Edward Pentin is reporting that Cardinal Godfried Danneels admitted, in a recently released authorized biography, that he was part of what he called a “Mafia’ Club” opposed to Pope Benedict XVI:
[Daneels] called it a “mafia” club that bore the name of St. Gallen. The group wanted a drastic reform of the Church, to make it “much more modern”, and for Cardinal Jorge Bergoglio to head it. The group, which also comprised Cardinal Walter Kasper and the late Jesuit Cardinal Carlo Maria Martini, has been documented in Austen Ivereigh’s biography of Pope Francis, The Great Reformer.
OK, let me get this straight…
So… there was a group of liberal loons in red that were organized to resist the efforts of Pope Benedict XVI in order to promote their vision of a “much more modern” Church.
This group fashioned itself as a “Mafia Club.”
Interesting…
Mafiosi (not that I am confirming that I have knowledge of any such group ever having existed) as I understand it, don’t ordinarily form bonds in order to share their hopes and dreams with one another.
Rather, they join forces with one another in order to extort, threaten, infiltrate and intimidate and whatever the hell else they have to do to get whatever it is that they want. Often, it is the person or persons that stand in their way who gets to decide if the process happens the easy way or the hard way.
So, this leads me to wonder what sort of offer these men made to Benedict the Abdicator that he couldn’t refuse?
Cardinal Danneels’ revelation also leads me to wonder if… no, make that, it leads me to believe that it is far more likely than not that Jorge Bergoglio was among the caporegime of this so-called “Mafia Club.”
I mean, does it make any sense at all that this club of miscreant cardinals, which included the “profound and serene” theologian Walter Kasper, would be laboring against the reigning pope in order to bring about a “much more modern” Church headed by a fellow-cardinal who was ignorant of their very existence ?
If any response is given from the Damage Control Team at Holy See Central, this is what it will be.
And yet, only a fool can believe that Jorge Bergoglio was ignorant as to the existence of this “club,” and only a bigger fool can believe that he wasn’t a central figure in it; if not the capo di tutti capi himself.
Now that Daneels has violated the omertà and spilled the beans (which just goes to show you the kind of cloth he’s cut from), maybe those bishops who are cheering the revolutionaries on will begin kissing the pope’s ring.
Soooo…is Bergollio the pope or not?
John Paul II’s Apostolic Constitution of 1996 makes canvassing before or during a papal conclave a high-crime, punishable by automatic excommunication.
“The Cardinal electors shall further abstain from any form of pact, agreement, promise or other commitment of any kind which could oblige them to give or deny their vote to a person or persons. If this were in fact done, even under oath, I decree that such a commitment shall be null and void and that no one shall be bound to observe it; and I hereby impose the penalty of excommunication latae sententiae upon those who violate this prohibition. It is not my intention however to forbid, during the period in which the See is vacant, the exchange of views concerning the election.
I likewise forbid the Cardinals before the election to enter into any stipulations, committing themselves of common accord to a certain course of action should one of them be elevated to the Pontificate. These promises too, should any in fact be made, even under oath, I also declare null and void.
With the same insistence shown by my Predecessors, I earnestly exhort the Cardinal electors not to allow themselves to be guided, in choosing the Pope, by friendship or aversion, or to be influenced by favour or personal relationships towards anyone, or to be constrained by the interference of persons in authority or by pressure groups, by the suggestions of the mass media, or by force, fear or the pursuit of popularity. Rather, having before their eyes solely the glory of God and the good of the Church, and having prayed for divine assistance, they shall give their vote to the person, even outside the College of Cardinals, who in their judgment is most suited to govern the universal Church in a fruitful and beneficial way.”
This doesn’t mean he is invalid since Pope Pius X II said “None of the Cardinals may in any way, or by pretext or reason of any excommunication, suspension, or interdict whatsoever, or of any other ecclesiastical impediment, be excluded from the active and passive election of the Supreme Pontiff. We hereby suspend such censures solely for the purposes of the said election; at other times they are to remain in vigor.”
…very fitting for this post also……
“Through prayer and not through attacks! I Myself will be his judge, NO ONE BUT I!…..Our Lord’s revelations to Mutter Vogel.
….from the Holy Hour, by Fr. Mateo…..
CONSIDERATION: O prodigy of humility! the God of heaven, the Sovereign Lord of earth has made Himself the slave of men; He Who gives life annihilates Himself; He Who has broken our chains binds Himself, and He remains, by an incomprehensible love, always a prisoner ever since the first Holy Thursday!…..He descends from the hill of Sion and plunges into the solitude of Gethsemane….There, falling on His knees, He prays….His agony commences….At this moment a weight of sorrow presses upon His Heart and crushes It. In the midst of all this anguish, He cries out sobbing, “O Father, strike Me, but save men…..pardon them for I love them.”…..
+ His anguish increases. He sees passing before His Eyes His executioners, blasphemers, insulters of His Cross, the deniers of His Gospel and of His love….and He repeats: “I Love them, O My Father, pardon them!”…..
+ He sees passing in review the apostates, the renegades, who cast at His Feet the things they adore;…..then the multitude of lukewarm souls – men who fear to confess Christ, those who are ashamed of their King and Savior, and He cries out with grief: “I love them, O My Father……pardon them!”
