologie/neo-Modernism before, during and after the Second Vatican Council. His entire life’s work is a testament to this fact. It’s difficult to see, at least from my limited perspective, how one can honestly call Ratzinger truly Catholic. Traditionalist Catholics often point to his motu proprio “Summorum Pontificum” as a testament to him “upholding Tradition” or similar. But all “Summorum…” did was muddy the waters, so to speak. On one hand Ratzinger states in that document that the New Missal and “Liturgy of The Hours” is of “equal parity and value” with the 1962 Roman Missal and Breviary. But then in the same document he names the 1962 Missal and Breviary an “Extraordinary Form” and places detailed and severe restrictions upon their use. That should confound anyone with any understanding of logic.
As far as point four is concerned, if one has to truly be Catholic to even initially assume the Roman Papacy, I cannot see how he was legitimately a Pope in the first place and therefore able to resign something which he never truly held. There does seem to have been more than a little maneuvering, politicking and shenanigans surrounding Ratzinger’s resignation and Bergoglio’s election. But that sort of thing is nothing new in church history, and ultimately it’s all beside the point.
The long and short here is that, with all due respect to Ms. Barnhardt because she seems to be a very earnest and honest individual who does otherwise manifestly have faith in Jesus, she does not know what she’s talking about.
@NQP: I should have put a disclaimer that her positions on several matters are dubious.
–
What I was more concerned by is she nonetheless apparently confirmed a suspicion I have long entertained – that Ferrara, Salza and the SSPX use their positions on the current crisis in the “Church” as part of a MARKETING PLAN that is more concerned about raising money than in properly instructing the faithful. Witness in the story she recounted how concerned they were that a $1 million dollar donation only be placed under their control, and they apparently used accusations of “sedevacantism” to clear the field of competitors for that donation.
–
The apparent thrust of their efforts is one of control – that Catholics who have reached a point of clarity where they can no longer attend mass within the diocesan structure in good conscience only have only one alternative – the SSPX. All other Chapels and independent entities are either “protestant”; “heretics”; “apostates”, etc. They use accusations of “sedevacantism” as a boogeyman to keep those who attend SSPX chapels in line.
–
My suspicions about their fundamental dishonesty arose from contending with them on the issues. Having been accused of “declaring the Pope an apostate and seeking to bind the Church to my decision” by them only focused my attention on the issues and helped me to better understand them. A byproduct of my education is I came to understand that Ferarra and Salza have never had consistent positions on the issues, and it was particularly infuriating to see them change their positions after having been corrected without ever admitting they were wrong or giving credit to who corrected them.
–
One other concern that AB hit on in her post is that Salza and Ferarra have adopted positions that PRESERVE THE STATUS QUO. The status quo is harming the faithful every hour of every day as false shepherds lead them astray. To see those who advertise themselves as being in opposition to the Conciliar Church satisfied with the status quo really caused me to wonder. Are they really all they claim to be, or are they controlled opposition? Since we are contending against principalities and powers, and the prince of this world, would it be surprising that the enemy has also managed to subvert the opposition to the Conciliar Church?
https://sspx.org/en/news-events/news/support-sspx-end-year-donation-tips-53689
Who is Chris Joliat? and why does the SSPX need him? He is a part of their alleged “rebranding”?
Yes, it is terrible to see the corruption of Faith and Reason in people I had looked to for some leadership up to perhaps 2015. And to whom many still listen and look for leadership. The utter contempt for all the souls being led to damnation right before our eyes by pertinacious public heretics and enemies of Holy God and the One Holy Catholic Faith whom such people insist be looked to as the pope, the earthly vicar of Christ, the one who defends and spreads the Holy Faith and strengthens his brother bishops in the Faith. There are no words to adequately describe the horror of this diabolical disorientation. Dear God, grant us the necessary graces to do thy Holy Will and persevere in the Holy Faith in this evil time of Apostasy “from the top down”. Viva Cristo Rey!
St. Cyprian, I have often thought that perhaps the purpose of SSPX was to preserve the status quo. To keep the natives peacefully penned into a little popeless corral. How otherwise would Catholics sit back for decades and allow a vacant seat in Rome, it would be entirely unacceptable without placating with deception. Honestly, I’m feeling the same about every refuge that Catholics have fled to including sede Mass centers. There should be no fleeing, there should be a conclave. Honestly, I hate to see war but there should be a war over this. If there was ever a just war this would be a just cause. This Benevacantism is CLEARLY a ruse to keep the status quo. Some men I really like and respect like Frank Walker and Mahound’s Paradise have jumped right on this and I’m just sitting in awe going these men can’t possibly want to maintain the status quo. Some of these guys I thought were the good guys just HAVE to be actually good guys. How? Why? Why have they joined team keep the Catholics shut down and maintain the status quo; NO Pope for you?
St. Cyprian- I agree that she has pointed out some things which seem to be awry with The Fatima Center and the SSPX. I’m more concerned with her so-called “thesis” though.
That being said, I’ve always thought that the very fact that there even is something called “The Fatima Center” is curious, to say the least. Sometimes I wonder if those who belong to it place more faith in the alleged appearances of the Blessed Mother at Fatima than they do in Her Son Jesus.
As far as the SSPX is concerned, I’m confident there are more than a few priests within that organization who aren’t buying the whole “Traditionalist” ideology/gnosticism and branding which seems to be the outward face of the organization these days. I’m also confident that there are some priests who reject Bergoglio as Pope and therefore do not commemorate him in the Roman Canon when they offer Mass.
BTW, just to reiterate with regard to the “In caritas” character who posts on here: DNFTT.
Cyprian,
Barnhardt has publicly professed that Ratzinger is a heretic: https://www.barnhardt.biz/2017/01/16/cutting-the-crap-31-questions-and-blunt-answers-about-the-catholic-church-and-antipope-bergoglio/
xxxx
Question 9: Isn’t Pope Benedict XVI a heretic for doing what he has done, and thus no longer the Pope either?
Pope Benedict XVI is indeed a heretic and is now the worst pope in the history of The Church, BUT this makes his papacy ILLICIT, but still VALID. It is absolutely essential to understand the difference between LICAITY and VALIDITY. At this point I would refer you to an excellent essay by Fr. Brian Harrison, penned in ARSH 2000, and thus completely unprejudiced with regards to current events.
“A Heretical Pope Would Govern The Church Illicitly But Validly”
Question 10: But wouldn’t this same concept of “illicit yet valid” apply to Bergoglio as well?
Absolutely not, because Bergoglio’s election was itself invalid. The question of Bergoglio’s heresy and apostasy is moot with regards to the papacy because Jorge Bergoglio is not now and never has been the Pope.
Question 11: So if a pope who is a heretic is illicit yet valid, that means that the sedevacantists have been wrong all along?
Yes. Pope John XXIII was almost certainly a Freemason. Paul VI was a raging sodomite and pro-Communist. John Paul II was a phenomenologist and kissed the satanic tome of the musloids, the koran, and his so-called “Theology of the Body” is deeply heretical. Pope Benedict’s metaphysics are so warped as to be not even properly called “metaphysics”, revolving around “meaning” and not “being”. And yet, all were/are popes, valid yet illicit.
xxxx
Harrison’s “valid yet illicit Papacy” was refuted theologically and canonically unsound years ago by Novus Ordo Watch (and others probably), so her particular reliance on that thesis for her position is somewhat interesting.
Furthermore, there are numerous posts of hers where she says that the Novus Ordo rite must be destroyed; yet, she has also advised people that if a Latin Mass (Indult, naturally) is physically unavailable for them, then they should still go to worship Jesus Christ at a “valid yet illicit” N.O. mass. Per this interview with Pat Archbold (https://www.barnhardt.biz/2016/08/18/the-novus-ordo-must-be-exterminated-barnhardt-cmr-interview-part-5/):
xxxx
PA: I used to think that a gradual restoration of the sacred in the Mass was possible, maybe even preferred. For the most part, I have abandoned the reform of the reform as an end. If anything, reforms to the Novus Ordo are good only if they prepare and lead people back the TLM. In your mind, is the Novus Ordo reformable and how do you deal with multiple generations that have no sense of the sacred or what has been lost?
AB: Omnipresent preface: Most Novus Ordo Masses are valid and the Eucharist is confected therein. HOWEVER, almost all Novus Ordo Masses are ILLICIT in that they fail to follow the rubrics prescribed for the Novus Ordo. There are probably fewer than 100 parishes in the entire world regularly LICITLY celebrating the Novus Ordo Mass according to its own rules. Further, ALL Novus Ordo Masses are COMPROMISED, meaning that because the Novus Ordo was conceived in malice as a means of attacking and destroying the Church from its very core, the Liturgy, namely by hiding and obscuring the reality of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass and the Real Presence of Jesus Christ, Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity, in the Eucharist, the Novus Ordo in and of itself is a cancer, and cancers must be cut out.
xxxx
Then, later on, she says this:
xxxx
AB: The Novus Ordo is valid. Our Lord, in His infinite, unfathomable, condescending love still comes, ignored, denied, abused and despised, just so the souls there present will have the chance to fall to their knees upon realizing what His own have done to Him, beg forgiveness and console Him. Because God Almighty wants to be consoled by us. The mind reels.
