According to reports, a cardinal or cardinals has challenged Francis over the Hell dust-up; perhaps even going so far as to suggest that he may lose his “so-called pontificate” (as Fr. Gruner aptly called it).
I’m not sure what to make of this. As I wrote in yesterday’s post, Amoris Laetitia contains blasphemy and heresy – signed, sealed, and delivered – with no room for debate.
And yet it wasn’t until this latest Bergoglian-Scalfarian scandal erupted that such an action has taken place?
Something doesn’t add up.
In any case, the alleged challenge (as reported by Antonio Socci) was presented to Francis on Holy Thursday.
How did he respond?
He pressed forward full speed ahead with his evil plan to destroy what little is left of a Church that no pre-conciliar Catholic would even remotely recognize.
During the Easter Vigil, he once again used the occasion of his homily to encourage acceptance of his agenda, saying:
We are invited to contemplate the empty tomb and to hear the words of the angel: “Do not be afraid… for he has been raised” (Mt 28:5-6). Those words should affect our deepest convictions and certainties, the ways we judge and deal with the events of our daily lives, especially the ways we relate to others.
HINT: Let us not address the matter of Holy Communion for those publicly known to be in mortal sin the way the Church has always done so.
This he made even clearer as he stated:
To celebrate Easter is to believe once more that God constantly breaks into our personal histories, challenging our “conventions”, those fixed ways of thinking and acting that end up paralyzing us. To celebrate Easter is to allow Jesus to triumph over the craven fear that so often assails us and tries to bury every kind of hope.
Translation: Be not afraid! Amoris Laetitia is Thomist! It’s Catholic! No, really!
He went on:
The stone before the tomb shared in this, the women of the Gospel shared in this, and now the invitation is addressed once more to you and to me. An invitation to break out of our routines and to renew our lives, our decisions and our existence. An invitation that must be directed to where we stand, what we are doing and what we are, with the “share of power” that is ours.
So, you see, the bi-millennial practice of the Church, which is itself an expression of the immutable faith and the very words of Our Lord, are but a worn out “routine.”
How can we change such things?
Easy, we have a “share of power;” the same power that Christ exhibited in the Resurrection!
A time will come when the Church will be tempted to believe that man has become God.
It’s here, folks.
Now, a word about “the stone.”
In this very same homily, Francis demonstrated for all to see just how evil can strip a man of his ability to reason; even to the point where his intellect is dulled in the most remarkable of ways.
The stone before the tomb cried out and proclaimed the opening of a new way for all. Creation itself was the first to echo the triumph of life over all that had attempted to silence and stifle the joy of the Gospel. The stone before the tomb was the first to leap up and in its own way intone a song of praise and wonder, of joy and hope, in which all of us are invited to join.
The stone cried out… The stone proclaimed… The stone was the first to leap up…
Yes, he actually said this. (NOTE: I double-checked the Italian text to make sure that the English translation provided by the Vatican is accurate.)
No, Jorge Bergoglio isn’t insane. He knows very well that the Scriptures tell us that “an angel of the Lord descended from heaven and coming rolled back the stone and sat upon it,” and this same angel was the first to proclaim “He is risen.” (cf Mt 28:2,6)
He is simply so immersed in his own evil ways that he has been rendered as one who speaks as if he is insane.
On Easter Sunday, he once again insisted:
God’s announcements are always surprises, because our God is the God of surprises … God can not make an announcement without surprising us.
(And guess what? He wants the Church to look exactly as Jorge would have it look. Surprise!)
At the Easter vigil, Francis posed the following rhetorical question, and it’s a good one:
Do we prefer simply to continue standing speechless before events as they happen?
I, for one, refuse to stand speechless as this man wreaks havoc on the Church and leads countless souls to perdition; rather, I intend to call his heresies and blasphemies by their proper name, warning everyone who has ears to hear that this man simply is not a member of the Church; much less her head on earth, and he therefore must be avoided.
May it please God to inspire others, especially those in the sacred hierarchy, to follow suit.
“I, for one, refuse to stand speechless as this man wreaks havoc on the Church and leads countless souls to perdition; rather, I intend to call his heresies and blasphemies by their proper name, warning everyone who has ears to hear that this man simply is not a member of the Church; much less her head on earth, and he therefore must be avoided.
May it please God to inspire others, especially those in the sacred hierarchy, to follow suit.”
And I, for one, am glad that you do. And I share your wish (prayer) in your closing sentence.
According to the Gospel (Mt. 25:41) Hell is a place prepared for the Devil and his angels and Francis has spoken about the Devil quite a bit.
So there seems to be some contradiction or confusion here.
Louie, what can I say? Once again you have analyzed this awful man’s heresy to perfection and in such a way that you enable all of us to understand exactly what he’s doing.
You cut through the diabolically clever waffle that is specially designed to fool the masses and nail the truth to the wall for all to see.
God bless you, dear and faithful defender of Christ the King and valued friend to all of us here – and may the Holy Spirit continue to guide you.
Christus vincit. Christus regnat. Christus imperat
It’s the ‘Diabolical disorientation” that Our Lady warned us about. The most dangerous heretic is the one who throws in enough truth among the poison to wrong-foot people.
The stone that sealed the tomb of Our Lord Jesus leapt and rolled to the side all on it’s own?
Makes perfect sense to the muddled mind of a Marxist Communist who was handed the task to push the political agenda of Gorbchev’s Green Cross , doesn’t it?
‘Green Cross” was the carefully conceived plan of atheist Communists with the cooperation of the KGB (now FSB , but what the heck is in a name when excrement is still fecal matter? ) , in order to enter into the global political arena.
So “the God of surprises ” ignores His own Word Made Flesh , denies the Scriptural dogmatic and doctrinal reality of hell , and now even the reality of the Angelic Hosts tasked with the Heavenly Will to assist mankind on earth in their personal pilgrimages towards eternal life?
Yes, all this makes sense to the friend of an atheist who agrees with atheism as a Marxist Communist, doesn’t it ?
But , “Who am I to Judge?”
Ugh, there is a certain kind of religio-babble that these NewChurch types engage in. To me it’s the visual equivalent of fingernails on a blackboard, but they can’t seem to produce anything else. As Satan is the imitator, it has elements of religious language, but it’s off, way off, because Satan is not creative, he can only imitate badly. Francis-speak sounds like New Agey nuns on the bus drivel. I find it hard to believe anyone can hear or read what he says and take it seriously. I don’t think people are as literate as they once were, because if people gave him a real listen, they surely would see he speaks nonsense.
You do realize that Pius X was very clear in Pascendi that this is exactly what Modernists do, right?
As the apotheosis of the Judas Council, Francis is a master of double talk (as for the Judas Council, behold the double talk, for example, on collegiality in Lumen gentium 22 & 23). Like the infernal documents of the Judas Council, his speech is multivalent, just as the devil is legion.
A holy man would never deny the reality of hell. But a child of the devil would, as he found it expedient, alternately affirm and deny hell and its master.
Face the hard reality: whether wittingly or unwittingly, Francis is a devoted servant of Satan.
This babble is the sort of thing you get when you are off-the-cuff and filled with the ‘Spirit’ of spontaneity. Where everything is always bringing forth a new creation and reality simply with the words spontaneously coming forth from one’s mouth, then somehow evolving into physical form by unknown Darwinian processes.
Man has become God indeed…
Just as how God’s Word never returns empty handed, Bergolio expects the same. That he can just speak a state of things into existence.
Life evolved randomly anyway, amirite? So a process of struggle and wrestling dialogue eventually leads to Hegelian synthesis…
I think the reason the Cardinals are speaking more strongly now than they did with Amoris is one part imagining they can salvage Amoris Letitia with the ‘hermeneutic of continuity’ just as they could do for Vatican II and thereby placate the Catholic faithful with similar amounts of verbiage where they transmutate heresy into doctrine through alchemical contortions.
But there’s no spinning ‘no Hell’ because that makes the entire existence of the Church and their positions pointless. If there’s no Hell, then the Catholic Church is the biggest scam in existence.
Do you not think Satan is crafty enough to throw a little orthodoxy in with his poison, to at least soothe the naive, and especially to confuse?
“HELL” appears 110 times in the Douay Rheims.
I truly believe this man is an Atheist.
During Vatican Two they came up with the notion that the Devil (i.e. evil ) was not an entity or a fallen angel, rather evil was in the hearts of mankind . “This is what they decided to teach the new seminarians.”
Our pastor who taught us our Religion Class at the time , kept us apprised of the daily discussions and decisions during Vatican Two..
That was then and this is now , so are we to believe Borgolio believes in any real entities referred to as the Devil, Lucifer , Beelzebub, Satan et al?
Or is he referring to evil in the hearts of men?
No hell = no devils.
Francis is a master at making the most profound event in the history of mankind (The Resurrection) into a trite and meaningless event. How can he do this? Because he is trite and meaningless. Why does he do it? Because he can.
Yes and no. “Skorka unexpectedly followed up, though, to address the question too. Referring to himself as “someone who knows [the pope’s] thinking,” he looked intently at Deutsch and said, “Were all the decision power in his hands, he would do a lot. He would do a lot.” Skorka drew comparisons to proposed changes in halakha (Jewish law) in Jewish communities, suggesting that it is not at all easy for one leader seeking change to modify long-standing traditions.
On the question of reforms, Skorka summed up his assessment of Francis: he “has an open mind—and is traditional.” Francis’s changes, his “revolution,” will be first about “spirit” and “spiritual things,” not “political” matters, by which Skorka seems to have meant church governance.”
Why would anyone be surprised that, as we go down into the heretical hell, that it takes this or that heresy to wake different people up? The really awake people have been so since Vatican II. All the rest who either had not been Catholic for long at the time, or too young, or just not aware of what the Church taught, just imbibed the Novus Ordo and all of its parts, like mother’s milk. Not realizing that ‘Mother’ was being poisoned.
For some, it took the so-called abuses of Vatican II, hippie priests, gay priests, priests who downplayed devotion to Our Lady, who allowed contraception, Communion in the hand, altar girls, et al. For some it took Assisi interfaith prayer meetings, and for some it has taken the direct attack upon marriage and the natural law, which even the most sleepy Catholic should be alarmed by. This is normal since most people do not really know their Faith. Hopefully all will wake up soon, our souls depend on it. The Church depends on it.
As a man who saw no path but the sede path almost 5 years ago now, it does my heart good to see those who have resisted slowly but surely get it. My path wasnt an easy one….but it also wasnt one that took years and years either; once you GET it (as many trads are doing now) you GET it. The next false pope will be worse than jorge.
Im 48 and I did lose my Faith at about 38-40, mainly due to the sexual scandal of these deviant homosexual “priests” (who I considered actual priests back then). I stupidly though that THAT was the true Catholic Church, and I abandoned it. As you say, I didnt know my Faith. It took a few years but I got back. I started with the SSPX, saw the contradiction of them, and became a sede.
I also have a lot to say about the FSSP and how they destroyed my family (and I have. over the past few years, said as much on this site), but I wont revisit that. Id just say, stay away especially from the vatican 2 FSSP.
I hope everyone on this site has taken the time to read Pascendi. If not, you do not know the enemy. In all war, one must know his enemy. Pascendi defines the modernist enemy and his tactics. Many trads do more damage than good in the fight against modernism because they haven’t take the time to get to know the enemy.
The path out of the NO is painful. To be a “resister” is to still recognize the enemy as your legitimate God given ruler. Its an asinine contradiction.
Happy Easter in the Octave rich,
You identified the elephant in the room, which all but all of the baptized in the world are blinded to. How many times has Louie, for instance, pointed out the heresies contained in so called “Vatican II”, while at once he then speaks of that same entity which holds Vatican II as a “Council” of the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church, as though it actually as literally is the Church which Jesus Christ established, which is an ontological absurdity the likes of which cries to Heaven for justice, as it places an absolute affront to the law of non-contradiction, while it defies the commands of Jesus the Christ in Matthew 16: 18 and Luke 22: 31-32. This creature beast thing from Hell, which all but all in this world call the “Catholic Church”, simply because it dresses up as such, cannot both hold heresy as its teaching and be the Catholic Church and hold heresy as its teaching and not be the Catholic Church, at the same time. The true Church simply CANNOT be in opposition to Herself, as heresy is opposed to the Faith, and God can never be in contradiction, period and end.
The focus is always on Jorge from Hell, Bergoglio. The utter as literal reality in truth, is that as Jorge from Hell cannot be the true Holy Roman Pontiff, that church which he claims to be the Catholic Church that he is the “Pope” of, simply cannot be the Catholic Church, which Christ Jesus established, as Christ commanded in Luke 22, 31-32 that Peter and his Successors cannot ever loose their personal faith and not because I say so but the Vatican Council in its Fourth Session in July of 1870 did definitively as infallibly, say so. The true Holy Catholic Church and the true Vicar of Christ fit as hand in glove. You cannot have a false pope as an apostate to the Faith, One and True, and at the same time have the church which he is the false pope of as the True Church, as this cannot be, because Christ commanded it as such and the Vatican Council defined it as such in 1870, period and end.
The vice of cowardice is now preeminent the world over, as to face the reality as truth, is to acknowledge that we now await the person of the Antichrist foretold in Holy Writ and Holy Tradition. Christ Jesus commanded in Matthew 24, 15: “When therefore you shall see the abomination of desolation, which was spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place: he that readeth let him understand.” Then referring to the Book of Daniel 9: 27 he prophesies thus:
“And he shall confirm the covenant with many, in one week: and in the half of the week the victim and the sacrifice shall fail: and there shall be in the temple the abomination of desolation: and the desolation shall continue even to the consummation, and to the end.”
Daniel prophesies that, “the victim and the sacrifice shall fail:”. The “victim” is the spotless Lamb of God and the “sacrifice” is the representation of Calvary. The Holy Mass shall fail and not return unto the consummation of the world. That is a hard pill to swallow, but the Truth just is, much as the Holy Gospel of John, chapter 6, when most of the disciples, but for the Twelve, left Christ for perdition, as Christ commanded, “You are either with Me or against Me.” Louie then refers to men in the, “sacred hierarchy”, as needing to be “inspired”. Again, he correctly identifies “Vatican II” as spewing heresy upon heresy but then he refers to the men who adhere to “Vatican II” as though it actually is an Ecumenical Council of the Church established by the Son of God, as men of the “sacred hierarchy”, when they cannot be men of the “sacred hierarchy”, as objectively understood, because the church they adhere to cannot be the Church Christ established, rather it is the church of the Antichrist, as its teaching is antichrist. Simply because it dresses up as “Catholic” and proclaims to be, does not mean that it is what it claims itself to be, because in the objective realm of reality it spews heresy and therefore it simply cannot be Christ’s Church, because He commanded it as thus, Amen. God bless you and yours’ rich. In caritas.