+ Then are presented to His Mind the army of wicked men, without conscience;…..an innumerable crowd of revilers who profane their souls in the shameful misuse of their passions…….then the persecutors of the Church, those who have enriched themselves by lying,….the seducers of the people, the hypocrites, the proud:….all these pass by, and the Divine One in agony repeats: “I love them, O My Father, I beseech pardon for them!”…..
+ Then come the mediocre and unfaithful priests, worldly parents, responsible for the loss of their children’s souls,…..families with all their sins,….societies with all their orgies,…..peoples and rulers with their insulting rebellions. Before His Eyes pass by all those who insult the Pontiff, His Vicar,……and Jesus immersed in this profound sea of filth, dishonor and agony, His voice quivering with grief utters again; “Yes, O My Father, I love them, I love them. Pardon all these guilty ones!”
+ And finally, like thousands of arrows, sacrilegiously striking His Face and transpiercing His Heart, the names of the damned have come, that innumerable legion of reprobates, who, marked with His Blood and redeemed by His death, nevertheless choose for themselves eternal death and malediction!……O! then this Divine Heart breaks under the oppression of an infinite sorrow, His veins burst open with violent grief. Jesus staggers….an instant after, His Features livid, His Hair disheveled, His whole Body trembling and covered with blood, He falls on His Face to the ground and utters a cry: “FATHER, I have come into this world to accomplish Thy Will!…..If it be possible let this chalice pass from Me, but not My Will but Thine be done!”……
+ Let us keep silence and let the beatings of this adorable Heart speak to us of Its secret sorrows, Its requests for love, and Its desires to triumph over all!
+Sacred Heart of Jesus Thy Kingdom come!
+Immaculate Heart of Mary, pray for us!
+Saint Joseph, pray for us!
Let us thank God, that He founded the Roman Catholic Apostolic Church. Let us pray for the supreme head of the Church, the Pope at Rome. That he may be given the grace to follow St. Peter in zeal for religion and the salvation of souls. Amen.
I was very surprised to see Edward Pentin’s story on a mainstream new church outlet owned by EWTN. The reality of this story is if this story if true then Frances is a anti pope. If churchmen conspired to fix the conclave for the election of Bergollio each and every churchmen who did so would be automatically excommunicated per canon law. Therefore they could not vote in the conclave.
If churchmen conspired to push Pope Benedict out and he was under pressure to resign when he resigned his resignation would not be valid. Therefore Benedict would still be Pope. The implications of this story are huge and sadly very few saw it due to the visit of Frances in the United States.
**************BREAKING NEWS**************
The Traditional monument has another Bishop! Bishop Ambrose who is a hermit living in Colorado. Bishop Ambrose knew Archbishop Lefebvre and worked with Archbishop Lefebvre. For the full story on the “Hidden” Bishop:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zk2NnV-Qtuw
Reinforcements or infiltration?
So the excommunicative censures are suspended for purposes of electing the pope but at other times (i.e. post election) they are to remain in vigor? The pope, if a participant in this canvassing cabal, is immediately thereafter his election excommunicated, the censures having remained in vigor? How heartening. And precisely what powers and authority does an excommunicate pope have?
While all of this conspiracy stuff is very interesting, it is also very confusing. In my simplicity, all I know is that Bergoglio is the “Pope” of the World when as Vicar of Christ, he should be anti-cultural, preaching with all the authority of his sacred office the Kingship of Christ.. By commission or omission, he is endorsing evil people who do evil things. The fact that Bergoglio is sitting on the throne of Peter, validly or invalidly, was not an accident. It was the planned event of scheming evil prelates within the church. Now we are stuck with him until good men within the church declare him a heretic, show him the door and say with one voice: “HERE’S YOUR MITRE. WHAT’S YOUR HURRY?”
“[22] Blessed shall you be when men shall hate you, and when they shall separate you, and shall reproach you, and cast out your name as evil, for the Son of man’ s sake. [23] Be glad in that day and rejoice; for behold, your reward is great in heaven. For according to these things did their fathers to the prophets.
…..
[26] Woe to you when men shall bless you: for according to these things did their fathers to the false prophets.”
[Luke, Ch 6, Douay Rheims]
Tradition has another warrior. Sermon His Excellency Bishop Ambrose Catholic Eastern Rite: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aYN_E3guNnA
JP2’s decree came after Pius XII’s.
So now we have this angle, the other angle of Benedict’s abdication being coerced (which he’s denied), and the angle that Benedict didn’t totally resign the office, only the “active ministry” of it.
And then we’ve got Francis who doesn’t seem capable of mentioning the name of Jesus, making the sign of the cross, or genuflecting in front of the Blessed Sacrament.
Hmmmm.
dear brethren,
Let us listen to the voice of reason & for once, look deep into the teaching of Holy Mother Church on matters at hand for the last half century or so, and confusion becomes clarity–to that end, I offer this:
*******
http://mostholytrinityseminary.org/Explanation%20of%20the%20Thesis.pdf
*******
No arguments nor debates here, please—anyone of good will who wishes to discuss this, let it be known & we can do so in the Forum. I emphasize the term “of good will.” Peace be to you all.