The Novus Ordo is also the single most compelling proof set of the indefectibility of the Church. Satan and his Freemasonic, Communist and sodomite toadies, infiltrating the Church all the way to the core, could not fully invalidate the Mass. But to tell ourselves that we should be “okay” with the Novus Ordo is presuming upon God’s mercy. I cannot tell myself that my sins are “okay” because I know that Christ in His infinite mercy will always forgive me in the Sacrament of Confession. My sins are not “okay” precisely because of Our Lord’s infinite mercy and loving availability to me in the confessional. Likewise, the validity of the Novus Ordo and Our Lord’s presence upon the altar in the Eucharist therein is PRECISELY WHY the Novus Ordo is not “okay” and should be abrogated tomorrow – because it was conceived in malice by evil men in league with satan to hide and obscure the very thing that it is – the Sacrifice of Calvary. To take His love for granted to the point of subjugating it to human respect is simply wicked, and belies a massive failure in faith and charity.
xxxx
Now, let’s recall that she’s saying **all of this** about a rite universally promulgated; as such, if it had truly come from the Catholic Church, it is a matter of faith and dogma that it cannot be deadly or poisonous to the faithful; to assert that a universal rite promulgated by the Church can in and of itself be harmful to the Catholic faith has been condemned as heresy.
In summary, her conceptions regarding validity and illicitness has led her to conclude that John XXIII thru BXVI were Popes despite being heretical, and that the Novus Ordo rite still can result in a valid Eucharist despite the rite itself being intrinsically Modernist and malicious in conception.
If there’s a word I can use to summarize the entirety of her current position, it’s “self-defeating”.
If I might offer something for discussion here-
The underlying problem with all these “theses”, whether it is that of Ms. Barnhardt, that of the formal sedevacantists, that of the R&R adherents, or that of the Novus Ordites is this:
They all subscribe, whether in plain language or implicitly, to what I call a hyperpapalist ideology.
I can summarize this hyperpapalist ideology thus. It is hardly exhaustive, mind you:
-The notion of the Pope as “Vicar of Christ”
-The notion of the Pope enjoying personal, supernatural “infallibility” when speaking on matters of faith and morals.
-The notion of the Pope possessing a “Petrine Office” and “Ministry” which both have a supernatural/metaphysical character.
-The notion of the Roman Catholic Church being “indefectible”.
One is hard pressed to find genuine historical or Scriptural evidence to confirm any of this.
All that historical record and Apostolic Tradition gives us is that the bishop of Rome has enjoyed a sort of esteem and primacy within the larger Catholic Church even from the earliest days.
If indeed our faith in Jesus is based on real historical events, real historical witness, and real historical records, we have to rely on that first to understand what exactly the papacy of Rome truly is.
Our point of departure cannot be theological speculations such as the hyperpapalist ideology.
In other words, NobisQuoquePeccatoribus, is an Eastern Orthodox Schismatic.
Actually, the Eastern Orthodox by and large subscribe to what I would call a “patriarchical” ideology.
It is different in some key respects from the “hyperpapalist” ideology, but nonetheless just as problematic.
So, NobisQuoquePeccatoribus, if you’re not an Eastern Orthodox Schismatic and you’re not Catholic, what brand of heretic are you?
Some more remarks about hyperpaplism and the Eastern Orthodox patriarchal ideology:
The Eastern Orthodox ideology largely assumes the existence of the patriarchal structure of the church which came into existence only after several hundred years after Christ. Therefore it’s just as problematic as the Catholic ideology of hyperpapalism. It too took a long time to come into existence. As far as the latter, a better argument regarding the nature of the Roman church’s historical primacy would be along these lines:
The high regard for the Roman church in the first centuries was based on what was regarded as its authoritative link to Apostolic Tradition, preeminent among the churches. The reason for this–which is explicit in the literature of the first 2-3 centuries is the presence of the two apostles: Peter and Paul. BOTH are continually mentioned in the early centuries as the basis for the respect in which the tradition of the Roman church is held. It’s only later that the “Tu es Petrus” found in the Gospel according to Matthew argument comes in. Even then, it took many centuries to arrive at anything even approximating the modern hyperpapalist position.
One can see the survival of this earlier attitude in the Roman liturgy in the repeated phrase “the holy apostles Peter and Paul” which reflects the Roman church’s reliance upon the the prestige of the TWO apostles–one the rock on which the church was founded centuries before, the other the author of so much of the NT as well as the hero of the longest book, Acts.
-Confiteor: sanctis Apóstolis Petro et Paulo, ómnibus Sanctis (…the holy Apostles Peter and Paul and all the Saints…)
-Suscipe: et sanctórum Apostolórum Petri et Pauli, et istórum et ómnium Sanctórum (…the holy Apostles Peter and Paul, and all the Saints…)
-Communicantes: et beatórum Apostolórum ac Mártyrum tuórum, Petri et Pauli, Andréæ, Iacóbi, Ioánnis, Thomæ, Iacóbi, Philíppi, Bartholomaei, Matthaei, Simónis et Thaddaei: Lini, Cleti, Cleméntis, Xysti, Cornélii, Cypriáni, Lauréntii, Chrysógoni, Ioánnis et Pauli, Cosmæ et Damiáni: et ómnium Sanctórum tuórum (… the blessed Apostles and Martyrs Peter and Paul, Andrew, James, John, Thomas, James, Philip, Bartholomew, Matthew, Simon, and Thaddeus; Linus, Cletus, Clement, Sixtus, Cornelius, Cyprian, Lawrence, Chrysogonus, John and Paul, Cosmas and Damian, and of all Thy Saints …)
Libera nos: cum beátis Apóstolis tuis Petro et Paulo, atque Andréa, et ómnibus Sanctis (…of the holy Apostles, Peter and Paul, and of Andrew, and of all the Saints…)
In the Novus Ordo, one will only find that combination “Peter and Paul” in the New Order if EP I is used. In other words, for most practical purposes, the historical sense of the faithful has been eliminated in this as it has in many other ways.
I suggest that, in line with what Aquinas and Cajetan and others say, a rejection of tradition removes the primacy of Rome and its Pope. This primacy, however, was never regarded in the first centuries as complete power of jurisdiction and to define and “develop” doctrine. This doesn’t leave us with any clear doctrine much less dogma regarding the papacy or the general institutional structure of the church, indeed, but it may lead us back to a better basis for understanding and structuring the institutional church.
Nobis, Are you Dr. Peter Kwasniewski?
2Vermont- for the record, I’m not Dr. Kwasniewski.
Well, thanks for replying to that question. Are you an Old Catholic? It’s pretty clear that you are not Catholic considering some of your comments, such as believing that the Roman Catholic Church is not indefectible.
St. Cyprian,
I noticed not all the twelve fruits of the Holy Spirit were listed in your counsel above to In Caritas’ uncharitable rants. I don’t think it was intentional but I would like to add them. Of the twelve fruits, Continence and Chastity were missing.
The twelve fruits of the Holy Spirit are, Charity, Joy, Peace, Patience, Longanimity, Goodness, Benignity, Mildness, Fidelity, Modesty, Continence and Chastity.
Please notice, for all those who might be interested, that Chastity and Continence are two distinct separate fruits of the Holy Spirit.although. Chastity is being pure in thought, word, and deed typically in all matters pertaining to human sexuality whether married or not. Continence on the other hand is specifically pertaining to the sex act itself. Continence is the act of refraining from the conjugal act or refraining from performing the sex act ( if anyone, should God forbid, think sex outside of marriage is not included) whether one is married or not.
2Vermont- To answer your question, I don’t identify as an Old Catholic. Nor have I ever affiliated myself with any such sect.
From what I know about those sects which identify as such, I can say however that I sympathize with the rejection of papal infallibility which was a large factor in their historical origin.
Otherwise, I personally don’t identify as an Old Catholic. Those sects are so splintered and shady and in more cases than not have become doctrinally off-the-wall.
2Vermont- regarding the institutional Roman Catholic Church being “indefectible”:
I would argue that at this current time with Bergoglio and the post-Vatican II changes to liturgy, doctrine, theology as well as the sheer rampant and systemic moral corruption within the institutional Roman Catholic Church, the burden of proof rests upon those who would maintain that it HASN’T in fact defected from Tradition.
As far as I can see, it has defected.
So, Nobis, exactly what religion do you identify with? Do you identify as anything? If you do not believe that the Catholic Church is indefectible, then you can’t be Catholic.
I don’t believe that the institutional Roman Catholic Church, or any other rite for that matter, is indefectible.
But the Roman Catholic Church is just that: a human institution which, or at least should, preserve, protect and transmit Apostolic Tradition.
Our real bedrock of being faithful in not in some mere institution or formal structure made by the hands of man, good as it might be, but in the Tradition which comes from The Apostles who knew and witnessed Jesus and actually carried out what He told them to do.
Ecclesiastical structures are good only inasmuch as they preserve the historical truth which is their foundation. When that foundation gives way- that is to say when the genuine historical truth about Jesus: Who He claimed to BE and what He actually did and said- is either forgotten or rejected, the structure becomes unsound and begins to collapse.