Happy Easter in the Octave Tom A,
To be a “resister” is to deny the teaching of the Holy Catholic Church, which commands our submission into the teaching and discipline of the true Holy Roman Pontiff, period and end, while you know this. Thus, to be a “resister” maybe “…an asinine contradiction”, while at once it is a sure path to eternal Hell, as the Holy Church has always taught. It is an ideological contradiction, and as thus the work of Lucifer himself, as it has certainly then taken many souls to Hell. If you want to punish yourself and bear witness to a real time example of internal contradiction, at once inducing cognitive dissonance which rattles the cosmos, go to “The Remnant” and listen to Michael Matt’s most recent psycho-babble, where he actually says that if Jorge from Hell actually denied the dogma of Hell, “then I guess we have an heretic as our Holy Father”, which is a patent denial of the command of Jesus the Christ in Luke 22, 31-32 and its defined interpretation by the Fourth Session of the Vatican Council in July of 1870. To “rightly reason”, as taught by the Angelic Doctor, is to literally as actually participate in the Mind of God, as the only wellspring for right reason, in contradistinction to contradiction. Amen. In caritas.
Tom it is especially painful for those who do know their Faith and have to acknowledge that the One True Faith is no longer in a visible place in their vicinity where they can give Honor and Glory to God and keep holy the Lord’s Day. It is literally gut wrenching to long for the Body and Blood of Our Lord and communion with like minded Believers.
We tried over and over attending all types of freaky entertainment NO
parishes ( the “Our Father” sung to the tune of” Bingo Was His Name O”, at a children”s Mass was the last straw) and then we became Eastern Rite Catholics until we were hit, after about 20 years with three extremely disordered pastors and a fruitcake Bishop who supported them while knowing one of them with AIDS was sodomizing little boys and another was grooming and filming parish youth with adult male porn stars under the guise of a wrestling charity. The last one was a cross dresser who denied the Real Presence
in a homily. The last robbed our two church accounts and stole the rectory furniture that the previous now defrocked filmographer bought with our parish donations. Then ,to pay the bills , the lawsuits and recover from the the dwindling donor pool the bishop sold our church. From there ,off to an SSPX chapel quite a distance away, only to be forced to listen to the praises of Adolf Hitler from the pulpit.
Onto an Ecclesia Dei Indult priest who was wonderful and given permission to start an Order from the Local Ordinary , say Mass and
reside in a formerly independent chapel owned by five parishioners who held the deed. Big surprise (not) ,same Ordinary had wanted the property for years and once when it was repaired by the grateful Trad parishioners he sent in his chancellor to coerce and curse at the deed holders until they signed it over to the Diocese. Then the Ecclesia Dei priest was given twenty minutes for he and his seminarians to get out.
a Diocesan took over and now the chapel is filled with mostly new ethnic grateful and blind parishioners. Blind? Yes, they are clueless to what their pastor really is. Back at our local RC parish the long time pastor was charged with aiding his assistant pastor to leave the country with five grand he pilfered from the collection plate .It was revealed that his assistant pastor had been molesting pre pubescent parish girls for over ten years whose parents went to the pastor and complained and he promised to take care of it ….until finally one set of parents were smart enough to go to the police first. The assistant pastor is still wanted by the FBI while the pastor died doing his “community service” in a NC Diocese. All this was way before the Boston Globe broke the news to the rest of the Catholic Church.
………So yes it has been painful Tom. Really painful for some of us who knew the score way back while Vatican Two was going on and later
after speaking with a Cardinal , two canon lawyers , Fr Hardon , a Polish priest emissary of JP2’s ( who BTW knew about Maciel long before any real action was taken) and many good priests who left because they were buggered in the seminary or in rectories and at mandatory priest retreats. I have spoken with the broken hearted parents of children who were abused or committed suicide after being sodomized by priests as children and some priests who were physically abused themselves ……I’ld say yes Tom it has been pretty damned painful.
More recently we relocated to another state and yes I attempted to set up a time for confession with a local priest my neighbors told me was very good. He called but only after weeks had passed and basically told me to go to any local parish since he was busy .I tried to tell him how and why we were cautious , but he screamed a me I was being “prideful.” I ended the conversation and examined my conscience more closely . My conscience assured me my heart was just broken a million times over and he was the last illusion of a sound priest that I could take. Literally all the good Faithful intelligent and well educated priests I knew have now died.
Francis: “An invitation to break out of our routines and to renew our lives, our decisions and our existence.”
Yeah, the routine of the last 60 years of nonsence since John 23 called V2, esp. the last 5.
Oh MY word Sweep, that is breathtakingly awful. I’ve occasionally come across information in the most strikingly unlikely manner. I always thank God for letting me know, when it seems like there would have been no chance I ever would have ever known naturally. You got some insights that many people only read about, can’t really dismiss any of that. I’m extremely resistant to thinking in caritas is completely correct, but he seems right over the target. I just don’t know and I’m responsible for my whole family. My Grandfather must have seen all this and he never said ANYTHING, but I don’t think I ever saw him and he didn’t tell me to pray the rosary, so I guess that’s probably everything he had to say.
Sometimes, I contemplate the confusion these frauds have introduced into the Church and I ask why did they do it? The answer is fairly straightforward for most of them. They saw what the Church of Our Lord “does” in the broadest possible sense, and in their hubris they wanted the Church to do something “different”.
The problem with that is the Almighty does not aid those with a “different mission statement” from His Own, especially when the usurpers are operating from within the bounds of the institutional Church. Witness the collapse of the Church.
Don’t look for the usurpers to change because the best of them believe in immanentism, that the Almighty inspires individuals through interior inspirations that manifest themselves as different faiths. Hence they are functional apostates because they accept those different faiths as inspired by the Almighty and, as a result, deny the uniqueness of Our Lord’s revelation. How could such ones who clearly lack the faith ever restore the Church?
God bless you as well IC.
I looked over my last comment ( and believe me there is so much more I could have added experientially speaking) and it occurred to me that I just may be suffering from PTSV2D (Post Traumatic Vatican Two Disorder) and that the present occupant of the Chair of Peter has had Theological training equivalent to John Lennon’s .
“Imagine there’s no heaven
It’s easy if you try
No hell below us
Above us only sky
Imagine all the people living for today”
Look up the rest of the lyrics and you will see how nicely it encompasses all the rest of Borgoglio’s verbalized religious opinions.
Then I thought I would peruse some other blog sites to see what they are reporting .One April 3 Catholic blog post is on Borgolio’s Argentine nun friend quoting his advice to her concerning the poor women down there, as having endorsed the use of contraceptive methods such as condoms , diaphrams and tubal ligations to avoid abortions. She goes on to say in the posted piece , that he mentioned the great PP6th as having allowed the use of condoms for African nuns who were threatened by rape. Then there is .Fr Z , formerly of the Voris’ LENTEN Retreats at Sea, which was an absurdly oxymoronish title in and of itself, has now moved onto exposing real NO masses , including the drone carried Monstrance up to an altar during a mass in Brazil and a superhero children’s mass complete with scantily clad adults representing the comic book characters. How inspirational is that !
Wow I thought ! We all are suffering from PTSV2D , including Borgoglio himself and it’s now a pandemic.
Sweep, In college I met a priest at the Neumann Center who left to live with two nuns. I only heard about hx priests locally, but no personal expierences. But in Manassas, our pastor had hot tub sessions with a married mother of five. He left the parish, the Church, the area and the state. He left with this doll, was ordained an Episcopal priest, and lead an Episcopal parish in Georgia. Notorious case. This doll later had at least two children with him. Her husband, all I know was that he was brokenhearted. Thus the need for the Ten Commandments. They arn’t the Ten Suggestions.
In caritas said: “Daniel prophesies that, “the victim and the sacrifice shall fail:”. The “victim” is the spotless Lamb of God and the “sacrifice” is the representation of Calvary. The Holy Mass shall fail and not return unto the consummation of the world. That is a hard pill to swallow, ”
Question; So are you concluding that no valid conversion of the constituent element of bread into the formal principle of the Body and Blood of Christ takes place on any altar in the world today?
Allow me to butt in here LennyB. I do not think IC is saying there are no valid masses. However, because there is no Pope, there are no valid licit masses. I believe it is IC’s opinion that only valid and licit masses are pleasing to God while other sedes will answer that the lack of authority gives them suppliedjurisdiction to continue saying mass and ordaining priests and consecrating bishops. Others will disagree and since there is no Pope, the issue remains unresolved. It is a mystery and yes, very messy and confusing to the faithful, but it is not a contradiction.
Tom A, IC said: “The Holy Mass shall fail and not return unto the consummation of the world. That is a hard pill to swallow, ” So you’re saying IC means in the future it will fail but not yet? Or does IC mean it has failed?
As for supplied jurisdiction, I am aware of the concerns relative to simulated consecration without Papal mandate.
I don’t know Lenny, but we all should be ready for the days when we no longer have access to the sacraments. Hold to Tradition and hold onto to the faith and your Rosary. It is a hard pill to swallow. But wishful thinking does not change reality. Know the Faith as taught prior to 1958 and know what the documents of Vatican II say and mean. Do this and you can only conclude that V2 is apostasy, not just heresy.
Bingo! The only question left regards access to the Eucharistic Sacrifice. Anyone with eyes to see and ears to hear knows that clerical infiltration/repudiation of Papal Monarchy and V2 constitutional heresy severed the Vatican institution from the indefectible Church. So the question now becomes where is that indefectible Church? Is it an objective reality among those Sede Vacantist Trads with their supplied jurisdiction Masses or is it among the Catacomb Catholics with their private chapels where the Holy Sacrifice has ceased? The Catacomb folks view all Trads, Sede or R&R, as schismatics engaging in “sinful simulated pseudo-consecrations.”
Happy Easter in the Octave LennyB,
As Tom A responded LennyB, there are valid Masses, because there are valid Bishops in the approved, non-Roman Catholic Rites but they are all illicit. Why? Because the last valid and licit, Papal approved/appointed consecration of Bishops would have had to occur, at the latest, in 1958 by Pius XII. Do the math. If 40 in 1958, you are 100 today. Please read, “Ad Apostolorum Principum” by Pope Pius XII, 1958, months before his death, where he clearly codified the Church’s perennial teaching/discipline regarding the consecration of Bishops, under any/all circumstances without exception, period and end. He commanded that any Bishops who consecrate priests as Bishops, as long as done as the Church has always done them, are valid but illicit. Further, as they are illegal/illicit, both the consecrating Bishops and those who receive the consecration are removed from the Holy Church, latae sentenciae, in the very act of the consecration, as well as any and all ordinates those same bishops may at any later time ordain into the priesthood. The priests will also be validly ordained, as long as the Ordination is done as the Church has always ordained (read as the “new sacraments” of the false pope Montini are invalid), but illicit and thus they too are excommunicated in the act of their Ordination, and as thus are outside the Church, where there is no salvation, deFide, as are the Orthodox. Do not allow the machinations of mere miserable men and their canonical “interpretations” of so called, “supplied jurisdiction”, lead you away from the Truth, as taught by His Holy Church and by His true Vicars, who existed until after the death of Pope Pius XII, as these men, the true Vicars, teach and govern infallibly. Amen. Alleluia. Further, he commanded that their consecrations of the bread and wine, the illicit Bishops and priests, all of them, are always sacrilegious and therefore mortally sinful, and it follows then, that the laity participate in that sacrilege, whether they know it or not, as taught by Saint Thomas Aquinas, leading then not to their salvation but to their eternal damnation, consuming the Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ unworthily, as Saint Paul taught, causing their judgement, as sacrilegiously consumed.
The Truth is hard but Christ Jesus, in His infinite mercy, has allowed for all to see this in the objective realm of reality, and it is to be known, as a virtuous 12 year old would understand it to be, reasoning rightly, as that only occurs by virtue of the human person’s participation in the Mind of God Himself, as the Angelic Doctor taught us.
So it is the “Holy” Sacrifice of the Mass which has already been lost, Lenny B, and this in the objective realm of reality. Amen. The unholy Sacrifice of the Mass continues, as in the approved Rites of Pope Satin Pius V, in his Apostolic Constitution, “Quo Primum”. I pray this helps. In caritas.
LennyB, on the issue of the Eucharistic Sacrament in these time, one must do his due dilligence. There is no authority to teach us where we may go to Mass or Liturgy. It is a fact that Paul VI altered the Rites of Ordination in 1968. It is a fact that Abp Lefebrve ordained and consecrated without a Papal Mandate. It is a fact that the sede and independent communities do likewise. It is also a fact that the Eastern Catholic Churches have by and large not changed their Rites yet do not denounce the heresies of Vatican II. Then there is the question of whether you should attend any mass that invokes the name of the heresiarch Bergolio in the Sacred Canon. Others advocate staying at home because these masses lack official authority and we can’t depend on supplied jurisdiction. All make good cases to defend these various positions but no one can pronounce an authoritative solution except a true Pope. I pray that the traditional clergy gather, declare the See Vacant, and elect a Pope. Only then will the faithful have a shepherd. Right now you are on your own.
Hello again Lenny B,
Tom A is patently as objectively wrong in this his most recent opinion, as that is what he is now injecting into the dialogue. He suggested that what I said above was my opinion. That conjecture of TomA is patently false. What I am saying rests in the objective and infallible teaching of Holy Church. I site the sources. It is simply as only, his miserable opinion, as the perfectly fallible man that he as I, and all the rest of us miserable creatures can only be, this side the veil. That said, our Blessed Lord commanded that His Church prevails unto the end of time, period and end. He wasn’t commanding the real estate to prevail as His Church but His Mystical Body and Bride. We have 1958 years of infallible Magisterium as the holding place of the infallible as Holy Tradition of the One, True, Church, Her Moral teaching, Her interpretation as the definition of Holy Writ as it has occurred, and Her existing infallible discipline, as we have no Pontiff to change it, as only he holds the Keys and the power to bind and loose.
We are led astray by mere human opinion, in matters deFide, always and everywhere, which will take us on the broad road to eternal perdition, as our Blessed Lord and Savior, Jesus the Christ, commanded in Matthew 7. The only as singular way which Tom A, or you LennyB, or miserable me, or anyone else, is going to rightly reason, is if we are participating in God’s Holy Mind, and not within the immanence of our own mere, fallen, creaturely minds. In the Holy Gospel of John, chapter 14, Christ clarified this reality as Truth for us, when in the sum He commanded: Soon I will be leaving you as I will be returning to the Father Who loves Me and if you love Me, you will be glad for Me; but the Father will not leave you alone. He will send you the Blessed Paraclete, the Holy Ghost, Who will remind you of all that I taught you and teach you more. The world will not know Him nor see Him but you will. Who is “you”, Lenny B? His disciples of course, unto the consummation of the world. Those who hold the One, True Faith in their hearts, with the movement of their wills, into His Holy Will. In that same chapter, Christ commanded who it is that truly loves Him, at all personal cost: 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. It is all quite clear LennyB. Christ our Lord through the Love of God’s Holy Ghost, simply does not, as He cannot because He commanded thus, abandon those who truly love Him. Most in this world, all but all, are receiving the, “operation of error” to believe the lie, as though it is the Truth, as we all, every human creature, seeks the Truth, as He is written on our hearts. Most are deceived though, because the Holy Writ prophesied thus, because they love iniquity and not Truth Himself, as Saint Paul prophesied in 2 Thes 2, thus they reject His grace which is freely given and completely undeserved, and in lieu of His grace then, He sends them what they will, the “operation of error to believe lying.”. It is all deeply sorrowful LennyB, but the Truth just is and He commanded that He came not to bring peace but the sword. Amen. Alleluia. I pray this helps. In caritas.