I was particularly surprised by Danneels remarks, since not only is mafia one of the groups Frannie consistently condemns, he has excommunicated them and called them to repentance:
“The Mafia is an example of the “adoration of evil and contempt of the common good,” he said. In unplanned remarks about the ‘Ndragheta crime group to thousands of people at Mass in southern Italy, Pope Francis said: “Those who in their lives follow this path of evil, as Mafiosi do, are not in communion with God. They are excommunicated.” 6/22/2014
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/pope-excommunicates-mafia-for-adoration-of-evil-in-strongest-attacks-in-20-years-9554617.html
Repent your sins and the Roman Catholic church will welcome you, Pope tells Italian Mafia
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2963828/Repent-sins-Pope-tells-Italian-Mafia-says-Roman-Catholic-church-welcome-members-organised-crime.html#ixzz3mnbcxtER
Guess the (North, Central & Latin) American, Belgian, Austrian, French & German Mafia (aka the sodomite network/gang of h8) is different (or maybe it takes a thug to know one)!
P.S. does anybody know anything about St. Gallen? “He called it a “mafia” club that bore the name of St. Gallen.” Wikipedia: The history of LGBT emancipation began in 1836, with the publication of a book by Heinrich Hössli, a cloth merchant from Glarus, defending homosexuality and love between men. In his two-volume work, «Eros. Die Männerliebe der Griechen» (Eros. The male love of the Greeks) (published in Glarus in 1836 and in St. Gallen in 1838) he presented, from the idea of liberalism, the demand that the recognition of homosexuality was a test of liberal democracy and civil rights. In the German-speaking world outside Switzerland during the mid-19th Century, two liberal champions of gay rights made their ideas public. Karl Heinrich Ulrichs in the Kingdom of Hanover gave the name “Uranism” to the concept of same-sex love in 1864, followed in 1868 by Karl Maria Kertbeny from Austria-Hungary, who first called it “homosexuality.”
In the 1880s and 1890s, Jakob Rudolf Forster from Brunnadern SG (1853–1926) was prosecuted by the St. Gallen authorities for his open homosexuality. In 1893, he presented the Federal Assembly with a petition for the Elimination of Discrimination Against Homosexuals («Beseitigung der Diskriminierung der Homosexuellen»). Karl Heinrich Ulrichs submitted an application for pardoning Forster to the St. Gallen authorities, but was turned away.
This is all very surreal. Could all the speculation about the Francis papacy being invalid be true? I don’t know about anyone else, but ever since the man stepped out onto the loggia that night I’ve felt things were not quite right. That sinking feeling has never gone away and it’s getting more intense.
We need to pray very hard for Pope Benedict. May God give him the courage and opportunity to speak up and soon!
Ratzinger, bc he is a flaming modernist, never achieved the papacy. He’s actually more dangerous than Bergoglio, bc his Modernism is disguised by “tradition.” & his made-up “hermenuitic of continuity.” BXVI never achieved the papacy, as mentioned, bc his embrace of Modernism is the impediment posited which prevents the Authority of the Keys from being given to Him, to put it in very plain language. The problem is Modernism and VII-not any Modernist occupant of the Chair, current or former, since VII. See my link above fore further deliberation on this.
Second time I’ve downloaded it, first time I read it through to the end. It sounds reasonable to me.
May be a way to reconcile sedes (this type anyway) and r&rs as well. The thesis is very close to the way I was already thinking, and I’ve never considered myself sede.
Given the material/formalist thesis you presented earlier, it would still an important question on who would be materially holding the office of the pope, no?
POPE Benedict, profoundly Christocentric, holy, and intelligent man that he is, will go down in history as the man who saved Western Civilization with his action of 07/07/2007. I felt a deep and abiding joy upon his ascendency to the Throne of Peter. His holiness and beautiful intellect led me profoundly on my journey. And I’m sure many other Catholics have similar stories after the long malaise of the Wojtylan reign. I pray I get to heaven and if I do, Josef Ratzinger is the first person I want to hug.
You sedavacantists fail to recognise the gift of the Ratzingerian reign and are the poorer for it.
Well that’s interesting.
Im assuming you give him a pass for his part in the vatican 2 council? Regardless, I certainly dont think you need to be a sede to be able to see though his facade. He’s all about ecumenism and the non importance of converting to the Faith (among MANY other bad things), just like the rest of his v2 cronies; the only difference between him and them is that he was a lot better at hiding his true intentions.
Akita, all the VII heresiarchs are substantially brothers in faith – that is the faith of the VII sect with its Novus Ordo rites and disciplines; they only differ stylistically; the differences are nothing but make up on the same trojan horse.
–
St Bellarmine and Pope Paul IV and the giver of Divine Law all concur that a prolonged Vacancy in the Chair of Peter is possible and therefore, the Church being a wise Mother, made provisions for the faithful in the teaching of Holy Mother Church for such an eventuality. The dogma of the perpetuity of the Office of Saint Peter established at the first Vatican Council, which is a lesson to the Protestants that there were indeed supposed to be successors of St Peter, Vicars of Christ, in no way teaches that there must always be a living Pope, one after the other in proximate chronological succession.