That’s what we’re witnessing now with the Roman Catholic Church. It WAS once thought that this was unthinkable because at one time the Roman Church and Pope actually DID more or less preserve the historical truth about Jesus in a pure form (which is to say the purest form of Apostolic Tradition). But now the unthinkable is coming to pass: V2, false ecumenism, neo-Modernism, Popes who promulgate a liturgy and a notion of faith which is alien to that Tradition…and of course Bergoglio.
You still haven’t responded to the question: what religion do you subscribe to? Which church?
If the Church in Rome that calls itself Catholic has actually defected from the Catholic faith, then the claim of “indefectability” is meaningless. Traditionalists would have to fall back on the “invisible Church of true believers”, which is exactly the same argument/ idea the Protestant uses to justify what they do… Sounds like a conundrum to me….I had one online host tell me “the Church is just obscured for now” … which seems to make the mark of “oneness” implying “visibility” a lie also… one definition has :
….”The “oneness” of the Church is also visible. As Catholics, we are united in our Creed and our other teachings, the celebration of the sacraments, and the hierarchical structure …..” I’m not seeing the “unity” here…
2Vermont- I’m a Catholic of the Roman Rite.
I do not attend the Novus Ordo Mass, and I do not recognize the authority of either Bergoglio or any bishop or priest who actively, persistently promulgates and practices the New Order.
I would graciously like to stick to the matter at hand and not engage in twenty questions about who I am, or who you are for that matter. Frankly, I’m not interested in who you are as a person. I’m far more interested in having an honest, open and intelligent discussion about The Church, faith, doctrine and Tradition.
Mr. V gives us all the privilege of using his website and bandwidth for honest discussion about matters pertinent to what he posts on his blog. It is not a forum for personal disclosure much less personal attack. To use it that way is an abuse of a privilege. So let’s keep it im-personal as possible.
Thank you.
“….”The “oneness” of the Church is also visible. As Catholics, we are united in our Creed and our other teachings, the celebration of the sacraments, and the hierarchical structure …..”
mpoulin- I agree with what you say here with the exception of “and the hierarchical structure”…if by structure you mean the entire edifice of the Roman Church.
While this institutional structure certainly isn’t a bad thing per se, and it can and has been a good thing, it isn’t remotely fundamental to faith.
Nobis…..But it is important to know “who you are” in relationship to the matter at hand. You say you are a Catholic of the Roman Rite, but you can not be so if you do not believe the Catholic Church is indefectible (because Catholics agree with Catholic teaching which states that it IS indefectible). If you find the Catholic Church has defected, then your understanding of the matter at hand must be wrong, not Catholic teaching.
mpoulin- I would argue that “visibility” does not imply a robust institution structure or formalities. It can includes that, of course, but fundamentally I think that all that it simply means is individuals who actually ARE faithful to Jesus by way of Apostolic Tradition.
“If the Church in Rome that calls itself Catholic has actually defected from the Catholic faith, then the claim of “indefectability” is meaningless.”
I would agree with this logic.
I also think it has actually happened in real life, or at least seems to be happening as sure as a rising tide. As I said, I think the burden of proof falls upon those who would maintain that the Church in Rome (AKA Roman Catholic Church) has NOT defected.
That being said, I believe therefore that “indefectibility” is just as meaningless as “papal infallibility”.
2Vermont- when you use the term “Catholic Church” do you mean all the rites or do you mean specifically the “Roman [Rite] Catholic Church”?
It’s not clear to me. I’m sorry.
2Vermont, I think this Nobis… is taking advantage of the fact that In caritas has cried wolf so much calling everyone a heretic that we’re loath to jump on the attack, at least I’m a bit reticent. Thank you and JT Luizza for calling out this sacrilegious heretic. If I want to read attacks on the Papacy and the Saints I’ll hop on over to 1P5.
BTW mpoulin- the online host you mention who spoke about the Church being currently “Obscured” sounds like he or she might be a bit of an obscurantist. LOL.
JTLiuzza- The church hasn’t suddenly embraced a new theology.
I would argue that it was a long time coming, mostly thanks to the thought of Augustine. Augustine was fascinated by all manner of eastern mystery cults, vague sorts of Platonism, and even gnosticism before he finally confessed faith in Jesus. Even so, I don’t think he ever quite purged all those old bad habits from him mind and will.
Mind you, this isn’t a personal attack on Augustine of Hippo. I certainly hope he died with a great love for Jesus and His Father and is in heaven now…and I personally believe that he is. But it is an attack on much of his thought and sensibility, and I make no apologies for that whatsoever.
I don’t presume to know what his actual intent was, but I do know that his thought did introduce a rather subtle (and sometimes not so subtle) gnostic tendency into theology and we’ve been suffering from it ever since.
Didn’t you write above:
“I don’t believe that the institutional Roman Catholic Church, or any other rite for that matter, is indefectible.”?
So, why are you now asking me to clarify which rites I am speaking about when I say “the Catholic Church”?
Personally, I have now come to the conclusion that you are doing a little dance here….and I’m no longer joining in.
Yup.
2Vermont- Now I understand that you have been using the terms “Catholic Church” and “Roman Catholic Church” interchangeably.
Thank you for clarifying that.
Melanie- I’ll say this about “In Caritas”.
The person behind the name seems to have a tendency to troll people and even assume an authority which few popes ever tried to have with regard to the condition of individual souls. In spite of all that, whoever is behind the name seems to have a rather good understanding of the Catholic Faith…albeit with the admixture of the hyperpapalist ideology which has no basis in anything truly Catholic or Christian.
If one can sort through all the silly and theatrical anathematizing and disregard the hyperpapalism, there’s actually a lot of good stuff in what he or she has written.
In this crazy era, I’ll take the truth wherever I can find it. Even if if it comes from some emotionally unbalanced and somewhat confused internet warrior who goes by the name of “In caritas”.
I partially copied the definition from somewhere else, which is why I put it in quotes…not my words. I don’t necessarily buy the “entire edifice” as it now exists either , but there is a clear hierarchical structure in Scripture in the form of Cephas/Peter being selected as the holder of “the keys”, a clear sign of kingly authority given him by Jesus, and the Apostles being appointed and appointing bishops…(in Greek literally “overseer” ) and as seen when they selected Matthais to fill Judas’ spot….
Yes, indeed.
First, let me correct myself. I meant to say “what you cited” rather than “what you say”. My oversight in proofreading my own words.
That being said, I think that there should be a sort of hierarchy within the institutional church. There should be men designated to offer Sacrifice (Mass or the equivalent word in other rites) and administer the other sacraments, and there should be men designated to teach and govern. There has to be some sort of order…but formalities and hierarchy should NEVER supersede manifest faith.
And that, I dare say, is a big part of the crisis we face now. We have a formal structure which is being used to destroy faith, and likewise we have a clinging to formal structure which people regard as superior to faith.
You seem to be rather ignoring the Magisterium of the teaching, governing and sanctifying Church established on Earth by the Second Person of the Most Holy Trinity, with pope, bishops, priests and deacons and their respective roles.
Lynda- I’m not particularly fond of the word or the notion of “Magisterium”.
We have witnessed “Magisterium” being utterly abused in both theory and practice by Popes, bishops, and theologians…particularly the ones since Vatican II.
“Apostolic Tradition” is a much better term, a much better notion and a much better foundation for faith in Jesus than some vague and rather abstract “Magisterium”.
Are Catholics supposed to show lack of charity to others as IC does?
And it is mmf parlaying the, “soft”, ad hominem this time,
as with this comment: “Are Catholics supposed to show lack of charity to others as IC does?”
The true Church of which you mmf simply cannot be a member, as this thing itself speaks objectively as from your fruit, which factually demonstrates that you cannot hold the divine and Catholic Faith, while at once you deny this grace in heresy, and as commanded by the Incarnate Son of God: “You will KNOW them by their fruits.”, teaches as perennially that heresy, as you remain an obstinate holder of heresy, in spite of correction in time and again and again, as from the divine, living, perpetual, Ordinary and Universal Magisterium, is a worse crime than murder of the flesh. You and all of the objectively known obstinate heretics who simply opine here without any proof offered from the holy Magisterium to support your immanent claims in fiat, as there can be no proof in support of heresy to validate your errant claims in truth and of course. Why? To hold doubt in matters deFide is at one and the same time only to be understood objectively as to NOT BE in the immanent possession of the divine and Catholic Faith in the operation of your will, as being cannot both be and not be at the same time and under the same respect of what the Catholic Faith actually is and deFide. You are labeled thus with linguistic terms which simply edify who you actually claim yourselves to be, as time and time and time and again you falsely claim yourselves to be Catholic. While at one and the same time you and all your cadre of non-Catholic heretical fools who, as you are objectively holding heresy with pertinacity, at the same time falsely believe yourselves to be Catholic. You all bear witness to the heresy which you freely choose to hold as, “You will KNOW THEM by their fruits.” The evil tree cannot bear good fruit as the Incarnate Son of God commands and further He commands that He will cast the evil trees into the everlasting fire of Hell. Amen. Alleluia. You are objectively therefore all on the wide road to Hell, deFide. You all objectively deny the Incarnate Son of God in His command, “You will KNOW THEM by their fruits”. How can Almighty God command that the one who truly holds the divine and Catholic Faith will KNOW the heretic by his fruits, so as to correct him and then avoid him in pertinacity, and yet you and your cadre of heretics, with this so called, “NobisQuoquePeccatoribus”, as perhaps now the most sinister of all, declaring this command of The Christ as of His disciples, to be the judgment of the subjective soul, while in doing this you all defy the command of Jesus the Christ? Amen. As you deny His commands, you actually as literally deny the Incarnation without even knowing that you do. Amen. Alleluia. One of the marks of the time of Antichrist is the writ large denial of the Incarnation, deFide, as taught in unanimity by the Early Church Fathers. Amen. Alleluia.