Happy Easter in the Octave to IC and Tom A.
Thank you for taking the time to address my questions. I, too, pray every day that Christ the King will raise up a Vicar for His Church before the consummation of the world.
In caritas, you say, “The priests will also be validly ordained, as long as the Ordination is done as the Church has always ordained (read as the “new sacraments” of the false pope Montini are invalid), but illicit and thus they too are excommunicated in the act of their Ordination, and as thus are outside the Church, where there is no salvation, deFide, as are the Orthodox.” So, assuming you’re correct what happens if say one of these Priests or Bishops decides, “Oh no, I was in error. I thought that I had supplied jurisdiction, but now I realize I was wrong?” What would he have to do to save his soul? Does he need to just stop acting as a Priest or Bishop? I mean, what else can he do? If this were the case, you couldn’t even ask a valid Priest for some holy water, “Hey, since your on the way to Hell anyway, could you just fill up this big jug with holy water for me?” No Holy Water. In your opinion, do I sin today if I use the holy water I have?
Lenny, it appears In Caritas is a home aloner.
Could you explain your warning about the FSSP please? Our adult children moved from novus ordo to FSSP. Despite our warnings concerning the consecrations of novus ordo bishops used for their ordinations, they do not want to leave. They do not see how the thinking and teaching is still novus ordo-pro Vatican II. Any information will be greatly appreciated.
rich I am very interested in what you have to say about the FSSP and how they destroyed your family. I have not read about it on this site. I currently belong to a FSSP parish and have been visiting a sedevacantist chapel, trying to decide where I belong. Any information that can help me in this decision is greatly appreciated.
Louise, investigate the 1968 Rite of Ordination of Bishops. Chances are the FSSP priests are simply laymen.
In caritas, I read this from Ad Apostolorum Principis: Consequently, if consecration of this kind is being done contrary to all right and law, and by this crime the unity of the Church is being seriously attacked, an excommunication reserved specialissimo modo to the Apostolic See has been established which is automatically incurred by the consecrator and by anyone who has received consecration irresponsibly conferred.
How could present consecrations of this kind possibly “seriously attack the unity of the Church?” And they help Catholics w/grace from the Sacraments and religious community which would aide the unity of the Church, I’d think.
Rich I am really interested in how the FSSP destroyed your family, I have not read about it on this site before and find myself torn between a FSSP parish and sedevacantist chapel at the moment. Anything information you could share for me to consider in making a decision between the two would be truly appreciated.
Thank you for reading, “Ad Apostolorum Principis”. It is of utter import that when we speak of Holy Mother Church, for instance in regard to “unity”, within the context of your question, we must firmly as unequivocally adhere to precisely what Her meaning is as the Truth, of just what, “unity”, means. Allow me to quote from Ad Apostolorum Principis:
“40. And when We later addressed to you the letter Ad Sinarum gentem, We again referred to this teaching in these words: “The power of jurisdiction which is conferred directly by divine right on the Supreme Pontiff comes to bishops by that same right, but only through the successor of Peter, to whom not only the faithful but also all bishops are bound to be constantly subject and to adhere both by the reverence of obedience and by the bond of unity.”
As the three Doctors and Carmelite Saints of Holy Mother Church so eloquently taught, Saints Theresa of Avila, John of the Cross, and Therese of Liseaux, “obedience” is the test of “humility”, without which there can be no true Caritas and without this reflection of the Love of God for Himself, as Deus Caritas Est, there simply can be no unity, as unity flows from the Blessed Trinity.
It may “feel good” to suggest that under the Church’s current circumstance in this world, the appointment and consecration of Bishops without true Papal authority, from the authentic Vicar of Christ, is somehow a “good” but it simply cannot be, as this has been defined as the exclusive governance of the Holy Roman Pontiff, by the last true Vicar of Christ who roamed this world, having died in 1958. Without a true Vicar alive today, there can be no powers of jurisdiction nor teaching given, nor held then by any Bishop, as these are divine in their Origin and flow only to the Successor of Peter, and then only through him to the Shepherds. This is infallible Church teaching and discipline. True “unity” can only come through submission into the authority of the Successor of Peter, by both the Shepherds and the faithful, at any and all costs, including the shedding of one’s blood.
And so Melanie, you asked your question this way,
“How could present consecrations of this kind possibly “seriously attack the unity of the Church?” And they help Catholics w/grace from the Sacraments and religious community which would aide the unity of the Church, I’d think.”
You see, the “unity” of Holy Mother Church can only come from the singular man in the cosmos given the divine authority to yield such unity and with the divine protections offered him. Without the true Successor of Peter, we have lost our temporal head of Holy Mother Church, through whom flows by divine right, the powers of jurisdiction and teaching. Looking at it another way, the “unity” has already been successfully “attacked”, by virtue of the false church of the Antichrist having been established, and having taken over the temporal structures of that which had been controlled by Christ’s Church over the centuries. This understood, while at once Lucifer has placed his vicar in lieu of Christ’s Vicar. This can be understood as a distinct manifestation of the “abomination of desolation”, of which the prophet Daniel prophesied would occur in its time, and commensurate with the loss of the “Holy” Sacrifice of the Mass, that can only occur when there is no true Vicar of Christ Jesus in the world. Remember Melanie, this has all been prophesied and must therefore come to pass. Further, as the Church has always taught, our Blessed Lord and Savior, as He so Wills, can confer Sacramental grace upon any human soul He Wills, without the external signs of the Sacraments, which under ordinary circumstances are given as a consolation to us, feeding our senses with the proper holy Rites.
Saint Thomas Aquinas taught that whenever sacrilege occurs by a priest during the offering of the Mass, the graces do not flow to the priest nor to the faithful, whether they know it or not and further that those Masses must be avoided as they are gravely sinful. This is in accord with, “Ad Apostolorum Principis”. To answer your question from above about the Holy Water. In keeping with the command of our Blessed Lord in Matthew 7, “good fruit cannot come from an evil tree”, and also the reality that it is gravely sinful to consume our Blessed Lord unworthily (as sacrilegiously) as Saint Paul taught, we then consume our eternal Judgment, you should discard the “Holy” Water as properly in the ground.
Finally for now, remember what Our Lady of LaSalette foretold, “Rome will lose the Faith and become the seat of the Antichrist”, and further, “The Church will be in eclipse, the world in dismay.” It is an ontological absurdity to suggest that Rome can at once be the See of Peter and the seat of the Antichrist, at the same time, as that defies the law of non-contradiction. I pray this helps Melanie. In caritas.
In caritas, I’ve really tried to think that you’re wrong but I do believe you speak the truth. Thanks for your response. Lord, have mercy.
@In caritas – It is completely irresponsible of you to declare the entire visible Catholic Church anathema and urge other people here, some of whom appear to take you seriously, to leave it. You are not a prophet. You are doing the Protestant thing of interpreting Scripture and randomly quoting it to support your thesis. You are calling Christ a liar – you know, the whole gates of hell thing – and I think you are crossing the line from delusional to objectively causing moral evil by leading people out of the Church. You love to say how any 12-year-old should be able to understand, yet 1.1 billion, many of whom are extremely intelligent and well educated, disagree with you. You believe that you’ve uncovered secret knowledge of the truth, which is pure Gnosticism. You have a lot of nerve to condemn Pope Francis for anything when you are actively and continually trying to convince people to abandon the practice of their Faith.
Blunder, the entire NO “visible Catholic Church” declares ITSELF anathema every day since V2 that they preach a false ecumenical, false religious liberty doctrine. Neither In Caritas nor anyone else has to declare this fact. One only has to listen to what they say and understand what they are saying. Here is a challenge, Blunder. Name one NO cleric that preaches the Catholic faith unblemished by modernism. I will save you some time. The answer is none. If the Catholic Church can teach heresy, then the Gates of Hell have prevailed. You are looking at the man made structures of the Church instead of the Divine Foundation of the Church. Christ being the Truth is the foundation of the Church. Any error at all in matters of faith or morals would destroy that foundation which cannot be destroyed. Since the modern “visible Catholic Church” teaches falsehoods, it cannot by logic be the Catholic Church which CANNOT teach falsehood. Its a simple process of deduction and elimination. It is a difficult pill to swallow since many sentiments and emotions keep us tied to what we used to believe was the Church.
PS Blunder, nothing Gnostic or hidden about it. All you need to know is what V2 teaches and what the Catholic Church taught before V2. Its all on the internet now and easily accessible to all. Read it for yourself. Personally, I was very troubled years ago when the abuse scandal first arose. So I set out to prove to others that were critical of the Church, how the Catholic Church was the one and only true church. Well it didn’t take long to quickly realize that something went terribly wrong at Vatican II. And what went wrong was the heresy of modernism. It is an act of charity to warn souls to leave the false NO church. It teaches errors that can lead a soul to hell.
Why not go ahead and retract your calumny above of the SSPX? You said that at an SSPX chapel you were “forced to listen to the praises of Adolf Hitler from the pulpit.”
You know this is either an outright lie or a gross distortion. Why not clear it up?
@Tom A You claim the Catholic Church no longer exists as a visible entity. But you and only you hold the “true” faith. and outside the Catholic Church there is no salvation, so…all those in what the entire world recognizes as the Catholic Church cannot be saved and only Tom A will make it to heaven. If you can’t see how completely delusional that is, nothing I can say will change your mind. Your internet research helped you figure it out. Right. I forget where Christ said, “And I Say unto you, let him who can go unto the Internet, for there is truth and enlightenment and My REAL Church.”
You actually think the God we worship operates like that? Like some sort of trickster sending everyone to hell because the Church He promised would endure has vanished and been replaced by what literally 99.99999% of humanity, Catholic or not, recognized as the Catholic Church but isn’t? For real?
Pope Francis is an admirer of Pope Paul VI (the great light) who made the famous statement: “The smoke of Satan has entered the temple of God through some crack…” So according to their own words the Devil is real, and thus Hell is real. I think though, that the Pope should be admonished and corrected for his statement to the reporter and for A.L. as well.
Blunderbuss, I’ve sometimes considered VII in this way. Say, I’m a wife and mother to a family and I have to go away, maybe a retreat for a wk. At the end of the wk, a person comes back in the house dressed in my clothes w/my belongings but is 200lbs, bald, has a beard, is a man, is cruel and hates everyone in the family, abusing everyone physically and mentally. Do you think it would be weird if none of them actually went looking for me. If they are sane and lucid and knew me and loved me they would not stop searching until they brought me home, dead or alive. They wouldn’t just throw up their arms and say, “Man, Mom is just awful now, that retreat must have been really lame. Maybe she’ll go on another retreat someday and come back at least clean shaven and smelling better. What a terrible Mom we have, poor us.” I guess, I’m thinking, maybe God expected us to notice something was wrong after VII. Tom A isn’t talking about the Internet like it’s a crystal ball; there is a library on there that is pretty much unlimited.
This guy has to be insane. To utter some of the most off the wall remarks in history coming from the chair of St. Peter. Our faith must be strong, bothers and sisters, to withstand this onslaught of scandalous comments coming from, from…I don’t even know–the very pit of hell. Let us take comfort in Jesus, who is greater than the house he built: the Church. Which he is allowing to be destroyed as a test. Our faith, remember, is not in an institution, but in a savior!
Blunder, please re-read all I have written and tell me when I said the Catholic Church does not exist. I simply stated that the visible church that the world believes is the Catholic Church cannot be the true Catholic Church since it does not teach the Catholic faith. Instead it teaches a false man centered religion as taught at Vatican II. Please tell me where I have ever written that only I have the true faith and all those who don’t believe like I do are damned. The Catholic faith is not hidden. It is right there in the old books as taught prior to 1958. Anyone can find it. Likewise the false V2 NO religion is easily found. You are putting words into my mouth that I never uttered because you cannot refute the objective facts that I have stated. If you are serious about seeking the truth then take the time to convince me that there exists a continuity between the pre and post V2 church. Explain to me what I believe to be contradictions are not contradictions. Have you come up with an NO priest or bishop who is not a modernist yet? I see you have not taken up that challenge.
TomA to Blunderbuss: “If you are serious about seeking the truth then take the time to convince me that there exists a continuity between the pre and post V2 church. Explain to me what I believe to be contradictions are not contradictions. Have you come up with an NO priest or bishop who is not a modernist yet? I see you have not taken up that challenge.”
Just as he still hasn’t responded to the following question in two separate blogs: Which of those bad/lousy popes taught heresy to the Universal Church?
2VT, the questions we ask are not answered because they cannot be answered. Yet most people operate on false assumptions. In the Catholic world, the first false assumption is that the guy in white at the Vatican is the Pope. These people are materialists who only understand the material aspects of life. They do not know the faith and therefore cannot recognize the imposters in their midst.
It is very complicated and I honestly dont think that a public forum such as this is the place for this discussion. I would have no problem explaining it to you of course in a private setting, just not on a public forum. Remember why the FSSP was formed (and by whom of course), and know full well where they get their marching orders from.
First off, I don’t doubt anyone’s sincerity, but I do think you’re dead wrong.
@2Vermont – no pope has, since the Church teaches they can’t do so, at least officially – though what is ex cathedra and what is not is pretty vague. Pope Francis hasn’t either, ex cathedra.
@Tom A – examples include the priest at my local parish and, I don’t know, Pope John Paul II and Fulton Sheen.
You’re saying that you have figured out that the institution calling itself and universally acknowledged as the Catholic Church isn’t. I say it is. Seems to me that if you make that claim, the onus is on you to show where the Church exists – with, as you assert, no priests, no hierarchy, no structure, no sacraments – and how that doesn’t contradict the whole “gates of hell” thing. You want to talk about old books, your theory flies in the face of that “one, holy, Catholic and apostolic” stuff in the old books. And private, vague revelation does not trump Church teaching, so please don’t cite vague prophecies and apparitions.
@Melanie – it’s a good analogy and I get what you’re saying. But stop at fat and drop the man and cruel and abusive and it’s still the wife. The husband, yeah, prob not thrilled but, if he’s a good man, he still loves his wife because she’s still the same person, and has an obligation to stay with her. What’s more, a lot of other people probably like her better a little heavier. The Church is still the Church, and Her sacraments are still sacraments. You (and many) just don’t like the packaging. But a lot of others do. If a husband doesn’t like his enormously fat wife, he can – I don’t know – encourage her to go running with him. But he doesn’t go out and set up shop in a strip club where he’s surrounded by emotionally unstable women who agree with him and validate everything he says. That’s what person who leaves the Church does on an intellectual level. That’s what people in the “the Catholic Church isn’t the Catholic Church” are doing. Gnostics in an intellectual strip club.