–
The absence of the successor has happened before, but never before has an entire heretical sect occupied the formerly Catholic sees to this extant, that is to say, right up to the Chair of Peter. We have no pope. Therefore we must cleave to the perennial magisterium of the True Popes. The means whereby, in such a situation, a true pope can be gotten have also been investigated by the Church over the centuries. It’s all there for people to learn about if they care about truth as opposed to the comfort of a preferred conclusion.
–
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1c_JL8_Wa-k
–
PS. This is the substance of what the Novus Ordo sect has done to the formerly Catholic parishes of the planet:
–
http://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/photos-of-european-churches-left-in-holy-ruin
Dear CraigV,
Yes, Craig V. To your point- ( again, very simply put for brevity, ) Bergoglio is legally occupying the Chair. He does not hold the office per se, which encompasses within it the Authority of one who is Christ’s Vicar, which of course he is not. We Catholics all can know this (we do not doubt- or “resist” Bergoglio i.e. there is doubt nor confusion) bc of Jesus Christ’s guarantee & from what we know from His Church. which is his undefiled Bride. Not to be redundant nay for impact, neither Jorge Bergoglio nor his predecessors, all of whom were Modernists, actually are in possession of the Authority of the Keys. This Authority comes directly from His Majesty Our Lord Jesus Christ. The man has not the protection of the Holy Ghost from teaching error (infallability in matters of Faith & morals) even in the regular exercise of the Universal Ordinary Magisterium. Of course, as you’ve seen-the Thesis goes on to explain how this is resolved (or not) & some resolve can actually take place rather rapidly & might- any resolve would include the nullification of VII by a successor among other crucial things which would be necessary.
*******
Modernism is what we should be discussing on sites like this one, not particlar men. For it’s Modernism that has wrought & is still reaking havoc. When we realize the horror that most Catholics are duped by the heresy & think that which is observed in diocesan parishes is Catholicism-that is the heart rending point-the men being almost irrelevant-they are mere, yet frightfully dangerous, Modernists.
*******
Here we judge not the interior of anyone & certainly, may God forbid, do not disparage in any way other Catholics, for many (although by no means all) are escapees from diocesan evildoers & false shepherds. Thank you for addressing me CraigV, if you’d like to discuss this with any of us, let us know so we can in the Forum.
May His Peace abide.
I think the key to considering Josef Raztinger’s contribution to Christ’s Church is to ask the question: is Catholicism objectively true? Too often, I think, we traditionalists (aka Catholics) are trying to prove things to each other, knowing full well that the person we are corresponding with will remain Catholic regardless of what we write.
I believe the correct approach should be to consider how a non-Catholic (in good faith) would respond to our argument. I also think that it was this approach that Pope St. Pius X had in mind when he wrote Pascendi.
As an illustration, I have made the next point a couple of times before, but I think it is worth repeating. Pope Pius wrote in his encyclical that, for Modernists, “it is a fixed and established principle…that both science and history must be atheistic: and within their boundaries there is room for nothing but phenomena; God and all that is divine are utterly excluded”.
Compare the above statement – as if you were submitting an academic paper in a secular college – with the following statement from Ratzinger’s Jesus of Nazareth (emphasis in bold added):
“Admittedly, to believe that, as man, [Jesus] truly was God, and that he communicated his divinity veiled in parables, yet with increasing clarity, exceeds the scope of the historical method“ (p.xxiii).
Consider also, in this context, that Ratzinger’s successor, in Laudato Si’, composes a non-Trinitarian prayer, which he encourages Catholics to pray with those who do not recognize Jesus Christ.
More can and should be discussed about Josef Ratzinger, including his attitude to the Resurrection, the inerrancy of Scripture, the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX and that of St. Pius X, and the Mystical Body of Christ. Obviously, however, these would have to be broken up into several comments.
Of course, the above should read: “Josef Ratzinger“.
Dear rich,
Another Catholic who you once commended by calling him a “good man” offers the following your way-“A good man says hi, good work, keep going.”
May She Who is the Seat of Wisdom Protect you & yours now & ever, rich.
Among other things, Benedict XVI denied bodily Resurrection-that is a (tried before by others in Catholic history) heresy. That is not holy. He is a Modernist. Modernism is the synthesis of all heresies.
We are discussing modernism. The question of who is the pope “materially” is a sub-topic.
Now given a formal-materialist theory for the sake of argument, what do you make of Matthew 23:2-3?
That denial, is one of the three marks of the antichrist religion as presented by Cardinal Manning in the 1800s, who had gathered the teachings of Holy Mother Church regarding the great apostasy.