You, so called mmf, then actually posit the claim as freely from you, that, “In caritas”, is a, “bot”, a machine, while you hurl the accusation at me of not holding, “charity”, as you literally deny the humanity of the other in your midst. Poor, poor, poor mmf, as you are perfectly effeminized in your heretical beliefs, while at once you witness a true reflection of, “Caritas”, defending the true Faith as taught in Her divine, living, and perpetual as unchanging and unending Magisterium, while although infinitely lesser as from the perfectly miserable creature me, “In caritas”, it is you and your cadre of heretics who are actually devoid of divine Caritas, as this thing itself speaks as res ipsa loquitur. Yours’ is simply an effeminized as false Caritas, purely affective and as thus, “love”, as coming from the lower soul, the passions, much like the beast possesses, as he licks his master in affective love, while at once devoid of knowing Love, as the beast, as the passions, are infinitely lesser the intellect in the higher soul, which KNOWS Who Love Is, as Deus Caritas Est. Amen. Alleluia. I do pray you hold the divine and Catholic Faith before you draw your last breath and meet the Infinite Judge in each your own as my own, particular Judgment. Amen. Alleluia. In caritas.
The sinister, NobisQuoquePeccatoribus, speaks as from the mouth of his master, his Prince, Lucifer.
You think this to be a game, a shell game, a game of cat and mouse, you perfectly miserable, pseudo-intellectual, hideous heretic. Your syncretic, linguistic construction glimpses that of your Princes’ church, as founded in October, 1958, and as witnessed in his false council of his false church of Antichrist, as the constitutional documents induced their false rationalization, as the wellspring of the false council of vatican 2, begotten by its false church of the Antichrist, you hideous, blasphemous wretch. You as all the rest of the cadre of heretics view these labels in the ad hominem, while you freely choose them, as they remain your very own. As you cannot hold a candle to Truth as in His divine, living, perpetual, as unchanging and unending, Ordinary and Universal Magisterium, you attack Him, as you attack His divine as supernatural creation, the Ordinary and Universal Magisterium, free of any iota of an iota of error, you blasphemous pig. You objectively demonstrate your perfect desire for eternal damnation as over and over and over again in your satanically inspired obscuration and suppression of divine Truth, if that were possible. Amen. Alleluia. Your soul in eternal Hell will be celebrated by the Angels and Saints as by their Queen of Heaven and earth, the Mother of God, should you remain on this freely chosen path of yours to Hell, as God’s Will be done. Amen. Alleluia.
As you are objectively known, poor, poor, poor, poor, hideous NobisQuoquePeccatoribus, as the Incarnate Son of God commanded: “You will KNOW THEM by their fruits”, and as He commanded the evil tree can only bear evil fruit and He Himself would first gather up and then cast the evil trees into the eternal fire of Hell, now for the question of you, you hideous as blasphemous wretch, riddled with satanic contradiction as to be objectively witnessed in your syncretic construction of lies. You bombastically claim in subtle jingoistic reality, that you hold, “Tradition”, as “true Apostolic Tradition”, as that, “from the Apostles”, as you will, while at once you utterly as pristinely deny the same Wellspring as the Apostolic Fount of Tradition, the Holy Magisterium, as objectively known from your words. Period and end. From whence does, “your Tradition”, come, as from whence is its wellspring, as you assume authentic Tradition, while at once you DENY that very same Tradition, while you parlay the claim in fiat that you hold, “Apostolic Tradition”, you literal exponent of the Whore of Babylon. I pray that you are saved, you hideous, blasphemous fool. In caritas.
I’m seeing a weird pattern with these more prominent benevacantist voices. One being we have a pope, he’s Benedict; patently absurd. Now they are pushing Coronavirus outbreak is no worse than the normal flu. Now, I hope that is the case. That is not at all what it looks like to me. But I’ll tell ya what, I wouldn’t be using my pulpit to encourage my audience to treat it like just the yearly flu. I probably would refrain from commenting in that vein until I saw what happened outside of lying communist China. These people are showing me a pattern of deliberately lulling people into complacency. I do not think they are stupid enough to believe this ludicrous Benevacantism, not if they weren’t born in 2013. I think they are bad guys. Barnhardt has also called Catholics antisemites and I suppose her audience reads that thinking she means everyone but themselves. She means you.
Deo Gratias for Archbishop LeFebvre. He may be the only bishop that ever gave his opinion while actually living through this unprecedented succession of bad popes that the Church has had. Most of the quotes from the past seem to be speculating on what would happen if there just happened to be one heretical pope. Not to even mention what happens when all the bishops beneath are all just as heretical and are all on the same page the way it has been at least the last 60 years or maybe even more as I believe can be prove t least to those who are not in a state of denial.
So again I think this idea of his should probably carry a lot more weight than most others based on the fact that he’s the only one I know of who responded to the unprecedented situation exactly as it was happening and as he was observing and experiencing it himself. He was right in the midst of it. Who else can we quote that can make that claim.
Here it is and sure makes a lot more sense to me than a lot of other stuff I hear.
“I think, nevertheless, THAT WE NEED A LINK WITH ROME. It is still there in Rome where we find the successor of Peter, the successor of the apostles, of the primacy of Peter and of the Church. IF WE CUT THIS LINK , WE ARE REALLY LIKE A BOAT WHICH IS CAST OFF TO THE MERCY OF THE WAVES, WITHOUT KNOWING ANYMORE TO WHICH PLACE WE ARE ATTACHED AND TO WHOM WE ARE ATTACHED. I think it is possible to see in the person who succeeds all the preceding popes, since if he occupies the see, he was accepted as Bishop of Rome at St. John Lateran. Now it is the Bishop of Rome who is the successor of Peter; he is recognized as the successor of Peter by all the bishops of the world. Good! What you want? We can think that he is really the successor of Peter, and in this sense we attach ourselves to him and through him to all his predecessors, ontologically so to speak. And then, his actions, what he does, what he thinks or the ideas he speaks; that is another thing, of course. It is a great sorrow, for the Catholic Church, for us that are forced to witness such a thing. BUT I THINK THAT THIS IS THE SOLUTION THAT CORRESPONDS TO THE
REALITY. – Archbishop Lefebvre
Amen!
Also Archbishop LeFebvre said this about Popes that he strongly believed were heretical and were in apostacy from the Catholic Church which is no different than what many believe and say today about Pope Francis although they must not be aware or just ignore the fact that the past popes were doing the same exact things he’s been doing, maybe just not as arrogantly or openly, which woud mean he would also have to accept Francis (WE NEED A LINK) as a Pope also.
@Johnbilbee: I was struck by this portion of what you attribute to the archbishop:
–
“We can think that he is really the successor of Peter, and in this sense we attach ourselves to him and through him to all his predecessors, ontologically so to speak. And then, his actions, what he does, what he thinks or the ideas he speaks; that is another thing, of course. It is a great sorrow, for the Catholic Church, for us that are forced to witness such a thing. BUT I THINK THAT THIS IS THE SOLUTION THAT CORRESPONDS TO THE REALITY.”
–
That is theological gibberish with all due respect to the Archbishop may he rest in peace. There is no such thing as an heretical Pope, for as soon as such a one publicly and pertinaciously manifests heresy he severs his bond to the Church, his office, and his predecessors. It is hard to understand how the Archbishop could believe that such a one who is NOT IN UNION WITH HIS FAITHFUL PREDECESSORS could nonetheless preserve the faithful’s union with the True Church.
–
Pope Leo XIII taught this in Satis Cognitum:
–
“No one, therefore, unless in communion with Peter can share in his authority, since it is absurd to imagine that he who is outside can command in the Church.”
–
How else can this be understood other than “Peter” means not only the current Pope, but also all Popes of the past?
Ok so this is the way I see all these rules just like any rules that are written down but always with the assumption that soneone with authority has to enforce them. I dont have lot a time, getting late but example like when get drivers license you learn rules from a book it might say theres penalties for breaking driving rules maybe even says drunk driving automatically lose your license but we all know it doesn’t automatically happen, someone in authority has to enforce it and than its an even longer process finding out if your guilty or not. I doubt it states in the rules that a cop or someone in authority has to catch you or you can take it to court or the whole process that happens before your guilty it probablynjust says drunk driving results in losing license assuming common sense tells us someone has to enforce the laws and not another citizen, well I think thats what the pope above and others just assume when they write these rules or laws that they asume we would know we dont have that authority. Thats best I can explain right now maybe dont make sense to you but it does to me not to mention that as I think Arch. LeFebvre stated it just becomes a bigger mess and really doesn’t solve anything. The way I see it if what you say is true the Church can never exist the way it originally was intended again because lay peopke will always have authority even if there was a next pope ultimately there would be all kinds of disagrrenents whether he was or not.