I hope for your sake that Mr Bergoglio officially rejects Catholicism. Maybe then you’ll get it. You are a person who literally needs to have their jaw broken to understand that the guy throwing punches at you intends to do you harm.
Blunder, I give you lots of credit and believe you really are trying to help us return to the Church. And for that I thank you. But it is obvious in choosing JP2 that you do not know what modernism is. You need to read Pope St Pius X and Pascendi. You and I are talking past each other and using common words with differing definitions. Also, the onus is on you to defend your faith. You still must show us how the teachings of the church calling itself catholic is not a contradiction to what was taught up until 1958. I don’t have to use any private revelations like Fatima. I am certainly not what is called a Fatimista. I do use Sacred Scripture. Read 2nd Thessolonians. The visible church will fail. The Gates of Hell will not prevail against the faith. But it will have a grand old time destroying the edifices.
Melanie, this might bring balance to the posts by In Caritas regarding the home alone understanding of the state of things currently.
@rich – One. Holy. Catholic. Apostolic. A clandestine Church that exists in the living rooms of a few fanatics is none of these. In that world, God’s a liar. And the pre-V2 Church is wrong too.
I don’t like Pope Francis. I run my a/c – using cleanly generated electricity- at full blast with zero fear of condemnation. I recognize Pope Francis for what he is – a lousy Pope. But I don’t descend into Gnosticism, where only a select few “get it” and where all but a handful of the seven billion people currently inhabiting the earth are on the fast track to hell.
Why would you worship a god who, not content to send nearly everyone on the planet who’s not Catholic to hell, allows a fake church to commandeer the Catholic name and be accepted as such by almost everyone so that even Catholics are almost all going to wind up in hell too? (This is literally what you’re advocating.) You can only fear an angry deity like that – and if you truly believe that that’s how God is, the fundamentalist Muslim view of God as an irrational being to be feared and obeyed without reason or question makes far more sense than the vindictive, petty one you make him out to be. This is not what the Catholic Church teaches now, nor what it has ever taught.
As I responded to Louise below, I dont think that this forum is the proper medium to discuss the issue. The FSSP was instrumental in doing great harm to me personally because of the bad men who they accept into their order. I have 10 children and a wife; I havent seen nor talked to my seven youngest children or my wife for 6 years now….and that happened because my wife was guided by an FSSP priest….and backed up by their North American superior at the time, a very cowardly Fr Flood. I have nothing but utter contempt for them. Is that sinful…yeah probably. Am I the one who doesnt even know what most of my children even look like anymore, thanks to the guidance of the FSSP? Yes.
Good Thursday evening The Papal Subject,
Your a bit behind the ball. Melanie provided that link to the layman lawyer’s article several days ago. His rhetoric is full of holes, my friend, as it can only be, as it flows from the immanence of men and not the Universal Magisterium, period and end. He ducks and dashes the substance of the argument, in the typical colloquial style of a lawyer, only now he is dealing with his eternal salvation and that of others. Stick to what has been infallibly proclaimed in both discipline and doctrine, by the one man in the cosmos who is given this authority by “divine right” and the concordant divine protections from error. All of the machinations of the R$R crowd and in all of its miserable facets, will take souls to eternal Hell all day and everyday, as they are mere immanent human opinion. The road to Hell is paved with any sundry of human opinion, with perhaps “good intention” but deceived, yet fully culpable for the deception, as are we all. To suggest otherwise is a patent denial of grace. Amen. Alleluia. In caritas.
You continue to dig ever more deeply into the only place which you can, from within your miserable creaturely immanence, and reach for that which in the objective realm of reality you are perfectly blind to, as you attempt to make sense of that which is nonsensical, as you seek your passions, while suppressing your intellect. You hurl vitriolic ad hominem attacks, evidencing not sincerity as Tom A has suggested, rather malignity in the objective realm of reality, for all to bear witness to. That is all someone as you can muster, as you literally as actually suppress your intellect into the subordinate position, where Almighty God has deemed the passions belong, as He created them, in His own divine likeness and image, as pure Intellect and Will. Amen.
You at once profane authentic Magisterial teaching and discipline as you spew the ad hominem rhetorical term in your use, “Gnosticism”, simply because in the objective realm of reality again, you are receiving the “operation of error to believing lying”, which Saint Paul prophesied in 2 Thes 2, must come to pass. You deny Jesus Christ, in His own divine words, as in the Holy Gospels of Matthew, chapters 7 and 24, where Christ the King makes it patently clear, that at the time when He comes again, there will be precious little faith left on the earth, and according to our Blessed Lord, again in Matthew 7 and 24, most souls are eternally damned, in accordance with their own free movement of their will, while at once denying God’s grace as they embrace a “comfortable life” of iniquity. Amen. Further, you deny our Blessed Lord specifically in Matthew 24:15, when He commands, “he that readeth, let him understand”, and this as He speaks of the prophet Daniel prophesying the failure of the “victim” and the “sacrifice”, in the context of the “abomination of desolation”, which Jesus the Christ commanded would be as Daniel prophesied, while at once commanding, “he that readeth, let him understand”.
The “visible Church” is now where the visible Church has always been since Pentecost and that is in the deepest interiority, the hearts of those who hold the One, True Faith, as our Blessed Lord commanded the gates of Hell will not prevail. He did not command that we would know how the gates will not prevail, as God’s Intellect is immutable and inscrutable, Amen. You pretend to know that somehow this means anyone who calls himself the “Pope” and because he controls the temporal edifice of that which was held by the true Church over the centuries, he indeed is the “Pope”, again placing an affront to what Jesus the Christ warned us would come to pass in Matthew 7 and 24, about those prophets dressed up coming to you as sheep but inside they are ravening wolves. Saint Paul also warned us clearly, for all those with eyes to see, about these times in 2 Thes 2. You are so utterly effeminized Blunderbuss, that you don’t even know it. Our Blessed Lord commanded that He did not come to bring peace but the sword and so your vitriolic attack of the other, has been prophesied as well. There is no love to be found in your attack, as there is no right reason in your intellect and this as objectively understood as Christ commanded: “You will know them by their fruits.” We can only truly love that which we truly know, as the Angelic Doctor taught, period and end. Amen.
Your own words betray you as our Blessed Lord commanded this to be in Matthew 7: 16-21:
“By their fruits you shall know them. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit, and the evil tree bringeth forth evil fruit. A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can an evil tree bring forth good fruit. Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit, shall be cut down, and shall be cast into the fire. Wherefore by their fruits you shall know them. Not everyone that saith to Me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the Kingdom of Heaven: but he that doth the Will of My Father Who is in Heaven, he shall enter into the Kingdom of Heaven.”
While you accuse the other of “Protestantism”, it is you who are effeminized, while at once you attempt to mold Almighty God into your own likeness and image of Him, the One Who simply IS. To leave you with a question that a virtuous 12 year old in the state of grace could answer, Blunderbuss. Can the Catholic Church be in internal contradiction in any understanding, but for the sake of this question specifically, can She be in internal contradiction to what She has always taught in the Creed of the Catholic Church? If your answer is no, then explain, “The Dogmatic Constitution on the Church”, so called, “Lumen Gentium 16”. I pray this helps as your very eternal salvation depends on knowing the Truth as Christ Jesus our Lord has commanded us to know. Amen. Alleluia. In caritas.
Blunder, I didn’t ask you whether any pope taught heresy to the Universal Church via ex cathedra means. I asked if any pope ever taught heresy to the Universal Church period. You will not find ANY pope that taught heresy to the Universal Church in any manner. That’s because the Catholic Church can not teach error in faith and morals to the Universal Church. The Catholic Church can not endanger souls. The Catholic Church also enjoys infallibility via its Universal Ordinary Magisterium…and no pope has ever taught something contrary to the infallible UOM. “Pope” Francis clearly teaches in contradiction to the infallible teachings of the Holy Catholic Church.
There is no one around to give a certain answer. Neither you, nor I, nor a layman lawnmower can give an infallible interpretation to any passage of scripture, e.g the prophet Daniel, and say that a certain prophecy has definitely been fulfilled in our day, and now we need to do x, y or z.
Moral theology says that we take the minimum retreat necessary in self defense. For the moment, I can only see that receiving the sacraments from validly ordained clergy is the right thing to do.
It was a mere two years ago, when that filthy rag, Amoris was presented to the world, that I came to believe that Bergoglio was not the pope, and never was, and the same soon went for Paul VI through to Benedict. I don’t know or care enough about John XXIII to decide.
You may have been at this for much longer and had more time to be convinced of your position. If it is true, I will surely adopt it and apply it, but God’s grace seems to unfold over time, and I’m not where you are.
So I will continue to trust in Providence to lead me to an ever more clear understanding of the truth of today’s situation.
Papal Subjec and Melanie, the application of supplied jurisdiction does not necessarily apply to our time. In the past, the concept of supplied jurisdiction was applied to correct administrative errors. An example would be when a priest thought he had faculties but somehow the paper work was misfiled at the chancellory. The Church also applies supplied jurisdiction when a soul is near death and any ordained priest (even excommunicated) can absolve the poor souls sins. But to apply supplied jurisdiction to a “state of emergency” as the SSPX claims and other independent sede clergy claim is not so clear cut. A case can be made either way. I have not heard a definitive argument yet on this subject. Perhaps someone else has more information.
Blunder, one more thing. You never refute one argument I propose. You simply say that what I claim cannot be so because you believe the Church will exist in the form that you wish it too. It is true that the Church will never be destroyed, but how that manifests itself in the natural world has never been defined. We creatures can only apply our reason and suppress our emotions and objectively analyze the situation. When you remove pre-conceived notions and emotions there is only one conclusion. The post V2 church contradicts the pre V2 Church. Therefore they cannot be the same thing in substance. Yes the accidentals appear to be the same, but the essence is not. This should not be a hard principal for Catholics to understand since it is exactly what the Church teaches about transubstantiation. The accidents of bread and wine remain, while the substance is transformed into the body, blood, soul, and divintiy of Our Lord Jesus Christ. Likewise, Sacred Scripture tells us of the coming of Anti-Christ. A key attribute of anti-christ is that he will mock the Church and reverse all that She does. So it seems possible that he will use the the same prinicpal to decieve many. Yet Satan is powerless to actually change the essence the true Church so he sets up a great deception and deceives even the elect. I do not need to use any private revelations nor conjure up conspiracies. It is all in Sacred Scripture and the Church (prior to V2) has explained how we should interpret these passages, so it is not my private “protestant” interpretation that I rely on. It is not gnostic as you claim. You simply do not want it to be so because it is terribly inconvenient and distressing. Oh how I wish it were not so and our futures all rosie and secure. But, I am afraid we are all being led and dragged to Calvary where we too will be handed our own cross to hang upon. Our Lord will judge us whether we take up that cross as He did or reject it like the condemned thief that cursed Him out at calvary. The most inspiring man in the Gospels, for me, has always been the good thief. Be ready all, to give an account to Our Lord like he did.
2Vermont: DaBus is a TROLL. The only answers/explanations you’ll get from this fake news loving virtue signaler are 1.1 Billion can’t be wrong, non sequiturs, and lame Hunter S. Thompson-lite quips like “Gnostics in an intellectual strip club.” I was surprised he didn’t start throwing out “neopelagians” instead like his mentor! He is the perfect successor to Jorge.
@In caritas – “Miserable creaturely immanence” literally had me LOL. An ad hominem attack is something like “you’re wrong because you’re fat” or “don’t listen to him, he’s ugly and stupid.” I haven’t done this. Your response, however, does it over and over. I don’t know how it started, but I’ve seen the “effeminacy” card thrown by Trads a lot and it’s kind of like how in 5th grade guys would insult each other by saying “oh yeah? Well, you’re gay!” Come on.
I’m flattered that you feel that my response was prophesied (I think?) but I can assure you no part of my life is prophesied anywhere.
Speaking of Scripture, the whole pulling quotes randomly to back up your thesis, yes, is Protestant. The fig one is kind of out of nowhere. I was at the grocery store the other day and saw some figs and decided not to buy them although I do like them. Looks like I made the right call not buying the evil fruit lol.
Saying that the visible Church is in our hearts is a cop-out and you’re denying reality. There is a visible Catholic Church, as Christ promised. It’s declining in the US and Europe and thriving elsewhere. There are more Catholics, both in sheer numbers and as a % of the global population, than ever before. God doesn’t play favorites based upon race or location so he is not going to end the world because of what Europeans and Americans are doing. You want to criticize the German Church, the Pope, fine, but check yourself before you accuse the worldwide Catholic Church of apostasy and get all apocalyptic. Those realities exist only in your mind.
And I just don’t get the “Amen”s and “Allelulia”s randomly thrown in.
@2Vermont – John XXII
At the very most, Pope Francis believes in some creator.
Blunderbuss: So now you found a pope…Pope John XXII. Unfortunately for you he never taught heresy to the Universal Church.
Pope John spoke as a private teacher on a matter not yet settled in order to ascertain the truth of the matter so it could be defined, meanwhile permitting others to differ from him. In other words, he did not exercise his Magisterium; he did not commit heresy; and although his view was erroneous, it was permissible for him to hold at the time.
I’d say “try again” but the fact of the matter is that no true pope has ever taught heresy to the Universal Church. Francis and his most recent predecessors do.
Good Friday morning in the Octave of Easter The Papal Subject,
You had this to say:
“There is no one around to give a certain answer. Neither you, nor I, nor a layman lawnmower can give an infallible interpretation to any passage of scripture, e.g the prophet Daniel, and say that a certain prophecy has definitely been fulfilled in our day, and now we need to do x, y or z.
Moral theology says that we take the minimum retreat necessary in self defense. For the moment, I can only see that receiving the sacraments from validly ordained clergy is the right thing to do.”
When you claim there is “no one around to give a certain answer”, you are simply wrong, in the objective realm of reality, as commanded by Jesus the Christ. Read the Gospel of John, chapter 14. Christ Jesus our Lord and God commands just the opposite for all those who hold the One, True, Faith, His disciples thus, unto the consummation of the world. He commands that the Father will not leave us alone. Do you deny the commands of our Lord Jesus Christ? Rather, the Father will send us the Blessed Paraclete, the Holy Ghost, Who will remind us of all that He taught us and teach us more. Further, Jesus the Christ commands, the world will not know Him (the Holy Ghost) nor see Him but you will. Again, do you deny the commands of Christ? His commands require that which He commanded they require, that is to receive them into the operation of the will freely, while having the faith of an innocent child, period and end. Pretty clear The Papal Subject. We are commanded to submit the operation of our will into the Holy Will of Christ Jesus and He tells us in John 14 how we accomplish that, when He commands thus: 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. Lucifer has done an unutterably stunning job of taking that which is truly Catholic, understanding Holy Scripture as Christ Jesus commands us to, and perverts that, he apes that understanding, and has gotten all but all to believe that we have no capacity to understand the Holy Writ, when Christ commanded the opposite. What a faithful Catholic cannot do, is come up with interpretation which contradicts that which Holy Mother Church has always taught, as defined.