–
‘The Present Crisis of the Holy See’ (retitled ‘The Pope and the Antichrist’:
–
” 1-The first is, schism, as given by St John: 1 John 2: 18-19 “Little children, it is the last hour; and as you have heard that Antichrist cometh, even now there are become many Antichrists: whereby we know that it is the last hour. They went out from us, but they were not of us. For if they had been of us, they would no doubt have remained with us; but that they may be manifest, that they are not all of us.” 2-The second note is, the rejection of the office and presence of the Holy Ghost…this necessarily involves the heretical principle of human opinion as opposed to Divine Faith; of the private spirit as opposed to the infallible voice of the Holy Spirit, speaking thorugh the Church of God. 3-The third note is, the denial of the Incarnation. St John writes, “Every spirit, which confesseth Jesus Christ as come in the flesh is of God : and every spirit that dissolveth Jesus (that is, by denying the mystery of the Incarnation, either the true Godhead, or the true manhood, or the unity, or divinity of the person of the Incarnate Son) is not of God, and this is antichrist, of whom you have heard that he cometh and is now already in the world”….These are the marks by which…the antichristian revolt, or apostasy, may be distinguished.” Cardinal Manning, ‘The pope and the antichrist’, lecture one, “Christ versus Antichrist’.”
–
The Novus Ordo Sect has all three marks, promulgated universally by its heresiarchs through VII and the Novus Ordo rites and disciplines. The fruits speak for themselves.
Here’s but a brief glimpse at the anti-Catholic anti-pope, Ratzinger:
–
http://search.freefind.com/find.html?si=62930896&pid=r&n=0&_charset_=UTF-8&bcd=%C3%B7&query=ratzinger
I agree. The sedevacantists also fail to recognize the possibility that Ratzinger had a conversion and left his modernist ideas behind him before his reign as Pope. I believe he was and still is the true pope. Bergolio is anti-pope. As Sr. Lucy and Ven. Anne Catherine Emmerich pleaded, we must pray very much for the Holy Father.
If the rules governing the conduct of the conclave were changed by Pope St. John Paul II in 1996 then I presume they were in effect before, during, and after the conclave that produced Bergolio. As a general question, therefore, is it possible for excommunicated cardinals to licitly elevate a co-conspirator (likewise excommunicated) to the papacy? Would not such a pope be invalid?
Beppo, have you read BXVI’S ‘Jesus’ trilogy? They are threaded with heresy. Do you remember that he presided over Assisi Three? “The truth is, there is no theological space between” Ratzinger and Bergoglio, or Wojtyla, for that matter.
–
http://www.amazon.com/No-Space-Between-Ratzinger-Bergoglio-ebook/dp/B00UKJKSG2/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1443274722&sr=8-2&keywords=droleskey
–
http://www.christorchaos.com/NoSpaceBetweenRatzingerandBergoglio.htm
Tell him I said hello as well…good to know he’s still around.
I have heard this many times….I hear it from my own father quite often. I dont believe it for a second of course but lets assume that this is a possibility. If he did have a “conversion” then why, in all of the years since the council took place, have we not heard him publicly denounce it…ESPECIALLY while he was the reigning “pope”?
Craig, re: Matthew 23, we ‘forsake not the Apostolic See’, no matter how many pretenders, whom Paul IV calls, ‘warlocks, heathens and publicans’, squat there. But reject utterly as ‘warlocks, heathen and publicans’ these heresiarchs who ‘will not listen to the Church’ we must. The See is perpetual. That it may remain unoccupied by a true successor for extended periods is true Catholic teaching. That an occupier universally perverting faith, morals and worship is a true Pope is utterly un-Catholic – never was such a thing taught by Holy Mother Church.
–
Protestants, however, loved to spin such a narrative.
–
PS As for those who ‘sat in the chair of Moses’, they taught the law as it was given them, even though they were hypocrites through their personal indifference to the spirit of the letter.
CraigV,
I don’t agree that such is a sub-topic, as you put it-bc we’re talking about from whence the twofold power of the Papacy is derived—
To all:
For further consideraion:
http://www.traditionalmass.org/articles/article.php?id=21&catname=10
dear rich,
You ( &everyone, indeed) might thoroughly enjoy this. Its title is “The Resignation of BXVI”–nevertheless, the programming encompasses so very much more of particular interest to everyone here, IMHO. This was recorded at a time when Retoration was a call-in. -so interest is enhanced by that fact.
It costs $1.49 US dollars to download. At near end, one hears the now famous & beloved statement by a True Shepherd. As I said, enjoy.
http://www.restorationradionetwork.org/season-ii-episode-18-the-resignation-of-benedict-xvi/
Will do, thanks.
No arguments as requested just a statement and rhetorical question. The dogma of infallibility seems to be the lynchpin on which this topic turns. It is a dogma. Could it be denied by inflation as it were, by extending it’s meaning beyond all limits? This is where the confusion exists IMO. There is no mention of Vatican I, which defined the dogma of infallibility, in the paper linked above. Call me paranoid, but at this point the life of the Church I need to see magisterial documents mentioned or footnoted to back up a thesis.
hi, John314,
You’re correct- vis a vie much discussion today revolves around the VI defined Dogma on Infallibility, at least in these discussions among Catholics. What we, all of us, hear endlessly is that infallibility is limited to, if you will, Ex Cathedra pronouncements. This view was actually unheard of before the Modernists gained a greater stronghold (you might say stranglehold) & was in reality a “tweaking” of the Dogmatic teaching of VI to which you refer. You may be interested in this talk, wherein the first 1/3 deals specifically with exactly this, to your point-I think. So, if you’ve limited time which would prohibit listening to the entire( very rich particularly in the middle) content of 3 hrs.-the first third will suffice for this topic.