And by the way just the fact this discussion continues to go on 24/7. 7 days a week just proves in itself no one has the authority or this discussion would be over based on St. Cyprians own authorative proclamations which would only have to be given one time. People pleading there case over and over again just proves that don’t have the authority or they would only have to say it once end of story.
So for me it would go back to, well, as far I’m concerned nobody broke the principle of noncontradiction like Pope Pius IX did in 1854 but sedes cant face that reality because it goes against there own brainwashed tgemselves agenda that it all started with PXXIII so there in as much denial with what PPIX said, which he even admitted when he said tge words ON TGE OTHER HAND as the PJPII cult.
Here’s the catch though: Rome needs a link ITSELF in order to be authoritative.
That link can only be with Apostolic Tradition. That has to be our, and indeed Rome’s, foundation of faithfulness to Jesus. The buck stops with that Tradition. Not with the Pope.
There’s nothing mystical or “theological” about this. History and Tradition are the foundation of our Catholic Christian faith.
Oh’ you poor, poor, non-Catholic, pseudo-intellectual imbecile, as so called, Johnbilbee, one of your Prince’s very own useful idiots, you fool,
Your heretical screed is so utterly disordered, that it seems as though it is flowing straight from the very fount of Luciferian heresy, from Hell itself. You cannot even make sense of your own gibberish, you heretical, miscreant clown, on your most sure as certain path to your very own personal eternity with your Prince in Hell, deFide, you ridiculous, sophomoric fool. The cacophony which spews from your intellect is as utterly ridiculous as it is painful to read, in its utterly disordered platitudes of non-sense. But this non-sense will take you, Johnbilbee, to Hell, deFide, you imbecilic moron, as you keystroke this gibberish:
“Ok so this is the way I see all these rules just like any rules that are written down but always with the assumption that someone with authority has to enforce them.”
You godless imbecile. Your intellective blindness now precedes you as the clouds do an hurricane, you imbecilic, pseudo-intellectual clown. “Cum Ex Apostolatus Officio”, conceived in 1559, Authoritatively commands with the full Apostolic Power to govern, discipline, and teach by the Vicar of Christ, Pope Paul IV, infallibly, as he condemns perceived Bishops who are witnessed to, “deviate from the Catholic Faith”, or, “fall into heresy”, in section 6 of that Apostolic Constitution, the following you imbecilic, miscreant, non-Catholic fool:
“those thus promoted or elevated shall be deprived AUTOMATICALLY, and without need for any further declaration, of all dignity, position, honour, title, authority, office, and power.”
You are so utterly blinded in your Luciferian hubris that you cannot see that which is right before your hideous eyes, you miscreant heretic, on your road to Hell with your entire cadre of fools, with so called NobisQuoquePeccatoribus leading the way and Cyprian following. Amen. Alleluia. I do pray that you save your souls, you poor, poor, heretical fools. In caritas
Demonstrate and prove the wellspring of your so called, “Apostolic Tradition”, so called NobisQuoquePeccatoribus, you godless, heretical, pseudo-intellectual moron. Save your soul. Submit to the divine, living, perpetual as UNCHANGING and UNENDING, Ordinary and Universal Magisterium, THE Singular WELLSPRING of Apostolic Tradition, as created and conceived by the Incarnate Son of God, you godless fool. In caritas.
And I’d like to emphasize one last thing again that was probably the main jist of my original comment but both of commentors already totally ignored and that is that absolutely none of these Popes,
saints or theologians that are always being quoted were addressing the totally disastrous unimaginable and unprecendented situation that Archbishop LeFebvre found himself in. So do they really apply. Heck, they seemed even a litlle unsure of how it would play out with even one bad pope. Personally I feel most of them would have dealt with it the same exact way Arch LeFebvre dealt with it especially someone like St. Robert Bellarmine, at least , in no way do I believe St. Robert would have been a sedevancatist but thats my opinion. Like Arch. LeFebvre I dont think any of these popes, saints, etc. would have a surefire answer for this particular situation and would have been a bit confused like him. Wasn’t there another confusing time in the past when there were two guys claiming to be pope and two saints disagreed on which one was the true pope. I think the one that was wrong ended up becoming one of the greatest saints and miracle workers ever, St. Vincent Ferrer.
Anyway I think this stuff is way more confusing than that so the way I feel it’s every man for them self but maybe I guess like St. Vincent Ferrer some of us could be wrong .
So again when I read the quotes from others than Arch. LeFebvre they really don’t hold much weight with me because if they were ever put in his situation they probably would have been responded in the same he did just like he would have probably responded as St. Bellarmone did if he lived back in those days when I’m sure nobody thought the Church could even get in a situation like this.
@Johnbilbee
“as far I’m concerned nobody broke the principle of noncontradiction like Pope Pius IX did in 1854”
Could you elaborate on this allegation of yours? How exactly did Pope Pius IX break the principle of non-contradiction?
In Caritas, honest question please be charitable with us miscreant heretics, but could you please explain how he loses his office “automatically”? Example, after he commits heresy does he just “automatically” admit he’s a heretic and leave his office on his own? What if he doesn’t realize he’s a heretic or refuses to step down? how exactly thsn does the “automatic” part work ? Seriously this is what I don’t understand. Thanks in advance for your charitable answer.
In Caritas, God Bless. I know your always talking about heretics that break the “law of contradiction ” and notice you accept all catholic teachings before 1958. Here’s my question how can you read these two paragraphs from Pope Pius IX’s Singulari Quadam (1854) which is before 1959 and not admit he’s breaking the ” law of contradiction.”
“It must , of course, be held as a matter of faith, that outside of the apostolic Roman Catholic Church NO ONE can be saved, that the Church is the only way of salvation and that whoever does not enter it will perish in the flood.
ON THE OTHER HAND, it must likewise be held as certain that those who are affected by ignorance of the true religion, if it is invincible ignorance, ARE NOT subject to any guilt in this matter before the eyes of the Lord.”
I probably wont see answer if you dont respond soon but thanks anyway in advance , Have a Blessed Ash Wednesday, In Caritas , Pax Tecum
In Caritas, Hi, here’s something I just did, you can try it too if you like. I asked my smart phone what does the phrase that Pope Pius IX used. “ON THE OTHER HAND”, mean and here’s the answer I got: “You use ON THE OTHER HAND to introduce the second of two CONTRASTING points, facts or ways of looking at something.”
Remember, something can not be and be at the same time.
For example one can’t say THERE IS NO salvation outside of the Church while at the same time in the very next sentence say THERE IS salvation outside of the Church.
By the way he was also the first pope ever to do so but only after 1,854 years and 255 popes. In fact three Popes infallibly defined three different times , not in personal encyclicals, with no mention out all of any exceptions because they obviously would have been breaking the “law of contradiction.”
The Pope Paul IV quote looks like he’s talking about Bishops but still same question if bishop doesn’t “automatically” step down on his own and is still out visiting Churches giving heretical sermons and carrying on like a normal bishop does Pope just sit in his office do nothing and say to himself well Pope Paul IV teaches that he’s “automatically” excommunicated so nothing more I can do since he’s already been “automatically” excommunicated and Paul IV even said that no further declaration is needed.
“…Ordinary and Universal Magisterium, THE Singular WELLSPRING of Apostolic Tradition, as created and conceived by the Incarnate Son of God…”
Think about what you’re saying here, In caritas.
You’re saying that Tradition comes FROM both ordinary and extraordinary papal Magisterium. In other words you seem to be saying that the Pope is a sort of oracle or sock puppet of the Holy Ghost.
That smacks of Modernism to me, and if anything I dare say you’ve got it completely backwards. You’re putting the cart before the horse.
If there is any sort of abstract “magisterium” to speak of, it has to have its foundation in real things Jesus said and did which were witnessed by real people. That is all to say magisterium must have its foundation in actual history, and in turn that (Apostolic) Tradition which preserves and transmits it all.
That being said, I would suggest that any sort of personal “magisterium” must have its ultimate foundation in personal manifest faith, not mere ecclesiastical formalism. Bergoglio is literally an embodied negative proof of this. And moreover magisterium certainly cannot be founded upon some hyperpapalist gnosticism/ideology of a Pope who is “infallible” and leads an “indefectible” Church headquartered in Rome. I’ve briefly explained in my previous comments here why this notion of the Roman Papacy is ahistorical and therefore untenable.
Invincible Ignorance does not mean one can be saved by being ignorant. It means one is not guilty of being outside the Church if one never heard of the Church. The fact that people jump to the conclusion that this means there is salvation outside the Church only shows the poor state of the modern educational system that no longer forms minds to reason in a logical manner. Being outside the Church is not the only sin that prevents a soul from the Beatific Vision. Original Sin, which all but our Blessed Mother inherit justly damns the entire human race.
Oh’ you hideous as godless fool, whose prince is most certainly the Prince of this world, as you objectively evidence holding his deception as you hold, “the operation of error to believing lying”, which will damn you to Hell deFide, on the this the Holy Day of Ash Wednesday no less, as you walk your most sure and certain wide, wide road to an eternity in Hell with your Prince, you poorest of, poor, poor, poor, NobisQuoquePeccatoribus.