Christ admonished His disciples for knowing the signs of the weather but not knowing the signs of the times. In Matthew 24:15, Christ Jesus our Lord and our God, could not have made it more clear, that is His command that we understand what we read in the Holy Writ, at once knowing that our proper understanding is not immanent to us, rather it is a Gift of the Holy Ghost, a charism, as Christ commanded would occur after His Holy Death, Resurrection, Assumption, and then Pentecost. If we are disciples of Christ Jesus our King, then we submit our will into Him and follow His commands as He commands them and not how we may wish them to be, which is “Protestantism”.
Matthew 24, 15: “When therefore you shall see the abomination of desolation, which was spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place: he that readeth let him understand.” Do not get caught in the Luciferian deception, The Papal Subject, which deceives all but all into believing that we cannot know the Holy Writ, as Almighty God has commanded that we do, as He has commanded that we know the signs of the times.
Of course there is one, singular man in the cosmos, who from his charism of infallibility, gives infallible interpretation, and as we know with divine certitude, he is no longer with us, because the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church cannot be in contradiction and Vatican II is contradiction itself, as it is heretical, as it places opposition to the very Catholic Creed itself in Lumen Gentium 16, period and end. Therefore, we know with divine certitude that the church which calls itself “Catholic” and dresses the part, in the metaphysical accidentals as Tom A recently wrote, simply cannot be the Catholic Church. To know this with divine certitude requires at once the reception of the graces of perseverance and fortitude, as to recognize thus that we are in the time of the Antichrist, as this church which calls itself Catholic, is perfectly antichrist while it teaches the anti-Gospel and anti-Tradition, requires the reception of those graces. That is why we bear witness to unmitigated cowardice by all those who are deceived, all but all the baptized the world over, and deeply sorrowfully. Christ commanded that when He returns, it will be as the time of Noah, in Matthew 24. As the time of Noah, the Papal Subject, when 8 souls were spared, as 8 souls were faithful to Almighty God, period and end.
Lastly for now, please read, “Ad Apostolorum Principis” by Pope Pius XII, 1958, shortly before he died. It is unequivocal, the Papal Subject, that any Masses attended by any Bishop or Priest who was ordained by such Bishops that were not specifically as actually approved/appointed by the Vicar of Christ, are sacrilegious and therefore taking those souls who partake in them to their eternal Judgment and not their salvation, period and end. That is the infallible teaching and discipline of the last true Vicar of Christ, who deemed them sacrilegious. You claim that there is “no one” to tell us. You are wrong. Pope Pius XII codified this reality very specifically with no exceptions, none at all, as he deemed that any appointments/consecrations without the specific authority of the Vicar of Christ, was an attack on the unity of Holy Mother Church. There is no man alive on the earth today who can change that discipline. Any machinations about so called, “supplied jurisdiction”, as it relates the consecration of Bishops and their ordinations of priests, is as it can only be therefore, the work of the Liar himself, Lucifer, using his useful human minions, on their way to an eternity in Hell with their Prince, as it places an affront to the very specific teaching/discipline of the Holy Roman Pontiff. He makes no exceptions, none. There is no, “supplied jurisdiction”, for the consecration of Bishops and ordination of Priests, period and end. To suggest otherwise is to place oneself outside the Church, where there is no salvation, deFide, as it places an affront to the infallible governance of Peter in His true Successor, which separates the soul in schism, latae sentencia. Pope Pius XII commanded that all the Bishops, both consecrators and receivers of the consecration, and all the priests that any of them may ever ordain, although valid but only if consecrated and ordained as the Church has always done it since Apostolic time, as per the Roman Catechism of the Council of Trent (and Lefebvre did not as he used only one other purported Bishop in his purported consecration of 4 Bishops, who in truth are laymen thus), are all removed from Holy Mother Church, excommunicated thus, in the act of their illicit consecrations/ordinations, period and end. Remember the Papal Subject, Christ our Lord clearly commanded that the Victim and the Sacrifice would fail, as prophesied by the prophet Daniel, period and end. Again, that which a virtuous 12 year old in the state of grace would readily receive into his intellect, the command of our Lord Jesus Christ, in Matthew 24:15. Christ admonished His disciples for not knowing the signs of the times. We are there, the Papal Subject, as we have now only sacrilegious and not Holy Sacrifices of the Mass occurring, unless there are priests somewhere who are praying the true Mass and were ordained by licit and valid Bishops, who could have last been consecrated in 1958. The Truth is hard but He commanded that He came not to bring peace but the sword. Amen. Alleluia. I pray this helps. In caritas.
In Caritas, I think Papal Subject
is saying there is no canonical ecclesial authority to submit to. Of course we are always bound to Divine Law. Pius XII is no longer alive so he is no longer the law giver. We are not bound to his canonical laws but only to his magesterial teachings on faith and morals. Excommunications based on ordinations is not a matter of Divine Law, simply ecclesial law. You are wrong to draw the conclusion that a Bishop today is excommunicated based on a church law since there is no authority on earth to enforce the law. This matter can only be solved when there is a true Pope. You may be right in the long run, but until it is defined as a matter of faith and morals and not simply a matter of law, we are permitted to discuss and disagree. I expect you will disagree with this assessment and say it is de fide, but it is not.
Hello Tom A,
To suggest that an infallible law of governance vanquishes because the law giver, in this case the Holy Roman Pontiff Pius XII, has died, is patently absurd, as it attacks the very unity which is the Holy Catholic Church, as the Supernatural Society of Heaven on earth. Thy Will be done, on earth as it is in Heaven. Jesus the Christ is Her mystical Head and He commanded that He will be with us unto the consummation of the world, period and end. The law only vanquishes if there is another Successor in the Chair of Saint Peter who holds the Keys and has the divine right of authority thus, to change the law. To suggest otherwise is to suggest chaos anytime an Holy Roman Pontiff dies. The infallible governance of the Successor of Peter does not die with the Pope, rather it “dies” with another Pope who may loose it. As you are correct when you say there is no Ecclesial authority, re: true Holy Roman Pontiff, alive today to change the existing law, we are left with the existing law, as only the true Successor of Peter can change it. Looking at it another way, you are saying that any Ecclesial law that Pius XI may have established and which Pius XII did not loose, was vanquished with the death of Pius XI. That places an affront to unity within the Mystical Body of Christ and implodes under its own weight of disunity. It would seem that you should know better. Anything which carries the signature of chaos, hence disunity, is not of Christ, rather of the Antichrist. The infallible power of governance afforded the Successor of Peter with its charism of divine protection, is part of the Magisterium, as it is Holy Tradition. Your comment that you anticipated disagreement with what you had to say on my part, speaks Tom A. I pray this helps. In caritas.
In Caritas, when there is no lawgiver, there is no law. Durring normal interregnums, the Bishops with jurisdiction retain their authority over their respective dioceses. They prevent chaos by enforcing the laws of the deceased Pope until a new Pope is elected. No judgements of law can be made during an interregnum, only enforcement (ie a bishop may excommunicate someone under his authority). We are living in a time of ecclesial anarchy and chaos because there is no ecclesial authority. You and others argue that without law we would have chaos and I agree. We have chaos and anarchy right now. Some groups band together and try to preserve the priesthood and sacraments on their own as a survival tactic. But that is all it is. Small tribal ecclesial existence. The true Church with its authority is hidden from us. Who is your Bishop, In Caritas? While it is pious to follow the customs, traditions, and even laws of the past, it is only necessary that we obey Divine and moral Law. There is no one to enforce canon law. We are living, as I said, in ecclesial chaos and anarchy. I also challenge every trad reading this blog, who is your bishop that you submit to? And by what authority does he have to govern you? SSPX and sede bishops have zero authority. Novus Ordo “bishops” are heretics at best and apostates at most and have no authority since they are not even bishops. Laws need to be enforced and there is no one to enforce canon law so how can one be bound to it? If the govt of US ceased to exist next week, would you still file your taxes by April 15 because you think the old laws still bind you? No you wouldn’t. You would be taking measures to ensure your survival, which is what those real bishops are doing when they consecrate without a papal mandate. I am afraid it is your position, In Caritas that is absurd.
In caritas, What are your thoughts on Mat 12:9-14?
And when he has passed from thence, he came into their synagogues. And behold there was a man who had a withered hand, and they asked him, saying: Is it lawful to heal on the sabbath days? that they might accuse him. But he said to them: What man shall there be among you, that hath one sheep: and if the same fall into a pit on the sabbath day, will he not take hold on it and lift it up? How much better is a man than a sheep? Therefore it it lawful to do a good deed on the sabbath days. Then he saith to the man: Stretch forth thy hand; and he stretched it forth, and it was restored to health even as the other. And the Pharisees going out made a consultation against him, how they might destroy him.
Wouldn’t this indicate that you save the souls even if it breaks the law. That the law is made to save souls not to damn souls?
Hello again Tom A,
You are now steeping yourself into a patently anti-Catholic abyss, with your antichrist position of anarchy. Anarchy is the signature of the Prince of this world and not Christ the King. Your pathetic attempt at analogy using the so called, “United States government”, as a means of proving your absurdity, which has no being in reality as Truth, itself speaks again, Tom A. Christ’s Church was commanded to prevail against the gates of Hell by the Son of God Himself, the immanently Freemasonic U.S.A., not so much. He is Unity Himself as a divine Person of the Triune Godhead. You are sowing chaos Tom A and that is antichrist. To suggest what you are suggesting, is from a defacto position, tantamount to claiming that Christ’s Church has failed. May God help you. We have no Bishops at all in the Roman Rite Tom A and your point? Any Bishops in any of the approved Rites are illicit and your point? Not because this miserable wretch says so but because the Vicar of Christ commanded thus in, “Ad Apostolorum Principis”. To suggest that the metaphysical being of infallible governance becomes metaphysical non-being with the death of any Holy Roman Pontiff is an ipso-facto manifestation of your suggesting the actual governance of Holy Mother Church finds its very immanence from the Holy Roman Pontiff, as though he creates it, and then it dies with him. Again Tom A, you are now burying yourself in a position which finds its wellspring not in Christ Jesus but in the Antichrist, as your position is patently antichrist. The Church, as She prevails unto the consummation of the world, prevails without licit Bishops, without licit Popes, but with Her divine command of the Son of God. You are warned Tom A, not by miserable me, but by the infallible teaching of Holy Mother Church and Her infallible governance, which can NEVER breed chaos or the gates of Hell have prevailed, as chaos belongs to Lucifer not Christ Jesus our Lord and our God. Amen.
Your position is patently absurd and to use your own language:
“In Caritas, when there is no lawgiver, there is no law. During normal interregnums, the Bishops with jurisdiction retain their authority over their respective dioceses. They prevent chaos by enforcing the laws of the deceased Pope until a new Pope is elected. No judgements of law can be made during an interregnum, only enforcement (ie a bishop may excommunicate someone under his authority).”
Again Tom A, this is tedious but you persist in your error. Your statement, “when there is no law giver, there is no law.”, is absurd as it suggests that “the law” finds its being in the Pontiff. This is an ontological error which causes the cosmos to shudder in its absurdity, as you apply the Hegelian dialectic of synthesis perhaps without even knowing that you are. There is not one iota of act to be found in potency and whether the mere miserable human creature is the Holy Roman Pontiff or the miserable wretch now writing to you, the law finds its immanence in God Himself and does not somehow become non-being with the death of a Pope. It only finds its form changed with the Ecclesial authority of the bearer of the Keys, period and end, as Almighty God commanded in Matthew 16:19, and since we have no bearer of the Keys since 1958, we have existing infallible governance unchanged since then, along with any that may have been in existence for hundreds of years before then, that was not loosed by Pope Pius XII. How many times have you suggested to other posters in this space, that there is no set time for an interregnum and in the same breath you suggest we are lawless in the interregnum? That is antichrist Tom A.
Let’s test your statement thus:
“They prevent chaos by enforcing the laws of the deceased Pope until a new Pope is elected. No judgements of law can be made during an interregnum, only enforcement (ie a bishop may excommunicate someone under his authority).”
You stake the claim, “No judgements (sic) of law can be made during an interregnum, only enforcement (ie a bishop may excommunicate someone under his authority).” What do you think, “enforcement” of the law is Tom A? It finds its very being in “judgment”, which is the highest intellective function. The Bishop must apply the infallible governing law which exists in the absence of a Pontiff, which is in the “judgment” of the Bishop, the very application of the law is his judgment, using the law. If the law dies with the Pontiff as you so errantly claim Tom A, what is it that the Bishops apply, or to use your term, “enforce”, in the interregnum? If there is no law, as you suggest, there can be no “enforcement”, of that which there isn’t, that which according to you no longer exists. You cannot have it both ways. If the law dies with the Pontiff, then there is no so called “enforcement” to be had of that which has non-being, in accordance with the proclamation of Tom A and certainly not Holy Mother, the Church. How can he apply a law if it doesn’t, as you suggest, have being, therefore it has non-being and doesn’t in fact exist? Your position is absurd Tom A, as it defies the metaphysical law of motion, “anything which can undergo movement, is moved by something else.” In this case, the movement is the movement of the will of the Bishop applying the existing law of the Church, which does not die with the Pontiff or the gates of Hell have prevailed. If you don’t see this Tom A, God help you. I pray this helps. In caritas.
Our Blessed Lord and Savior, Jesus the Christ, the Logos, the One Who gives meaning to His created cosmos, cannot be in contradiction, as contradiction is in opposition to Him. To oppose His Law is to be in opposition to Himself, as all things good, come from Him. The first test of Truth, is whether there is any contradiction to be found, as contradiction is the signature of the Prince of this world and not of Christ the King. Thus, as the Pharisees always attempted to somehow trick the Creator of the cosmos, He peacefully commanded His Truth, as Truth Himself, into being. Our Blessed Lord clarified for those wretches, the logos, the meaning of His Law. We are commanded not to involve ourselves in servile labor on the Sabbath. To assist in the salvation of the soul of the other, as you suggest, is not servile labor thus, rather it is caritas, in our perfectly imperfect reflection of Caritas.
As it relates to “breaking a law”, imagine breaking one of the commandments of the Decalogue, claiming that you are doing so to assist in the salvation of the other. You cannot damn your own soul, while in the act of damning yourself, assist in the salvation of the soul of the other, by damning yourself, as the Holy Church has always taught, intrinsic evil is intrinsic evil, never able to find remedy from its immanence to be anything but evil, as the privation of the good which is due in the act. We can never find contradiction in Truth. Amen. I pray this helps. In caritas.
TomA: Papal mandate has not always been required in the history of the Catholic Church. In fact, during the interregnum (period with no Pope) between the death of Pope Clement IV in 1268 and the election of Pope Gregory X in 1271, twenty-one vacancies occurred in various dioceses.