****
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BlRbDWrSDSY
****
Another time, if you have a chance, in the last part of this talk, a non-sedevacantist challenges with questions & the resultant interraction is riveting indeed. I hope you enjoy it all, and hope for further discussion too.
****
BTW, dear John314,
the request for no argumentation was not an attempt to be rude in any way whatsoeer, just a desire to abide by Louie’s request to engage in argumentation & extended debate on this topic in the Forum.
Peace be to you.
Not to mention his ongoing, unretracted heresies.
St Matthew 13:25 DRC1752
But while men were asleep, his enemy came and oversowed cockle among the wheat and went his way.
The parameters of “the scientific method(s)” and “the historical method” are (have been) determined by men for specific purposes.
But nothing in JPII overturns Pius XII.
To be clear: there is nothing wrong with the historical (or scientific) method. It is Ratzinger’s statement that is wrong. The following, for example, is a condemned proposition of St. Pius X’s Syllabus of Errors:
“36. The Resurrection of the Savior is not properly a fact of the historical order. It is a fact of merely the supernatural order (neither demonstrated nor demonstrable) which the Christian conscience gradually derived from other facts.”
CATHOLIC DETOURS…
“Dear Wormwood,
You’ll see here that I’m talking of those humans – happily, now a small minority – who are not only baptised, but also making a serious effort to follow the Enemy, obey His commands, and remain in what they call a ‘state of grace’. I am not concerned in this letter with the broad masses of men who by and large ignore the Enemy. And nor should you be, Wormwood. Your target is your man, and nobody else. We make war on the Enemy to get hold of individuals. What with all the excitement recently over heretic bishops and papal silence, I’m worried you’re making theirmistake, and forgetting that it’s individuals we war over. What goes on in the Vatican is the concern of spirits far below us in the Lowerarchy, and you should not concern yourself with it. Your man is your concern, and his eternal soul is your goal. Never forget this.”
http://www.onepeterfive.com/screwtape-sage-advice-for-the-synod/
I don’t necessarily disagree with the sede thesis by the way and of course there are many shades and layers as to how one may apply this as a working definition. And this funny business with a “mafia” at the conclave might be the best argument yet. God is certainly making it easy for Catholics to see that something is rotten in Denmark.
Solemn pronouncements aside, the real questions revolve around the interpretation of the ordinary magisterium. Sure it is infallible but what are the limits… The answer will allow a proper interpretation of Matt xvi:18, 1 Tim iii:15, and the other scriptures cited in the article.
And yes, the modernists are to blame for all the confusion because they have used a false concept of infallibility and magisterium to club the faithful into submitting to their agendas. And since most clergy and lay folk went along, maybe we did not understand the dogma to begin with…a key issue.
Thank-you for the youtube link.
St. Ephrahim the Syrian The Pearl – 7 Hymns on the Faith : Hymn 7
… 2. And envy is from Satan: the evil usage of the evil calf is from the Egyptians. The hateful sight of the hateful image of four faces is from the Hittites. Accursed disputation, that hidden moth, is from the Greeks. …
The bitter [enemy] read and saw orthodox teachings, and subverted them; he saw hateful things, and sowed them; and he saw hope, and he turned it upside down and cut it off. The disputation that he planted, lo! It has yielded a fruit bitter to the tooth. …
3. Satan saw that the Truth strangled him, and united himself to the tares, and secreted his frauds, and spread his snares for the faith, and cast upon the priests the darts of the love of pre-eminence.
They made contests for the throne, to see which should first obtain it. There was that meditated in secret and kept it close: there was that openly combated for it: and there was that with a bribe crept up to it: and there was that with fraud dealt wisely to obtain it. …
6. Haughtiness called for rage its sister, and there answered and came envy, and wrath, and pride, and fraud. They have taken counsel against our Redeemer as on that day when they took counsels at His Passion.
…And instead of the cross, a hidden wood has strife become; and instead of the nails, questionings have come in; and instead of hell, apostasy: the pattern of both Satan would renew again…
I wonder what this Doctor of the Church would say today? Michael F Poulin
Saint Ambrose – The Duties of the Clergy : CH5 paragraph 29 “ The wise man does nothing but what can be done openly and without falseness, nor does he do anything whereby he may involve himself in any wrong-doing, even where he may escape notice.”
The ‘mafia club’ are modernists. The N.O. traditionalists are modernists. They both go to the same worhsip service and pay homage to the same heresiarch, and profess obedience to the same Council of warlocks, heathens and publicans, otherwise known as VII. belial is belial, no matter which side of his face he’s talking out of.
–
The ‘continuous development and expansion of the “mystery of iniquity” ‘ is indeed continued and developed in the Rome of the modernists (Ratzinger and Bergoglio only differ styalistically).