You smear the Vicars of Christ with the ad hominem as you are exactly as precisely, and as pristinely, just whom you claim them to be, you jingoistic as Gnostic, pseudo-intellectual, who as a sophomoric prophet of self destruction, you simply understand not a word of which you write. There is One as One Singular Magisterium, you utterly profane idiot, referred to as the Ordinary and Universal Magisterium, in the authentic Catholic both/and understanding, you miserably pathetic, contemptuous, imbecilic moron. Read and know, “Satis Cognitum”, you freak. If you remain on this your own freely chosen path, you protestant idiot professing so called, “sola scriptura”, without saying so, as you tacitly demonstrate yourself to be the proverbial, “poster child”, for the quintessential exemplar of the, “Whore of Babylon”, Luther himself, you sophomoric fool. Save your soul. I do pray that you do. In caritas.
Dear Johnbilbee,
I pray you are sincere in your questions as you now appear to be. Your four responses objectively witness your willingness to find and submit to Truth, as He Is the Second divine Person of the most Holy and Blessed Triune Godhead. Amen. Reading your last four responses brings joy to a perfectly miserable wretch as me, who knows with apodictic certitude that I perfectly deserve my own eternity in Hell. Amen. My defense Johnbilbee, is not of myself, rather of the divine, living, perpetual, as Ordinary and Universal Magisterium, Who simply Is Jesus the Christ Teaching and Governing His tiny remnant flock still remaining in this world now, and since this darkest of times the world would ever know, found its nascent genesis in October, 1958, with the death of the last true Vicar of Christ–Pope Pius XII– and simultaneously then, with the utter as literal nascent genesis of the church of Antichrist, masquerading as the Catholic Church, from the summa and summit of power and lying wonders of Satan, as the Apostle warned us, in 2 Thess 2. Satan captured the metaphysical accidental forms of those sensient realities once held by the Catholic Church and props them up as though they are the Church conceived by the Incarnate Son of God, while they remain as perfectly devoid of the metaphysical substantial form of Jesus the Christ. This is the all but perfect deception. Amen. I pray you soon join this small remnant Catholic Church yet here and visible as promised to be by the Incarnate Son of God in His Church, while in Her Unity of Faith and Unity of Communion She remains visible, absent Her Vicar of Christ and the subordinate, human, sacerdotal hierarchy under him, unto the Last Day. Amen.
Know with apodictic certitude that Pope Leo XIII in, “Satis Cognitum”, prepared us for knowing that Holy Church in some of Her aspects could and already had in his time, succumb to the powers of Hell, and yet She remains perfectly inviolable as untouched and unchanged, perpetual, in Her divine Foundation. Amen. The men of the Church betrayed Christ Jesus again, as their master and mentor, the Iscariot. Amen. Blessed Peter in His Successors had to die in order for Satan to bring forth his Antichrist, as prophesied by the Apostle in 2 Thess 2, and as the true Pope could not betray the Master once he accepts the Chair, as he was promised the Gifts of, “truth and never failing faith”, Amen. This is the Holy Catholic Faith as taught infallibly in 18 July, 1870, the Fourth and Final Session of the only Vatican Council. Amen. Depart from this one, singular belief, and you depart from the entire Catholic Faith or prove that you never held it, which pertains to all but all who live and breath since the infamous day in 1958. The Great Apostasy found its nascent genesis with the whore, Martin Luther, and it peaked in October, 1958, in preparation for the summa and summit of Satan’s deception in this world, such that he could bring forth his Antichrist, at the time when all but all in the world had already lost the divine and Catholic Faith, as we now live in the aftermath of all of that. Amen. The desolation after Antichrist, deFide. Amen. There can be NO CONTRADICTION in Truth Johnbilbee. Pope Pius IX demonstrated as perfectly, the Catholic reality of, “both/and”, as it indeed simply is. While one is damned if they die outside of the Catholic Church, deFide, as, “extra ecclesium nulla sullus”, at the same time this being outside the Holy Church must be freely chosen. To be deceived, for instance, is a free choice, as one is deceived, as all but all are who profess with their personal fiat to be Catholic today and since 1958 are deceived, simply because they choose a life of the embrace of iniquity, rejecting thus Almighty God’s intellective Lights of grace to actually see the Truth and hold Him, as to enter Him, as only He commands: 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. Amen. His, “commands”, are His divine, living, perpetual, Ordinary and Universal Magisterium, Johnbilbee, as Jesus the Christ is now with His small remnant flock, as He commands, unto the Last Day. To see, know, and then hold all of these truths in the operation of the will, one MUST hold the divine and Catholic Faith, otherwise as taught infallibly in, “Satis Cognitum”, all of this is not comprehensible, as simple as it is to comprehend. Pope Leo XIII taught infallibly that to all those who are outside the Holy Catholic Church they, “can never grasp the divine teaching “, and further, “they cannot comprehend”, as, “they are like sterile and worthless sand”. Amen. “On the other hand”, if one is truly inculpably or invincibly ignorant, then they truly are NOT responsible for not knowing the Catholic Church and therefore God in His infinite justice, as JUSTICE Himself, could not damn them simply for not holding the Faith, that they could not have naturally known. They may be damned for sinning against the Natural Law however, as this is written on every man’s heart, as the true Church teaches perennially. Amen. If this miserable wretch can assist you anymore, please let me know. I pray God saves us. Amen. In caritas.
Johnbilbee,
That doesn’t break the principle of non-contradiction at all. What Pius IX is speaking of is of a similar track as what St. Paul is speaking of in Romans 5:13 with regards to those who knew the Mosaic law and those who didn’t.
“For until the law sin was in the world; but sin was not imputed, when the law was not.”
“Not imputed”: That is, if men knew not, or made no account of sin, neither was it imputed to them, in the manner it was afterwards, when they transgressed the known written law of God.
However, ignorance of the Mosaic Law was no excuse for ignorance of the Natural Law, which is written on everyone’s hearts, as St. Paul made clear elsewhere in Romans. As such, one can be guilty of violating the Natural Law even if one is invincibly ignorant of the Mosaic Law or Christ’s Law.
“The Catechism Explained” by Rev. Francis Spirago and Rev. Richard F. Clarke, S.J. gives a succinct treatment on the question of ‘salvation outside the Church’ (starting on page 246 of the Benziger Brothers edition). To summarize: it is possible that one may be saved if, **through no fault of their own**, they are visibly outside the Church while still living God-fearing lives.
However, in like manner: any who remain outside of it **through their own fault** cannot be saved.
That being said, the extent to which one’s ignorance can be said to be invincible in this day and age is certainly more minimal than in the pre-Internet era; however, one’s culpability on this regard will likely only be known at one’s Particular Judgment.
In short, Johnbilbee: if Pius IX broke the principle of non-contradiction as you allege, then so did St. Paul in his letter to the Romans.
Tom A–I believe there is salvation outside the N.O. “catholic church” for those who remain faithful to the True Catholic FAITH. Salvation comes from the Catholic FAITH—not the mainstream church which the world believes is the True Catholic Church currently headed by a man named Bergoglio.
Membership in the Church, as defined by Pope Pius XII, is to be baptized and hold the Catholic Faith. Objectively, Novus Ordites hold a different faith than held by Catholics prior to 1958, therefore it is only logical that they are members of the Novus Ordo sect and not the Roman Catholic Church.
Also then Johnbilbee,
The simplest answer to your question of how this ipso-facto recognition of the man who dressed as a Bishop, never actually was in truth, as Pope Paul IV taught with his full Apostolic power and Authority to teach and govern the Church, is that it is because the Vicar of Christ as the singular man in the cosmos, has the power to bind and loose which was given Blessed Peter in his Successors by The Christ, deFide, as he also singularly holds the Gifts of, “truth and never failing faith”, to protect the Holy Faith from one iota of error. Amen.
As Pope Leo XIII taught infallibly thus in, “Divinum Illud Munus”, it is actually as literally the Holy Ghost Who chooses His Bishops, as with His divine Consecration. If the man to be consecrated is licitly selected and while this is visibly accomplished with the proper external signs of the Rite of Consecration, as the Church actually declares the Rite to be as per The Council of Trent, while also this particular man is at one and the same time a wolf, who does not actually hold the divine and Catholic Faith in the operation of his will as freely, the Holy Ghost does not Consecrate him to the fullness of the sacerdotal ministry, deFide, even though in the so called, “external forum”, it would appear that he has received the Episcopal Office, as he received the external signs of the Rite of Consecration. Amen. This is the divine and Catholic Faith as this evidences the infinite Power of Almighty God. Amen. He who departs from this belief, if he held the Faith prior this departure, now looses the Faith, deFide. Amen.