During this time bishops were consecrated WITHOUT papal mandate to fill these vacancies because of the SPIRITUAL NECESSITY of the faithful and the IMPOSSIBILITY of having recourse to the Holy See.
If the Church allowed for this during this interregnum when there is no Pope to give a papal mandate, it makes perfect Catholic sense that the same would hold true due to the very dire circumstances the Church finds itself in these days (a long interregnum).
It seems In Caritas would consider these consecrations and these bishops’ masses illicit and sacrilegious. According to him, they and all of the Catholics who attended their masses (not to mention all of the priests these bishops subsequently ordained and all of the people who attended *their* masses) were ipso facto excommunicated from the Catholic Church.
For more info:
Any of our opinions are worth nothing as we were created, ex nihilo, from nothing. That understood, it matters perfectly as infinitely not what I write or what anyone else writes as a matter of opinion, period and end. All that matters is that which we write is consistent with the Truth, as carried forth over the centuries in the Universal Magisterium of Christ’s true Church, because the salvation of our eternal souls, each of us, is dependent upon knowing the Truth as He commands Himself to be known, and by His perfectly miserable creatures. That understood, if you have read, “Ad Apostolorum Principis”, you have not understood it well, as the Holy Father Pius XII deems that although there had been a time in the Church where Bishops may have been consecrated without the specific authority of the Supreme Pontiff as exclusive to him, that time was no longer, as he had made clear his loosing of that law of governance in, “Ad Apostolorum Principis”. This is a matter of objective reality and thus we are all subject to it, as it is infallible, in the Keys of Peter. See paragraph 43 of that same Encyclical here:
“43. We are aware that those who thus belittle obedience in order to justify themselves with regard to those functions which they have unrighteously assumed, defend their position by recalling a usage which prevailed in ages past. Yet everyone sees that all ecclesiastical discipline is overthrown if it is in any way lawful for one to restore arrangements which are no longer valid because the supreme authority of the Church long ago decreed otherwise. In no sense do they excuse their way of acting by appealing to another custom, and they indisputably prove that they follow this line deliberately in order to escape from the discipline which now prevails and which they ought to be obeying.”
You see 2Vermont, the Truth just is. Your time is much better spent learning that which the true Vicar of Christ has infallibly declared, then reading the opinions, as that is all they can be and as thus worth nothing, when they in any way obviate what the Supreme Pontiff has taught. Do you really as honestly believe, 2Vermont, that what I have written is according to “me”, as you claim in what you write? Please wake up, as this is according to Pius XII, the last reigning Holy Roman Pontiff of the Roman Catholic Church. It matters not one iota of one iota what I write, if it is somehow out of keeping with that which is infallibly taught and governed over infallibly by the Holy Roman Pontiff. Any other understanding is “self as vicar”, so called “protestant”, in its wellspring, rooted in “immanentism”, as Tom A has correctly written. I pray this helps as our very eternal salvation depends upon knowing what Christ Jesus commands His disciples to know, unto the consummation of the world. Amen. Alleluia. In caritas.
Thank you for your reply. I am so very sorry for your loss and I pray for you and your family. My heart aches for you.
An FSSP priest advised our daughter not to leave their children, our grandchildren, alone with us because we might harm their faith. We assist Holy Mass at SSPX chapels.
We must learn our Faith well and follow our Master’s voice.
A very well-known FSSP priest, ordained in the true Roman Catholic rite but by a novus ordo bishop consecrated to the novus ordo rite, told us that SSPX is satanic. He also stated that “it’s all about market share”! There is a positive doubt according to moral theology as to whether these men are anything more than novus ordo ministers. For sure they are not true Roman Catholic priests with the fullness of the priesthood!
God bless you.
Allow me to correct my mistake above. In paragraph 43 of, “Ad Apostolorum Principis”, which I copied and pasted for you, what Pope Pius XII made clear, is that the ability for anyone but the Supreme Authority of the Church, as the Holy Roman Pontiff, to appoint/approve of consecrations to the Bishopric, had in his words:
“Yet everyone sees that all ecclesiastical discipline is overthrown if it is in any way lawful for one to restore arrangements which are no longer valid because the supreme authority of the Church long ago decreed otherwise.”
Pope Pius XII made it patently clear that the loosing of that law of governance had not been accomplished by him, rather it had occurred as he deemed, ” because the supreme authority of the Church long ago decreed otherwise.” This very fact destroys Tom A’s opinion, as that is all it can be is his opinion, that the Church law dies with the Roman Pontiff, as Pius XII acknowledged that it was one of the Successors of Peter, “long ago”, who, “decreed otherwise”, and as thus that law remained in force unless or until the Supreme Authority of the Church as Holy Roman Pontiff, loosed it, which Pius XII clearly did not. In caritas.
I submit to his Excellency Donald Sanborn.
In Caritas: Pius XII was dealing specifically with the the situation in China in which the Communist government had established a schismatic Church to rival the Catholic Church. When there is a true Pope, no bishop may be consecrated without papal authorization, much less to establish a “hierarchy” for a schismatic Church. There is no evidence that he changed church law regarding consecrations in times of interregnum. He is clearly speaking of consecrations in times when we have a pope. You are assigning something to Pius XII that just is not there.
Hello yet again 2Vermont,
You choose to remain blind to Truth, as you will a Church in accordance with your pleasure and not the command of Almighty God. When the Supreme Pastor of the Church exerts his Supreme Authority given him by divine Right, while afforded divine protection, he does not somehow speak in isolation, as to suggest so is patently absurd, as Holy Mother Church is Universal, thus in Her teaching and in Her governance. You choose to hear what you will to hear 2Vermont. To help clarify this for you, find now copied and pasted, the very next paragraph of, “Ad Apostolorum Principis”:
“44. We mean that discipline which has been established not only for China and the regions recently enlightened by the light of the Gospel, but for the whole Church, a discipline which takes its sanction from that universal and supreme power of caring for, ruling, and governing which our Lord granted to the successors in the office of St. Peter the Apostle.”
What is it that you don’t understand about the Roman Pontiff declaring that his Authority speaks to the, “whole Church”, and not just for the Catholic Church in China? I pray this helps. In caritas.
In Caritas, there is always Divine Law, which we are always subject to, since the Author of Divine Law is eternal and His reign forever. I am sure you know and understand the difference between Divine Law and ecclesisial law. That is what puzzles me, In Caritas. Your response seems to me that of one who cannot draw this rudimentary distinction between the two types of law. Again, I ask you, to whom do you submit on this wretched planet? Who is your Bishop? The answer is, you have none. Ergo chaos and anarchy in the ecclesial order that all of us witness everyday.
Oh how I wish Bp Sanborn would be Pope someday. But as of right now he is a Bishop with no jurisdiction. He can steer us in leading holy lives, but he can bind us to nothing. He lacks jurisdiction.
Holy Mother Church is tripartite, as you know. We in the Church Militant are now without licit Shepherds in some cases and without valid Shepherds in most cases, throughout the world, and as you know without the Chief Shepherd. You are blind to Aristotelian-Thomistic metaphysics, as properly understood, and as metaphysics properly understood, pays its service to theology/ecclesiology, those sciences cannot be properly understood if not rooted in proper Thomism. Because there are no valid and licit Shepherds nor Pontiff, does not mean that we are left without the rudder, as if we were, the gates of Hell would prevail without specific divine intervention. We have almost 2,000 years of Holy Magisterium, which includes infallible governance to guide us, by the power of the Holy Ghost, as Christ commanded in John 14. Once and again, for you to suggest that Ecclesial law dies with the Holy Roman Pontiff defies a proper ontological understanding of being. The Ecclesial law does not find its immanence in the Pontiff and therefore it does not perish with the Pontiff. It remains as part of Holy Tradition, protected in the Universal Magisterium. The metaphysical form of the governance can be changed by one man in the cosmos and he is not with us and therefore the Ecclesial law stands as it has been since the beginning of the Church, including whatever binding and loosing has occurred over the centuries, by the valid Successors of Peter. There is no new binding nor loosing that can now occur without that singular man who, by divine Right, is given that authority. For you to suggest that all Ecclesial law is loosed with the death of any given Successor of Peter, is again fully antichrist, as it defies the proper understanding of the origin of being, and as it suggests chaos, which is antithetical to Christ and His Mystical Body, His Bride, the Church. In order for Ecclesial law to be loosed, the loosing requires a specific act of loosing by the operation of the will of any true Successor, period and end. “Ad Apostolorum Principus” speaks precisely to this point, when Pope Pius XII acknowledges that fact in paragraph 43:
“43. We are aware that those who thus belittle obedience in order to justify themselves with regard to those functions which they have unrighteously assumed, defend their position by recalling a usage which prevailed in ages past. Yet everyone sees that all ecclesiastical discipline is overthrown if it is in any way lawful for one to restore arrangements which are no longer valid BECAUSE THE SUPREME AUTHORITY of the CHURCH LONG AGO DECREED OTHERWISE. In no sense do they excuse their way of acting by appealing to another custom, and they indisputably prove that they follow this line deliberately in order to escape from the discipline which now prevails and which they ought to be obeying.”
Pope Pius XII acknowledged that, “long ago”, the “Supreme Authority of the Church”, “decreed otherwise”. He didn’t say that “he decreed” Tom A, rather his Successor decreed long ago, in his words. To suggest thus, that the ecclesial law dies with any given Pontiff, clearly defies the teaching and governance of Pope Pius XII, as it only can, because your thesis defies a proper understanding of the origin of being. Lastly, which part of disunity and chaos do you not understand is rooted in the Antichrist with Satan as his progenitor, and is not rooted in Christ Jesus our Lord and His Church, which He commanded prevails UNTARNISHED unto the consummation of the world? Also, are you suggesting that God is not the Author of Ecclesial law? I have made it patently clear that I know there are no valid Bishops in the church of the Antichrist and no licit Bishops in all of Christendom, and so why do you continue to pose your rhetorical question of me as to what Bishop I submit to? I have no Bishop to submit to, and your point? Again, I pray this helps. In caritas.
@Tom A Haha all I got was being accused of “miserable creaturely immanence” but you, Sir, hold an “antichrist position of anarchy.”
I have to say, @In caritas, I thoroughly enjoy the…unique…and highly customized insults with which you begin each post. They seem to fire you up for the subsequent 5,000 words.
IC: Show me where in that document that Pius XII makes it clear that his law forbidding consecrations without papal approval also includes times of interregnum.
And again Tom A,
Sanborn is an illicit Bishop “consecrated” in 2002, assuming he is even a Bishop, which he cannot be if not consecrated as the Church has always consecrated, as codified in the Roman Catechism of the Council of Trent, since Apostolic time and Tradition, period and end. You cannot have the Holy Catholic Church in your own likeness and pleasure Tom A. At best he is excommunicated in the act of his “consecration” and all of his Masses therefore are not Holy but sacrilegious, as are all of his ordinations if valid, sacrilegious, with those priests also excommunicated, all on the road to eternal perdition without even knowing it, yet fully culpable, as are we all. All of the faithful partaking in sacrilege are guilty by participation, in that same sacrilege, whether they know it or not. It is astounding how you apply your own will to the Church in spite of Her Magisterium. God have mercy. In caritas.
I think Louie should put a cap on words allowed in a post.
Face it everyone: IC thinks he is the only true Catholic on this blog. He has no priests or bishops and therefore has no mass and no opportunities for absolution.
Pray for him.
I’m still waffling over this jurisdiction issue. What if these few Bishops who didn’t go along w/VII simply followed the laws on jurisdiction and didn’t consecrate anyone. What could they have done that was totally w/in the law? Could they have traveled around raising the alarm that a crime had occurred, that the seat was being occupied by an imposter? Could they have provided the Sacraments wherever they did go, themselves? Or would this jurisdiction issue keep them to administering the Sacraments only where they happened to be when Pope Pius XII died? If there are none of these Priests validly but illicitly consecrated w/in an hour from me, I have no dilemma, I can’t go to Mass, I keep the day holy other ways. But if one of these Priests comes into that one hour radius of me, all of a sudden, I have this very serious moral dilemma. Am I in mortal sin by refusing to attend this Priest’s Mass for fear it’s sacreligious but I happen to be wrong in that fear? What do the sede Priests say about this? Do they believe it is incumbent upon every Catholic within an hour of themselves to attend his Mass on pain of mortal sin or do they consider it just an option? I’m not saying it’s good not to have access to the Sacraments but it isn’t a mortal sin to be deprived of the Sacraments. I’m wondering if a sede Priest considers it a sin if a Catholic declines the Sacraments from him because he is in doubt even if he isn’t certain. I’m almost certain that if there aren’t any goofy independent Priests now, there will be, so it doesn’t seem to me like it would be pain of sin to attend any sede Mass. It’d be a pretty heavy burden to ascertain validity even if it weren’t sacreligious. I don’t know, but it seems to me erring on the In caritas side couldn’t be a sin under these circumstances but I really have to reflect on this.
And again 2Vermont,
Thank you for your prayers as I most certainly need them. It has nothing to do with what “I think”, as anything which finds its immanence in me is worth nothing. It is simply what the Church teaches. To answer your question above, it is again what a virtuous 12 year old in the state of grace would understand. Pope Pius XII made NO EXCEPTIONS to his Authority as the Successor of Peter, and as that same Successor having to approve/appoint any and all Bishops everywhere, anytime, and under any circumstance. It really is that clear 2Vermont. Do you not think that he would have clearly allowed for exception, if he intended any, when he commanded a latae sentencia excommunication for anyone who violated his Authority as Universal Pastor, who bestows unity upon the Church by divine Right? It is not what you will for the Church and thus you remain blind, as you are not submitting to the authority of the Holy Roman Pontiff, given by divine Right to him alone. I pray this helps. In caritas.
In Caritas, you do not have to be a bishop to be elected Pope. Also, who excommunicated him? Pius XII? Even an excommunicate can be elected Pope if I am not mistaken. So regardless of Bp Sanborn’s ecclesial crimes (if any), he could be elected Pope someday since he is a baptized male who professes the Catholic faith.
Pope Pius is dead, his law no longer binds since there is no one to enforce the law. We are still bound by Divine Law, however. It is not a hard distinction to make yet you continue to suggest that I say we are bound by no law whatsover. A future Pope could some day punish us retroactively for disobeying the law of Pius XII, since he would be an absolute ruler. But then again, the future Pope may not punish those who violated the laws of Pius XII during the interregnum. It would be entirely up to him. Currently we are left only with Divine Law to be our rudder in this time of survival without earthly shepherds.
Thank you coastalfarm for your kind words.
If you have a bishop, blunder, then you have no chaos. Submit to him and embrace ecumenism. That is what your bishop teaches.
Well we both agree on the point of there being no bishops with jurisdiction left. Except perhaps in the Melkite and other Eastern Catholic churches. They have their own Patriarchs of their respective Churches and I am not sure what their juridical situation entails in these times.