–
“This is Antichrist, of whom you have heard that he comeeth, and he is now already in the world.” 1 John 4:3…We must look, then for the beginnings of this revolt in the times of the Apostles. The spirit of Antichrist was at work as soon as Christ was manifested to the world. In one word, then, it describes the continuous working of the spirit of heresy, which from the beginning runs parallel to the Faith…It is evident that St Paul and St John applied these terms to the Nicolaitions, the Gnostics, and the like. The three notes of Antichrist – schism, heresy, and the denial of the Incarnation – were in them. It is equally applicable to the Sabellian, Arian, Semi-Arian, Monophysite, Monthelite, Eutychian, and Macedonion heresies. The principles are identical; the deveolpment various, but only accidental. And so, throughout these eighteen hundred years, every successive heresy has generated schism, and every schism has generated heresy; and all alike deny the Divine Voice of the Holy Ghost speaking continuously through the Church; and all alike substitue human opinion for Divine Faith; and all alike work out, by a sure process, some more rapidly, and some more slowly, a denial of the Incarnation of the Eternal Son. Some may start with it in the outset, others resolve themselves into it by a long and unforseen transmutation, as that of Protestantism into Rationalism; but all being identical in principle, are identical in their consequences. Every age has heresy, as every article of Faith by denial receives its definition; and the course of heresy is measured and periodical; various materially, but formally one, both in principle and action; so that all heresies from the beginning are no more than the continuous development and expansion of the “mystery of iniquity,” which was already at work.” —– Cardinal Manning, ‘The pope and the antichrist/Crisis in the Holy See’, lecture one, “Christ versus Antichrist’. 1861
–
http://www.todayscatholicworld.com/present_crisis_of_the_holy_see_manning.pdf
–
http://stpiusxpress.com/?page_id=3740
PS. A heads up, perhaps avoid using the bottom link I posted with the id=3740. It seems to have a virus warning on it.
John, re: “I need to see magisterial documents mentioned or footnoted to back up a thesis…”
–
The following book had exactly that:
http://sggresources.org/products/the-anti-modernist-reader-vol-1
–
Likewise Fr Cekada’s “The Work of Human Hands’: http://sggresources.org/products/work-of-human-hands-by-rev-anthony-cekada
–
Both these sources have the full deposit of Faith on their side and they openly and meticulously use it.
MagisterAthanasuis, Bishop Wojtyla was an anti-Catholic universalist modernist man-centerist as opposed to God, in opposition to Pius XII:
–
jpii specifically promoted a dogmatically condmended error in his 1983 conciliar N.O. code of law taught that non-Catholics can go to Catholic communion without having to renounce their heretical faiths. This flouts Divine Law and contradicts the 1917 Catholic Code of Canon Law (canon 731) “It is forbidden to adminster the sacraments of the Church to heretics or schismatics…”
–
The Balamand Statement was promulgated by JPII/Wojtyla to never proselytize the individula/partial ‘churches’ [which the Church teaches are schismatics and not part of the Body of Christ] of the agreement.
–
“listen once again…to the words uttered by Simon Peter. In those words is the faith of the Church. In those same words is the new truth, indeed, the ultimate and definitive truth about MAN: the son of the living God —”You [meaning ‘man’] are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” ” http://w2.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/en/homilies/1978/documents/hf_jp-ii_hom_19781022_inizio-pontificato.html
–
“In reality, the name for that deep amazement at man’s worth and dignity is the Gospel, that is to say: the Good News. It is also called Christianity. This amazement determines the Church’s mission in the world and, perhaps even more so, “in the modern world”. This amazement, which is also a conviction and a certitude-at its deepest root it is the certainty of faith, but in a hidden and mysterious way it vivifies every aspect of authentic humanism-is closely connected with Christ. It also fixes Christ’s place-so to speak, his particular right of citizenship-in the history of man and mankind.” http://w2.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_jp-ii_enc_04031979_redemptor-hominis.html
–
Bishop Wojtyla also instigated and oversaw the Assisi scandals which mocked God Almighty and flouted the first commandment before the whole planet.
Say what you will about the old mafia of Luciano, Capone and the boys, they were Traditional Catholics. Can you imagine the baptism scene of “The Godfather” done to the Novus Ordo, with “Candle in the Wind” instead of Bach?
Hi, FrankIII,
I know.
“So, this leads me to wonder what sort of offer these men made to Benedict the Abdicator that he couldn’t refuse?”
“Offer” No, I don’t think there was an offer. There is a much darker and sinister story here. I have my theory.
Like!
Francesco,
Please do not leave us in suspense. Are you willing to share your theory?
Pax.
That is all irrelevant. If a Pope resigned for any reason other than voluntarily, the resignation is invalid. Benedict is still Pope if the story about this cabal blackmailing or threatening him into resignation is true. That would mean the current heretic really isn’t Pope anyway. Unfortunately 99 percent of “catholics” will never get this.
“Don’t be content to ask Jesus pardon just for your own faults: don’t love him just with your own heart…
Console him for every offence that has been, is, or will be done to him. Love him with all the strength of all the hearts of all those who have most loved him.
Be daring: tell him that you are crazier about him than Mary Magdalen, than either of his two Teresas, that you love him madly, more than Augustine and Dominic and Francis, more than Ignatius and Xavier.”
St Josemaria Escriva
May I add…unless it’s a baseless rumour.
Exodus 23: “Thou shalt not receive the voice of a lie: neither shalt thou join thy hand to bear false witness for a wicked person.
“2 Thou shalt not follow the multitude to do evil: neither shalt thou yield in judgment, to the opinion of the most part, to stray from the truth.”