As for a man refusing to step down from his faux office as, “Bishop”, which in truth he never held, the Church would approach him canonically with force if needed, when She had the human hierarchical power to do so. As for the Catholic lay faithful who were subjected to this wolf dressed in Sheep’s clothing then as today, Pope Paul IV declared the laity the power to walk away and reject any authority this man claimed to have, as in truth he never had any Ecclesial power nor authority. Amen. For anyone who truly holds the great grace of the divine and Catholic Faith within their soul, these imposters are self-evident, as the light of grace is given by the Holy Ghost to see. Amen. “Seek the Truth and you shall find It.” Remember Johnbilbee, you simply must submit to the teaching of the true Vicar of Christ whether you’re given the natural light of reason to see these truths or not, in any given moment in time. Be patient dear Johnbilbee, as Almighty God is infinitely Just, and thus each of His miserable human creatures receives as perfectly, that which each is perfectly do, and each when he is perfectly do. Amen. Pursue Him in filial love and fear as you submit to Him. Amen. God bless you and yours’. In caritas.
Dear John Bilbee,
In Volume I of “To Deceive the Elect”, Gondolin Press (Fort Collins, 2019), Fr Kramer collates the relevant doctrine of the Church in respect of an apparent “pope” showing himself to be a public, pertinacious (formal) heretic and the necessary, inherent consequence of loss of Office. In fact, it follows necessarily by virtue of the very nature of formal heresy (even reason alone reveals this necessary corollary). The loss of Office is, of course, separate from any subsequent formal declaration of acknowledgement, or communication to the Faithful, of the occurrence of same by an Imperfect Council (if possible).
Unfortunately, the copy-editing of the first Volume seems to be for the most part absent (!), doing the important work a disservice. The “Contents” page, which itself is badly laid out, is at the back of the book.
In Caritas- I would argue that the notion of “Magisterium” proposed in “Satis Cognitum” was a theological “development” which was formalized by Leo XIII. When I use the term “development”, I use it in the pejorative.
Theological “development”, much maligned as something which began with or at least not long before Vatican II, actually has a much longer history in the church prior to that. It simply became a bit more obvious to the rank-and-file churchgoer during and after V2.
That being said, I find nothing fundamentally Traditional about the sort of “Magisterium” Leo formulates in that encyclical. I’ve mentioned in a previous comment to Lynda why I’m not fond of the notion and word “Magisterium” and while I did not explicitly state such, I did have Leo’s formulation in mind when I wrote it.
Rather than repeat it here, I’d suggest you scroll up and re-read it.
Lastly if you’d like a good and fairly objective perspective on the historical context which preceded the publication of ”Satis Cognitum”, here’s a link to a video which I find to be quite lucid and concise. That encyclical was very much a product of the hyperpapalism which found its culmination in both the dogmatic definitions of 1854 by Pius IX as well as those later at at Vatican I:
https://youtu.be/d82qVDrjx9Q
my2cents- think about what you’re saying here:
You’re saying that one must be faithful to (the True Catholic) Faith.
What about being faithful to Jesus?
Johnbilbee- you have a point about Pius IX. And I would agree when you point out that it does not fit with the current sedevacantist narrative. It’s a huge inconvenient truth which they shuffle off to the side.
That said, sedevacantism can be certainly a very Catholic position depending on the circumstances. But it’s ultimately a dead end because it rests upon the hyperpapalist ideology I’ve mentioned in my previous posts. It gets us nowhere.
We have to look at history and Apostolic Tradition first in order to find meaning and a way forward. NOT indulge in theologization or “development” of doctrine.
Agree with this:
“So again when I read the quotes from others than Arch. LeFebvre they really don’t hold much weight with me because if they were ever put in his situation they probably would have been responded in the same he did just like he would have probably responded as St. Bellarmine did if he lived back in those days when I’m sure nobody thought the Church could even get in a situation like this.”
Why do you spread false non-Catholic ideas? You need to learn the most holy, unchangeable and knowable, Holy Catholic Faith as given to us via the Holy Catholic Church directly established by Our Lord Jesus Christ, Second Person of the Most Holy Trinity, One God, headed by Him, and guided in truth, by the Holy Ghost, sent by God the Father and the God, the Son. Through His Incarnation, Passion, Death and Resurrection, we were given the means of eternal salvation through His Holy Church.
Jesus Christ is the Invisible Head of the True Catholic Church.
my2cents- I was pointing out that you made a linguistic gaffe: being faithful to faith. Very respectfully, that doesn’t make a whole lot of sense.
If our faith is truly Apostolic and Catholic, it rests quite literally in the Person of Jesus. Not in some abstract “Faith”.
Our faith is in Someone Who is both real and therefore, very importantly, historical.
Lynda- correct me if I’m wrong but it sounds like you’ve said that being faithful to Jesus is un-Catholic.
Bellarmime, Cajetan and even Aquinas likely never publicly imagined the situation we have on hand now: virtually an ENTIRE institutional church which has abandoned Apostolic Tradition and replaced the faith which is founded in it with a pseudo-faith.
Dear NQP—I was distinguishing the Catholic Faith from the Catholic “church”. If you wish to grade my comment on linguistics, go right ahead.
I would suggest that “Apostolic Tradition” or simply “Tradition” is a more appropriate word than “The (Catholic) Faith”. I’m not particularly fond of the term “The (Catholic) Faith” because these days there’s simply so much confusion among people about what faith even is in the first place: nothing more or less than reasoned belief.
That being said, faith in Jesus can only have a legitimate origin in that aforementioned Tradition. Otherwise, we’re no better than gnostics, neo-Modernists and phenomenologists.
Poor, poor Lynda,
You cannot help yourself, as you hold platitudes of Catholic thought within the operation of your intellect, as you stroke them from your keyboard, while at one and the same time you are absent the divine and Catholic Faith within the operation of your will, as this thing itself speaks as your fruit, and this objective knowing is as commanded by the Incarnate Son of God. “You will KNOW THEM by their fruits.” Amen. It is as though your Catholic thought is your lyric, as you are a poet, drifting off from platitude unto platitude, without immanent Catholic meaning coming from you, as you are without true Catholic foundation in your intellect, as your communicated thought makes known. Poor, poor Lynda. Your internal contradiction is made extant in your quoting of these words, from a man who can no more be a Catholic priest than can you be Lynda:
“In Volume I of “To Deceive the Elect”, Gondolin Press (Fort Collins, 2019), Fr Kramer collates the relevant doctrine of the Church in respect of an apparent “pope” showing himself to be a public, pertinacious (formal) heretic and the necessary, inherent consequence of loss of Office.”
“The loss of Office is, of course, separate from any subsequent formal declaration of acknowledgement, or communication to the Faithful, of the occurrence of same by an Imperfect Council (if possible).”
And now to edify your utter contradiction as you quote Mr. Kramer’s very own contradiction: How can a man who is an, “apparent, “pope” “, while at once he is not a true Pope who actually does hold the Office of the Papacy, as you have deemed him, “apparent”, undergo what Mr. Kramer deems as you quote him, “the necessary, inherent consequence of loss of Office.” One simply CANNOT LOSE, that which he simply DOES NOT POSSESS, in the first place, to then lose it, as being cannot both be and not be at the same time and under the same respect, you poor fool. You cannot drop the quarter from your hand, that you never first held in your hand in order to drop. An, “apparent pope”, dear Lynda, NEVER held the Office of the Papacy to lose it, you poor heretic, as when you intone tacitly that the Vicar of Christ can fall from the See of Peter, consequent to his deviation from the Faith or heresy, you are indeed an heretic, ipso-facto. Amen. It is an uncontested, non-negotiable/non-debatable as settled matter, deFide, that Blessed Peter in his Successors where given the Gifts of, “truth and NEVER FAILING FAITH”, to protect the See from any iota of error. “Heresy” is the failing of faith. Blessed Peter in his Successors were given the Gift of “NEVER FAILING FAITH”, thus as the true Pope’s faith CAN NEVER FAIL, as to fail in faith is to be an heretic, the true Pope can NEVER BE AN HERETIC. Amen. What is it that you and all the other heretics, with Mr. Kramer included and of course, do not understand about matters deFide, you poor, poor miserable fool? Cease your poetic writing dear Lynda, find the Faith before you perish into the abyss for all eternity. Amen. I pray you find the Truth in faith. In caritas.
You poorest of the poor, godless heathen, as so called Nobis…….,
Your glib as meaningless diatribes, which you Nobis….claim to be, “Catholic”, would be as the most humorous Catholic satire that I for one have laid my eyes upon, if it were not objective evidence, deFide, that you are on the wide road to an eternity with your Prince of Darkness, there to remain forever in eternal despair, you utterly hideous, pseudo-intellectual, imbecilic moron. YOU ARE THE GNOSTIC, which you project upon someone other, you pseudo-intellectual, godless freak, as you are an exponent of the, “religion of man”, as with man as his own god, as that IS YOU. Who in Lucifer’s Hell do you really think that you are, other than an utterly imbecilic, heretical, defiant fool??? What you keystroke, you glib heretic, is utterly MEANINGLESS GIBBERISH, simply objectively telling anyone with eyes which can see, the precious few, that you are already tasting here the Hell which you are simply now glimpsing this side the veil, that you will know fully then with the gnashing of your teeth, you heathen freak. You have literally no concept of the meaning of what you keystroke, you oblivious fool. You have no understanding of the One True Faith. Amen. May God have mercy on your putrid, rotting soul. In caritas.
In Caritas- you don’t agree that faith can be defined as “reasoned belief”?
Are you serious, so called Nobis…….?, or is this simply another Gnostic gaming question offered by you, which you parlay on the, “stakes table”? The, “stakes”, in this, “game”, Nobis, is the FINAL disposition of your eternal soul. I pray your interest is utterly serious. Amen.