Tom A, Why can an excommunicate be elected Pope? If this is the case than why do you not accept Bergoglio as the Pope? I don’t understand this comment.
And yet again Tom A,
Your blindness is as a deer in headlights now. You speak in absolute ontological absurdity, as your passions now drive you, in spite of your intellective operation. The deeper you dive into the abyss of error, the more absurd your reasoning becomes. You had this to say:
“Even an excommunicate can be elected Pope if I am not mistaken. So regardless of Bp Sanborn’s ecclesial crimes (if any), he could be elected Pope someday since he is a baptized male who professes the Catholic faith.”
“Even an excommunicate can be elected Pope if I am not mistaken.” Are you literally as actually claiming this Tom A? A man who is outside the Church, let’s say an Orthodox Bishop, who according to Tom A, “professes the Catholic faith (sic)”, actually professes the Catholic Faith, while being outside the Church, where there is no salvation, deFide. Melanie just posed a very intuitive question of you Tom A. Then why can’t Jorge from Hell be Pope? Bishop Sanborn can be excommunicated, and as thus literally as actually outside the Holy Catholic Church, and become the Holy Roman Pontiff, in accordance with the “ecclesial law” of Tom A, who continues to persist in his ontological error, as it relates to the very being of the Ecclesial Law itself. One cannot be at once, outside the Catholic Church in excommunication, and at the same time profess the Catholic Faith, which commands submission into the infallible governance of the Holy Roman Pontiff, which is codified in Holy Tradition and as thus protected with the charism of infallibility, and be inside the Catholic Church, at the same time, while submitting to the authority by divine Right, of the Holy Roman Pontiff, period and end. Now Tom A, you freely choose to defy the metaphysical law of non-contradiction. No surprise, as it speaks as res ipsa loquitur to either your profound misunderstanding of it, or your rejection of it, one of the two. May God have mercy on you and me. In caritas.
Ps. Tom A,
Who excommunicated him? His act of receiving “consecration”, if it was valid, which is all but certain it was not. That is what excommunicated him Tom A. That according to the infallible governance of the Holy Roman Pontiff, Pius XII. Who are you really, Tom A? In caritas.
And your ontological error persists Tom A,
To apply proper analogy: The county road commissioner decides to place a STOP sign at an intersection, which never had one since the nascent origin of the county. That county commissioner retires. I now decide not to stop at that intersection because of course the law requiring me to stop, must have ceased with the retirement of the man who imposed it. That literally as actually demonstrates the absurdity which you persist in Tom A, suggesting that Ecclesial law dies with the Holy Roman Pontiff, or is not understandable/interpretable without him. You are making the case for an invisible Church and you don’t even know it. Further, you defy the reality that Pope Pius XII, in his Encyclical, “Ad Apostolorum Principus”, fully acknowledges that Ecclesial law from one of his Successors, “long ago decreed otherwise”. That objective fact utterly destroys your sophomoric as absurd rhetoric Tom A. Who is it that you think you are, as you develop your own “church” law? Do you really believe that you are Pope Tom A. I mean really. You have actually stated in fact that one can be excommunicated from the Church and yet be elected Pope. God have mercy on you and me. In caritas.
Melanie, not all excommunications are for heresy. A man can be excommunicated for striking the Roman Pontiff. There are many other reasons not related to heresy, schism, or apostasy that a man can incur excommunication. I do not accept Bergolio as Pope because I believe he was excommunicated. He cannot be Pope because he is an apostate.
In Caritas, one of the principals of law is that a law ceases automaticaly if it becomes harmful, impossibe, or irrational. Currently it is impossible for any bishop to receive a papal mandate since there is no pope. Also, it may be harmful to not consecrate a new bishop during these times of duress. During the Great Western Schism, many bishops were consecrated by those who picked the wrong Pope. These consecrations were never declared invalid or sinful and were in fact recognized by the proper Pope when the matter was settled. So here we have actual episcopal consecrations without a true papal mandate that were considered valid and licit by the Pope. And one more thing, a Pope issues a law. He doesn’t issue a law infaillably as you seem to state. The law is not a matter of faith. It may be a matter of morals but not always.
Are you serious? “Well we both agree”. Our so called “agreement” can take us both to Hell all day, everyday, and for all eternity. What is your point? Tom A declares he is, “not sure what their juridical situation entails in these times.” And again, Tom A, your point? It matters not one iota of one iota about what Tom A thinks their juridical status is. Holy Mother Church makes it patently clear. Their Bishops are illicit if valid as there has not been an Holy Roman Pontiff to approve/appoint since 1958. The Victim and the Sacrifice will fail, as according to the Logos in Matthew 24:15, and Tom A simply isn’t quite sure what the juridical status is of illicit Bishops. How do you think the Holy Sacrifice fails Tom A? By having valid and licit Bishops offering the Holy Sacrifice and ordaining priests who offer it? Your arrogance speaks as res ipsa loquitur. Their Patriarchs have no authority, none, to appoint Bishops of the Universal Church without the authority of the one man in the cosmos given this same authority by divine Right, period and end. Your term of use, “these times” itself speaks, Tom A, and it speaks as that which it can only be, anathema, as so called, “situational ethics”. “These times” have no bearing on Church teaching and discipline, as the Church is apart from time, as She is the Mystical Body of Christ, Who cannot change, in or out of “season”, Tom A. The Church is as She is in season and out of season. You are looking more like a charlatan the more you write. I pray this helps. In caritas.
In Caritas, how do you knwo for certain that your interpretation of John 14 means that this is for individuals, and not for the establishment of the teaching hierarchy of the Church? The former is a protestant interpretaion; the latter is the Catholic interpretation.
How do you know that your interpretation of Daniel applies to our time? It might, and then it might not. The Church’s magisterium is the official interpreter of every passage of scripture. You and I are not.
We may as well be in the longest interregnum in history. The disciplinary authority of Pius XII you cite is subject to Divine Law. In the event that an unforseen circumstance makes canon law contrary to the mission of the Church, we fall back on Divine Law.
St Alphonsus, an approved teacher of the whole Church in morals, refers to regarding the necessity of receiiving the sacraments. St Alphonsus’s teaching is part of the Ordinary Universal Magisterium, and all of it is approved by the authority of the Church.
The Precepts of the Church are also still binding, including reception of Holy Communion and going to donfession once a year. You paint your self into too narrow a corner to have regard for the greater whole.
Like you say, our opinions are of little weight, and this includes your interpretation of scripture.
IC, how can you in one breath say there is no authority and in the next say there is still law. Law follows from authority. You keep proving my case about cessation of law everytime you make your case for absence of authority.
And again Tom A,
Your rhetoric is bizarre. You had this to say:
“A future Pope could some day punish us retroactively for disobeying the law of Pius XII, since he would be an absolute ruler. But then again, the future Pope may not punish those who violated the laws of Pius XII during the interregnum. It would be entirely up to him.”
According to your rhetorical façade, a member of the Church Militant could die today and later, post-mortem, be “punished” with excommunication at the caprice of another Pope, who “decided to punish those who violated the laws of Pius XII during the interregnum.”, while at once you claim the laws die with the Pope, which is patently absurd, demonstrating your utter lack of proper understanding regarding potency and act, or your deliberate attempt to malign, one of the two. You continue to build your case for an invisible Church and perhaps you do know what you’re doing, Tom A, as you persist in error.
And now you purport that the Church is bound to your “principals of law”, again suggesting that ethical morality is situational, and you actually as literally claim that the Mystical Body of Christ, His Church, can have laws that “become”, “harmful, impossible, or irrational.” Once again Tom A, you apply the diabolical synthesis of Hegel, suggesting that man has creative power, and you even use the language, “become”, as though the substance of the law somehow changes to become in your terms, “harmful, impossible, or irrational”. You blaspheme the Church suggesting that the Church can “become”, “irrational, harmful, or impossible” in Her governing authority. And again Tom A, you are objectively wrong when you suggest that the Holy Roman Pontiff’s power of governance is not infallible, as his power of the Keys to “bind and loose” is protected with the charism of infallibility, as we are bound to Him in obedience and Almighty God cannot bind us to error.
And yet again Tom A, evidence of your application of situational ethics, no different in kind to what Jorge from Hell did with Amoris Laetitia and to quote you:
” Also, it may be harmful to not consecrate a new bishop during these times of duress.”
In “these times of duress”. Holy Mother Church is timeless Tom A. Do you know that you are actually as literally suggesting that Almighty God could not have anticipated this “time of duress”, and so Tom A has to provide a solution for God and His Holy Church. At this juncture it is clear that you have no interest in Truth Tom A. May God have mercy on you. In caritas.
Every comment section here is now a total debacle and absolute travesty. Calumny, detraction, wild speculation…but above all, wasted time. And we’ll have to account for all of it, including the time.
The comment sections here should’ve been shut down long ago.
St Alphonsus: Third Sunday After Easter: On The Value Of Time
Out of curiosity, I just copied and pasted In Caritas’ posts – on this article alone – into a word counter to see what came up. This is not in itself a refutation of anything he/she (probably he) has written, but just to put a number on things.
I also did the same with Louie’s article.
Louie’s article: 855 words.
In Caritas’ comments at the time of posting: 10126 words.
We need to get A Catholic Thinker, aka True or False Pope’s biggest fan, Paul Folbrecht, posting back here for some real competition.
Now I am confused, as you consistently argue against the sedevacantist position, but the link you have now posted leads to a website full of sermons by sedevacantist priests.
In fairness to ‘In Caritas’, your comment needs to be qualified, since many of the words he wrote were in direct answer to questions he was asked.
Dear ‘In Caritas’, I would like to ask you about the Divine command (should this not trump Pope Pius XII decree on papal mandate for episcopal consecrations, also considering the fact that the whole world has become mission territory again?) as given to us in the Gospel of this Friday in Easter Week:
“Go, therefore, and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you”. And the following sentence assures us of his assistance while following this great command, as many of today’s priests are doing, until the end of time: “And behold, I am with you all days even unto the consummation of the world.” (Matthew, 28;19-20)
IC, a Pope is an absolute monarch. Once installed he can pretty much do as he pleases. There is no appeal of his judgments. And yes, Popes have dug up bones of past Popes and “excommunicated” them. The point is they are absolute monarchs beholding only to Divine Law. They can reign injustly with no option of appeal. This is the flawed argument that Abp Lefebrve used to justify his disobedience to the man he called Pope. So my analogy is absurd only to prove your position wrong. Its called reductio in absurdum. A position to be correct must withstand every absurd scenario. The Pope’s governance of the Church is not protected by infailabilty. History is replete with bad and even evil temporal decisions by Popes. I cannot believe a learned man like you cannot draw the distinction between teaching and governance. Nor are you able to draw the distinction between Divine Law and ecclesial law. Infaillability pertains only to teaching. Law needs an authority to enforce it. During a normal interregnum, the college of cardinals retain some of the authority of the dead Pope in order to elect a new Pope and pay the bills and keep the lights on. Only that minimal authority to keep things running. Today, there exist no such body of Cardinals. Not even the minimal authority exists today to manage any portion of Church governance. That is called chaos or anarchy. This chaos or anarchy is witnessed by us on a daily basis as we observe the squabbles between various trad group.
This man is possessed by the devil. When will a god deliver us? How angry He must be to have delivered us into the hands of this fiend. A punishment of the highest degree. “Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves, because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed for ever! Amen.” Rom 1:24-25
Not “a god” should be “God”
Yes Ursula, Divine Law trumps canon law. All man made laws are subject to changing and unforeseen circumstances. And as such, these man made laws often become impossible or even harmful to fulfill. Divine Law on the other hand is eternal and unchanging and all of humanity is bound to it forever.
IC: I will no longer interact with you because I believe the home alone position is false and dangerous….especially your particular version. I have interacted with other home-aloners but, although I strongly disagree with them, I have never heard them judge all of us non-home aloners and our priests and bishops as excommunicated from the Church. I am concerned for anyone who looks to you for the truth (ie. Melanie).
Agreed. The Church’s job is to save souls. This is Divine law. In the absence of a pope, the inability to consecrate and ordain new and real Catholic clergy hinders that job. There are a number of Catholics that do not have access to a real and certain Catholic priest who provides real Sacraments to save their souls.
“IC: Show me where in that document that Pius XII makes it clear that his law forbidding consecrations without papal approval also includes times of interregnum.”
No response. That’s probably because it’s not there.
Additionally, the Pius XII document doesn’t even state that there should be no consecrations during a time of interregnum. It is clear that he is discussing situations when there is a pope. So it is irrelevant to this discussion and it certainly shouldn’t be used to anathematize fellow Catholics.
Here’s an interesting quote from Pius XII:
“Canon law likewise is directed to the salvation of souls; and the purpose of all its regulations and laws is that men may live and die in the holiness given them by the grace of God.”
To think that this same man would hinder the salvation of souls by restricting accessibility to true priests, bishops and Sacraments during an extended interregnum is ludicrous.
I’m still wondering if anyone can answer my previous questions. When we have a Pope, we go to Church, whether our Priest is holy or evil, saintly or depraved. Now we have to investigate lines of succession from I guess +Lefebvre and +Thuc? If there’s else, I’m unaware and there’s all kinds of conflicting info about this. And there’s totally independent Priests and who knows where they came from, you trust them to tell you? Because there do exist bad or crazy people that lie tremendously well. If anyone could answer the following wonders, I’d really be appreciative, “ If there are none of these Priests validly but illicitly consecrated w/in an hour from me, I have no dilemma, I can’t go to Mass, I keep the day holy other ways. But if one of these Priests comes into that one hour radius of me, all of a sudden, I have this very serious moral dilemma. Am I in mortal sin by refusing to attend this Priest’s Mass for fear it’s sacreligious but I happen to be wrong in that fear? What do the sede Priests say about this? Do they believe it is incumbent upon every Catholic within an hour of themselves to attend his Mass on pain of mortal sin or do they consider it just an option? I’m not saying it’s good not to have access to the Sacraments but it isn’t a mortal sin to be deprived of the Sacraments. I’m wondering if a sede Priest considers it a sin if a Catholic declines the Sacraments from him because he is in doubt even if he isn’t certain. I’m almost certain that if there aren’t any goofy independent Priests now, there will be, so it doesn’t seem to me like it would be pain of sin to attend any sede Mass.” Would it be a mortal sin to decline a sede Mass & how questionable would the Priest have to be; because they range from being affiliated w/CMRI to some random Priest in Melbourne, who I have no idea how he got to be a Priest but I’m sure he’s got some explanation that sounds reasonable, right?
Melanie, the answer to your question depends on who you ask. Divine Law commands that we sanctify Sunday. Attending mass is one way to sanctify the day. The obligation to attend mass is not Divine, it is a precept of the Church. Only Church authority can answer your question.
Melanie, a true Pope can answer your question. No one here has the authority.