You know, I once thought it couldn’t get any weirder than Godfather III, but this Godfather IV stuff is *much* more unsettling…
Prithree, kind sir, what is your theory?
EM. You know, even in the JPII anyone can be a saint factory, a bunch of Escriva’s collegeaues basically campaigned and pleaded that he not get an N.O. hevean certification. They were, of course, ignored.
‘Scuse me, that should read ‘a N.O. Heaven certification’. Predict text agreeing this time. The complete person, legacy and miracles are scrutinized when it comes to authentic canonization. Not in the N.O. Mother Teresa, of profound religious indifference, is yet another famous example. Religious indifference is indifference to the Blood of Christ. Indifference to valid ordination and authentic Catholic Worship is also indifference to the Blood of Christ. Offering the sacrifice in communion with a Heresiarch is also indifference to the Blood of Christ.
What is a N.O. Heaven Certification?
Michael Dowd
Dowd – luv the handle – an N.O. Heaven certification, is a piece of Novus Ordo propaganda. The purpose of the Vatican II Novus Ordo Institution is to ‘canonize’ in people’s minds, the Second Vatican Council. The purpose of which is to draw folks to a counterfeit of Christ’s Church.
–
The Holy Roman Catholic Church and her True Vicars are the Bride of Christ. The ‘mystery of iniquity’ found a willing brotherhood in the 60s – willing to contradict and exile Christ…get this…in the name of Christ.
–
The story of what has become of the Catholic Church is best found in brief here: http://www.traditionalmass.org/
PPS. Michael, the orchestrated ‘abdication’ (as if they could) of Christ the King to the secular ‘shahs’ of the US/UN found its theatrical overture when Montini/anti-pope-paul-6 took off the Papal Tiara, worn by true Vicars of Christ, and gave it to the secular shahs with a mind-numbing speech about how ‘they’ were the hope and the way. The ‘mystery of iniquity’ is always an outside enemy of Christ and His Vicars.
Dear Salvemur,
You note…”Mother Teresa, of profound religious indifference, is yet another famous example. Religious indifference is indifference to the Blood of Christ”
Her way of life suggests she structured her life around the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Christ…
“We shall spend two hours a day at sunrise and sunset in adoration of Jesus in the Blessed Sacrament exposed. Our hours of adoration will be special hours of reparation for sins, and intercession for the needs of the whole world, exposing the sin-sick and suffering humanity to the healing, sustaining, and transforming rays of Jesus, radiating from the Eucharist
To me – Jesus is my God. Jesus is my Spouse. Jesus is my Life. Jesus is my only Love. Jesus is my All in all. Jesus is my everything. Jesus, I love with my whole heart, with my whole being. I have given Him all, even my sins, and He has espoused me to Himself in all tenderness and love. Now and for life I am the Spouse of my crucified Spouse.”
Mother Teresa of Calcutta
Empty words. She was committed to Hindus remaining Hindus, Sikhs remaining Sikhs. When will folks ever believe Holy Mother Church when She teaches us that one must assent to all the dogmas of the Faith to be Catholic? Mother Teresa decided that ‘no salvation outside the Church’ did not need her assent. She is, therefore, a world-wide witness, as was JPII, to a rejection of the Catholic Faith.
–
http://traditioninaction.org/bkreviews/A_025br_MotherTeresa_Zima.htm
–
” in 1997 she told an AP reporter: “Of course I convert. I convert you to be a better Hindu or a better Muslim or a better Protestant. Once you’ve found God, it’s up to you to decide how to worship him” (“Mother Teresa Touched Other Faiths,” AP, Sept. 7, 1997). “
It’s well known, even among trads, that Mother Teresa was a syncretist. In fact the entire religious order she founded today, dressed in full nun veiled garb, are syncretists. One of the disasters of the Luciferian destruction of religious life is not the dropping of the habit, but the habit being a disguise
In the same way, you can take a man, place him in a cassock, teach him how to say the Latin mass–but if he’s teaching out of the catechism of JPII-especially putting forth the same false teaching on the sin for which Sodom was destroyed-you have nothing but a wolf in sheep’s clothing-no matter how many so called trad “pilgrimages” he attends. I warned about such a priest in this combox long ago, I hope at least one person took heed .
heh, heh-I know.
I really do need to post this link for all those sedevacantists who appear to promote Pius XII as the last valid Pope. I find it surprising seeing that he didn’t have a good record. My criticism for those sedevacantists who support Pius XII is that they appear to be as reliable for discerning modernism and heresies as the next RR traditionalist.http://www.traditioninaction.org/HotTopics/f000TradIssuesIndex.html#trad
Yes, I agree. I’ve read that whole ongoing series by Dr Carol Byrne. A pope kisses the Koran and the rumors fly. Too obvious. A pope talks about integrating Jungian psychology into the liturgy and the silence is deafening. Too subtle?
A case in point is that most SV’s will take as optional the changes in the liturgy that Pius XII authorized but the letter of the holy office regarding Father Feeney, well that’s infallible magisterium. Pope Pius X died of a broken heart over the infection of modernism in the Church, yet supposedly Rome was an unspotted bride until John XXIII was elected anti-pope.??!
In the accompanying photo, we once again see Bergoglio about to pick his nose in public.