The divine as supernatural, Catholic Faith simply is in Truth what the Incarnate Son of God deemed It to be, as He created It, ex nihilo. What you think you agree upon, regarding that Reality as It Is, and as you agree or disagree with any other perfectly miserable, human creature as me, has not one iota of any single iota of any impact on what the Faith Is, as the Faith simply remains thus unchanged, as Jesus the Christ first conceived It to be. Amen. The supernatural Faith, as it is a divine Creation, is a Gift freely given by Almighty God, as offered by Him and to His perfectly miserable human creatures, who can only remain perfectly undeserving of receiving this divine Catholic Gift of Faith, with me as the first who simply cannot deserve this Gift. While we simply cannot deserve the Gift of Faith, we must freely dispose the operations of our intellect and will to receiving the Faith. “If any man is to come after Me, he must first DENY himself, take up his cross, and follow Me”. This disposition is within the human power of our fiat, our, “yes”, as the Blessed Virgin Mother of God firstly offered her own at the Annunciation, then the Incarnation was, as she is, “full of grace”. Amen.
As any gift, the receiver is free to open it and use it or to discard it. Amen. The Gift of the Faith is of God, by God, through God, because of His infinite Beatitude offered His miserable creature. The divine Gift of the Faith cannot be received in its full luster by one who holds, “the operation of error to believe lying”, as Saint Paul prophesied would be in 2 Thess 2, which blocks the intellect from seeing Truth, Who is the First Cause of that same Faith. Amen. It is mortal sin which blocks the luster of Faith within the human soul, jading and cloaking the Truth from the soul’s own true perception of Truth. The human soul then sees and knows deception as God sends it, “the operation of error to believe lying”, and it sees this deception as if it were Truth. The lie becomes the Truth thus. Amen. It is humanly insurmountable, this, “operation of error to believe lying”, yet Almighty God in His infinite Beatitude, will take that operation away, if the soul submits to Him in His Ordinary and Universal Magisterium, whereby Jesus the Christ Teaches and Governs His inviolable Bride as His Mystical Body the Church, now and unto the Last Day, as He commands. Amen.
Jesus the Christ warned us that after the Gospel was disseminated throughout the world, the End of Time would come and in this epoch of time, His Vicar would be gone from the world, with the loss of Apostolic Succession, as the ipso-facto reality as it simply is thus, this loss of Apostolic Succession. In true, “interregnum”, Succession is preserved and of course, and valid Conclaves then met, and they did so as fully in accordance with the active governing Papal Election Law which stood at their time, as per the Governing Vicar of Christ and his exclusive as singular power of the, “Keys”, to bind and loose. Amen. The Church protects this truth as She is Truth. Valid Conclaves simply cannot meet willy nilly, as that must as it only can, then signal to the truly faithful, a false conclave, if it deviates one iota from the specific Papal Election Law in power at that time. Also, to be a valid Conclave, the man elected as true Pope could not have ever before deviated from the Catholic Faith, nor of course have been an heretic, and each of these as witnessed by the lay faithful. Amen. This is the Good Shepherd protecting His tiny, remnant flock from the ravenous wolves, as they are now dressed in Sheep’s clothing, as prelates of the church of Antichrist. Amen.
In the End of Time would come the very person of Antichrist and of course, as divine prophesy must be fulfilled in accordance with God’s Holy Will. Amen. The Great Apostasy would be at its summa and summit in this time, as all but all would have already then lost the Faith in this Apostasy, then they would be deceived with, “the operation of error to believe lying”, such that they would accept the Antichrist as king, but they would not know him for who he was, in like kind to the Jews, “the chosen people”, of Old, who did not know Who Jesus the Christ was in their very midst and yet they murdered Him on His Holy Cross. Mirror image, analogical realities. Amen. May Almighty God have mercy on you and me, Nobis……
You know right well that the Deposit of Faith is the body of truth revealed by God through Sacred Tradition, Sacred Scripture and Sacred Magisterium that Catholics are bound to know and to hold to – it is definite and unchangeable and most certainly not abstract.
In Caritas the notion of faith which you express in so many words sounds highly, even hyper, Augustinian. Which is to say highly neo-Platonic.
Tell me this: in what realm or where does this apparently Ideal “Faith” exist? It sounds to me as though you’ve rendered “faith” into a sort of Platonic Ideal which God interiorly infuses people with if they do just the right amount of mortification.
Sounds very Eastern-mystery religion to me. It begs the question: how does one know if one has performed just enough fasting, penance and so forth to receive this “Faith”? What’s the measure? Furthermore, how does the individual know he or she isn’t being deceived.
You render “faith” into a sort of absolute, METAPHYSICAL intellectual certitude whereas I’d argue that “faith” by it’s VERY DEFINITION simply entails personal acceptance based on logic and reasoning of that of which we have an incomplete understanding of. This acceptance stemming from reasoning and logic, in turn, is based on external, visible signs verifiable by others and not some sort of interior and therefore highly subjective infusion or mystical “gift” as you seem to put it.
Put another way: Having faith simply means having MORAL and MATERIAL certitude of that which we place faith in, not absolute/METAPHYSICAL certitude. Otherwise, it simply wouldn’t be faith.
Lynda- I agree that what we call “The Deposit of Faith” finds its origin in the broader Apostolic (or as you and others called it “Sacred”) Tradition which includes Scripture and the unwritten Tradition from which the content of the Gospels and epistles came from.
Many of the quibbles I have here have to do with equivocal, inappropriate and I would even argue erroneous uses and understandings of the word “faith”. We don’t have faith in “The Catholic Faith” properly speaking because that simply doesn’t make sense. Likewise as I have recently suggested to In Caritas, nor is faith some mystical interiorly infused gift of absolute certitude because faith by definition entails only moral certitude. My position is this: We have faith in God’s public Self-Revelation in history- Jesus- by way of Tradition.
As far as “Magisterium” is concerned, I’ve expressed why I’m not fond of the concept previously both to you and to In Caritas. It was a “theological development” which which culminated in the formulation by Leo XIII in “Satis Cognitum”. It has been abused mightily. In principle, I’m opposed to any “theological development”. Better to stick to Tradition pure and simple.
Good Friday morning poor, poor, Nobis……,
You have all either forgotten or have never known, “Faith”, as the supernatural virtue which it simply Is, and yes and with apodictic certitude, “Faith”, is infused by Almighty God into the soul who has the proper disposition to receive Him, you poor, poor, poor, Gnostic fool. This is the teaching of Holy Mother Church, reject it as you do, and you reject the “Faith”, as you reject the supernatural virtue of Faith which would allow you to know this. “Faith”, and “human reason”, both required to assent to Truth. One CANNOT conflict, as to be in contradiction with the other. If there is a perceived contradiction, it is ALWAYS as it can only be, consequent to flawed as faulty reasoning on the part of the miserable creature, as the Faith cannot be in error. Amen. Almighty God gives us the power of reason to approach Truth. We can only know Him in Faith. This is the Catholic Faith. Reject this and you are with apodictic certitude on your sure as certain path to Hell, as indeed you do, and therefore you are, as known by your fruits. Amen. You utterly glimpse these realities in your written words Nobis…. You seem to have desire though, as all but all here simply reject Truth about face and spew the ad hominem in their rejection. You’ve not done that. “Faith, Hope, and Charity”, the supernatural virtues, with Charity the greatest of these, as Charity is eternal, Faith and Hope go away. Amen. Poor, poor Lynda misconstrues the supernatural virtue of, “Faith”, with the body of knowledge which Holy Mother the Church offers us in the divine, living, perpetual, Ordinary and Universal Magisterium, as Holy Tradition and that along with the Holy Writ. Faith is no more a sentient reality than the thought is that allows us to know the Faith, and so what is your point? You attempt to naturalize Faith and in that attempt you become the heretical, “Naturalist”, the Gnostic Freemason, you utterly non-Catholic fool, which you may accuse one of being who actually holds the supernatural virtue of Faith. Faith and Tradition are not one in the same thing you fools. The One, Holy, Roman Catholic, and Apostolic Church has given us this body of knowledge which is referred to as, “the Faith”, yet this in and of itself is not and of course it is not, the supernatural virtue of, “Faith”. Amen. This knowledge to be known as extant, is the Catholic Religion, the One True Religion. Religion is that which binds man to his God. Amen. I am bound to Almighty God through Faith (supernatural virtue of) and then accept His Religion which is called, “Catholic”, which is protected and professed by His Church, the Mystical Body of Christ. What is it that you don’t get about the Mystery in, “Mystical”, you heretical fool? Lastly for now, one who receives the supernatural virtue of Faith, then holds that understanding which is called the, “Catholic Faith”, and they hold it perfectly freely within the operation of their will in the higher soul. Amen. The intellect, infused with the supernatural virtue of Faith, then properly informs the operation of the will, then through the grace of the Faith received, the will then chooses the perfect good over the privation of the good which is due in the religious or moral act. Amen. I pray that you one day receive the supernatural virtue of the Catholic Faith, dear Nobis….. In caritas.
Good job IC, well put.
The supernatural virtue of faith.