As the great Carmelite Saints and Doctors of Holy Mother Church have taught, humility is a mandatory requisite to caritas, in our miserable reflection of Caritas Himself. That understood, it is obedience which is the actual manifestation, in praxis, of our humility. Without obedience, we offer no true love of Christ, therefore we cannot have true zeal for the Truth, as also He commanded in John 14: 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. That understood, Pope Pius XII, in “Ad Apostolorum Principis”, deemed the utter import of “unity” in the Church, at all cost, including the inaccessibility of the faithful in China to a Shepherd. He deemed that Almighty God in His Providence would care for the faithful under those circumstances. The point being as well, we have many an example in the 20th century where Catholics had no access to the Sacraments for decades, but for Baptism, as do we by the mercy of God. To intone, as some have, that we cannot be saved without the external signs of the holy Sacraments, is contrary to Church teaching, whereby Christ Jesus our Lord can impart Sacramental grace to whomever He Wills. Amen. Alleluia. In order to have “unity” there must be submission in obedience to the Holy Roman Pontiff. Contrary to Tom A’s absurdity in sowing chaos, as though chaos could ever be present within the spiritual confines of Christ’s true Church, His Mystical Body and Bride, we have almost 2,000 years of infallible Magisterium and Papal discipline to rely on, in this the time in which we await the person of the Antichrist. I pray this helps. In caritas.
And again Tom A,
Sounds “good” as you usually do. The problem though, as you skate around it, is there is only one man in the cosmos who can change the Church’s discipline by divine Right (which is afforded implicitly and minimally, the negative protection of infallibility as the discipline can never bind us to error as error is antichrist), and he is no longer with us. And thus Tom A, your absurd as inane conjecture, contrary to the teaching of Pope Pius XII, that Church discipline dies with the Pontiff. I pray this helps. In caritas.
And yet again Tom A,
Give us one example of a true Pope being “excommunicated” by a later true Pope. Now your conjecture contradicts your own thesis from the past when JPeters and Folbrecht were in the forum of discussion and further, it contradicts the teaching on the “protestant” errors entering the Church as discussed by Saint Robert Bellarmine in his treatise on the Holy Roman Pontiff. Further, your conjecture now defies the reality that for a man to be the true, Holy Roman Pontiff, he must be inside the Church, to govern that same One, True Church, as he must be a member of that same Church which he is the Vicar of Christ for on earth, otherwise an Orthodox Bishop could be Pontiff, just for instance. If he was excommunicated based upon his acts as true Holy Roman Pontiff, then he could not have been the true Roman Pontiff, who must be in the Church he is Vicar of. God have mercy. In caritas.
One of the things that many Traditionalists like to point out is that confusion is from the devil. The notion that the vsisible Church has disappeared is the cause of much of the confusion here, and those claiming that there is no Pope and that there are no priests or bishops or sacraments are creating a great deal of confusion. The Church is alive and well. There is no need to investigate lines of succession. The God that Catholics worship is not a cruel monster who hides His Church so that only a select few in the know can find it. He does not have millions upon millions of Masses taking place that are sacreligious so that virtually all people are tricked into hell. Look at your local parishes, find a good priest. There’s at least one, I can assure you. And talk to him about yor doubts and fears and questions. Do not shape your faith or make decisons about it based upon what you read in comboxes.
This comment is for Melanie, because she honestly seeks truth in these troubling times. The question was asked how an excommunicate can be elected Pope. IC shot back that I was absurd. Well here is a simple possible scenario that proves it could happen. Let’s say IC in a fit of anger slapped the face of his pastor after learning that the pastor was a sodomite and pederast. I think Sweepoutthefilth knows a few priests that would fit this description. Upon hearing about the incident, IC’s sodomite protecting bishop excommunicates IC for striking a cleric. I think sweep knows lots of bishops who protect their sodomite priests in this manner. Then the Pope dies and during the conclave the cardinals learn of IC’s heroic virtue in defending the faith and elect him Pope (a job he believes he is duly qualified for). IC being so humble, naturally accepts, but before he can be coronated, the censure of excommunication would need to be lifted. Once lifted, he would assume all powers and his first official act would be to excommunicate Tom A. Voila, I believe I have proven my case that an excommunicate can be elected Pope. Yes this scenario is absurd and extremely improbable, yet it is not impossible.
@Tom A – You also have a bishop. You choose to deny that he is one. He may be a saint. He may be the world’s worst reprobate. But he’s your bishop. It’s up to your conscience, properly formed, to decide whether what he is teaching is Catholic and whether to follow is, as is the case for everyone. But he’s still your bishop, good or bad. Saying otherwise is just denying reality.
Blunderbuss, I’m not sure if you are aware, but the “Visible Church”, i.e, the Catholic Church is only visible because ALL her members are Baptised, and ALL outwardly profess the one and same Faith that has come from the Twelve Apostles.
Whoever misses either or both of these criteria is simply not a Catholic.
Can you name a single Novus Ordo clergyman who, while being Baptised, also outwardly professes the Catholic Faith in its entirety? No? Then none of them are actually members of the Church.
Pius XII lifted these penal/ ecclesial excommunications from all the members in a papal conclave so it would not hinder the ballot. This includes both the passive and active voting, meaning that they can both vote AND be elected.
Those excommunicated by Divine Law, however – that is, those who are public heretics, schismatics and apostates – are never eligible to be validly elected as pope at all.
Divine law says that only male Catholics are eligible to be voted pope.
2Vermont: Please explain how it is that CHRIST (who knows all things), in speaking THROUGH Pope Pius XII His Vicar on Earth, and a mere MONTHS away from the beginning of an extended interregnum, would NOT foresee this and put in place specific instructions for this situation IF HE HAD WANTED ANYTHING OTHER THAN WHAT HE STATED IN THE INFALLIBLE DOCUMENT. Or will you dare to say that it is not in fact Christ speaking when the (lawful) Pope speaks?
The true Church always taught that the Faith comes before Sacraments. St. John Vianney taught that himself. The Church ALWAYS stressed that the faithful have a right (as well as a duty) to know from whence their pastors come, and that they are to avoid the “thieves and robbers” who enter through another way. Furthermore that “a doubtful Sacrament is NO Sacrament”.
The danger here is not in staying home. The danger is in the mere possibility of committing SACRILEGE and IDOLATRY by receiving doubtful Sacraments. Therein lies the true danger, not by staying home, which happens to be in the spirit of the true Catholics of the French Revolution. Yes, they stayed home IN STRICT JUSTICE AND OBEDIENCE TO GOD AND HIS CHURCH rather than attend simulations and receive “Sacraments” from the Freemasonic usurpers, and they paid dearly for it. Why is it so hard to draw the parallels to our own time? I’ll tell you why. It is because it is GOD who either withholds sight from the blind, or opens the understanding. Not IC, not Tom A, nor I can do that for anyone much less can we do it for ourselves, other than to surrender our own mind, intellect and will to God in all humility, seeking God’s Will and not OUR own “sacramental comfort” and all we “get” from them (“Your ways are not my ways…”) in strict justice, no matter the cost, no matter the gossip, rash judgment, sneers and hateful vitriol that follows.
There is also another way to commit Sacrilege that I have mentioned and no one ever wanted to pay it any mind: once you have been an heretic (for example, a member of the Novus Ordo sect), the Church has strict procedures for being received BACK into the Church PRIOR TO being able to receive ANY Sacraments whatsoever. What “trad” do you know has abjured their errors and had their censures removed BY THE POPE, prior to receiving their “trad Sacraments”? Therefore, even if you COULD receive valid and licit Sacraments, in the present situation the best that can be done is a private Abjuration of Heresy and Profession of Faith, along with a Perfect Act of Contrition, and then even if there WERE true Sacraments to be had, you wouldn’t be eligible to RECEIVE them without censures FIRST being lifted and THEN Confession.
Satan has set a trap at every so-called “escape” door! We think we’re so smart??? Are you serious?
“The HOLY SPIRIT will teach you all things…” So yes we can know, as has already been stated within this discussion. Who does he teach? The humble and submissive little children who obey their Mother the Church, and hence God and what HE commands through that Church and His (lawful) Mouthpiece, the Pope.
You were proven wrong regarding China, can you not admit in all humility that you might be wrong about a few more things?
While the Trad sects are all off doing their own thing in utter disunity (another hint), and making their own rules, when exactly will the “Sacrifice fail” as prophesied in Daniel and by Christ Himself? It’s not in the future: it is NOW. The Church is eclipsed by the Anti-church, which includes ALL who call themselves Catholic yet in reality are outside of Her. “The woman (i.e. the Church, per Church teaching/footnotes) fled into the wilderness to be FED BY GOD” (Apoc ch 12-13). This is NOW. It’s all so complicated, yet oh so simple once we can SEE. “Lord, that I may see!”
You are on the right track, and obviously of good will and as such God will not abandon you. Please see my reply just above and there is a link there for you as well.
Melanie: Please see my posts above – one a reply to you. And, God is not constrained by His own Sacraments, especially in our extraordinary time (the end times). One can always make Perfect Acts of Contrition and that is most acceptable to God as the Church has always (infallibly) taught. There is even an anathema mentioned in a Papal document which escapes my mind at the moment, stating that any statement to the contrary is condemned.
Exactly Papal Subj. thank you for pointing that out. Pius XII’s decree, although only canonical, did not violate Divine Law. Pius XII acknowlegdes that all baptized male Catholics, even those excommunicated for ecclesial crimes other than heresy, schism, and apostasy, are eligible for papal election.
Melanie: Regarding Lefebvre and Thuc. Both apostasized by signing the Vatican II documents. Thuc also belonged to the Novus Ordo sect and said the abominable new “mass”. Lefebvre spoke out of both sides of his mouth (once the blinders are off and you can see this it is FRIGHTENING). They are apostates, and as IC would say, period and end. They never abjured their heresy hence were never received back into the Church per Church LAW (and couldn’t be without a true Pope), and their very own consecrations are both highly questionable.
(I will not respond to vitriolic replies on this subject. If anyone must say anything, please explain to me how after signing the Vatican II documents one is not an apostate, and is exempt from Church Law regarding the reception of heretics into or back into the Church.)
“Pius XII lifted these penal/ ecclesial excommunications from all the members in a papal conclave so it would not hinder the ballot. This includes both the passive and active voting, meaning that they can both vote AND be elected. Those excommunicated by Divine Law, however – that is, those who are public heretics, schismatics and apostates – are never eligible to be validly elected as pope at all. ”
Yes, exactly. I was hoping someone would bring this up. Of course there are some traditionalists who will twist this to say that a heretic can be elected pope.
A Simple Beggar….apparently another home-aloner.
Christ did not inform His Vicar how to deal with the Great Western Schism just BEFORE it happened. Christ did not inform His Vicar to define the Immaculate Conception BEFORE it became a point of controversy. Typically, the popes respond to issues AFTER the fact to clarify points of doctrine, law, etc…not BEFORE.
It is clear that Pius XII did not forbid consecrations when there is no pope simply because that was not the point he was trying to make. His words are clear. He is speaking of when there is a pope sitting in the Chair of Peter. No one can get permission from someone who is not there. No Catholic should be putting words in his mouth that just are NOT there. And no one should be anathematizing other Catholics because they wish to interpret his words as no consecrations EVEN IF the Chair is vacant. I suspect this will be one of those issues that will be clarified when we get a true pope again….again AFTER the fact.
Blunder, what purpose is there of a bishop if you or I have to decide if what he says is Catholic or not?
To whom would they abjure their “heresy”? The Church of Home Aloners?
@2Vermont, I’d just point out that you are doing the same thing to IC and ASB as Traditonalists do to Sedevantists. You are labeled a sede and thus all you argue should be summarily dismissed on that count. You make some arguments but then fall back on, “Oh, he is a “home-alone.” I can assure you that this does not bolster any claim you may make and it weakens your postition. Just an observation. You may think that they’re ideas are dangerous and that you you do this out of beneficence but keep in mind that most think sedevacantism is dangerous and dismiss the whole discussion for the same reasons.
Melanie: I am made a factual statement that he is another home-aloner. Then I go on to argue against his position and for my position…again. Did you not read that part? I don’t see how that is anything like what most anti-sedevacantists do to sedes. Perhaps you should go back and read my posts as well as some very good links provided by those who argue against the home-alone position.
Like I said in this thread earlier: there are those who take the home alone position, but do NOT anathematize Catholics who do not. What we have here in this blog are two home-aloners who do anathematize fellow Catholics and believe they are the only Catholics here. Since when have any of the sedes on this blog done the same? Let that sink in as you consider their position.
One more thing Melanie: why haven’t you called out IC for his rude remarks to those who disagree with him? Why haven’t you told him that that sort of rhetoric doesn’t “bolster any claim he makes and weakens his position”?
At least be consistent Melanie.
Good Sunday afternoon in the Octave of Blessed Easter Tom A,
Who are you really? From you immanence, the truth is evidencing itself. Your vitriol is becoming somewhat less than subtle now and your subterfuge speaks as res ipsa loquitur. You claim that chaos, lawlessness, can occur within the Church, which the Son of God made Man Himself commanded into being ex nihilo, and that lawlessness could occur at any time and space within His true Church, yet alone this time, when Lucifer’s church has deceived all but all the baptized in the world. While you establish your facade of despising the church of the Antichrist as the so called “conciliar church”, you use it in your current example of perverse, satirical comedy, as that is all it is Tom A, as it is not, as it cannot be Catholic, as perverse satire is not of Christ, rather of the demon, period and end. You literally as actually use the false church to set up an analogous paradigm that in reality as Truth simply cannot exist, as the heretical church of so called “Vatican II”, cannot be Christ’s Church, and therefore in Christ’s Church, Shepherds are actually Shepherds as Successors of the Apostles, and have received the Charism of the Holy Ghost in their very metaphysical substance, in the true Sacrament of Orders, which has forever then, altered their ontology and instilled the Sacramental grace. Christ warned us of those like you, the false prophets, who present themselves as sheep, while inside they are ravening wolves. Your motives are now clearly evidencing themselves, as the lie is always revealed in time. You are warned yet again, Tom A, not by this perfectly miserable creature, but by the Truth of His Church. Amen. Alleluia.
And so Tom A injects his conjecture as thus:
” I think sweep knows lots of bishops who protect their sodomite priests in this manner.”
Now a simple question of all those who seek the Truth, who may bear witness to this exchange. Hasn’t Tom A again and again in these com-boxes, posited his argument that these men in the church of the Antichrist, so called “conciliar or post-VCII church”, are apostates to the One True Faith as “Bishops” for instance? Many times he’s referred to the “Chief Shepherd, the Pontiff” Bergoglio as an “apostate”. And as an apostate, one literally as actually rejects the teaching of the Holy Church, because an apostate literally as actually then rejects Christ and His divine teaching. That is simply the understanding of apostasy. So Tom A then has the unmitigated audacity in deception, to use apostates to Christ’s Church, as examples of men who would somehow have ecclesial power, and the attendant change in their ontology as priests, with the infused Sacramental grace of both priest and Bishop as Shepherd and guardian of the One True Faith, the same One, True Faith which they reject as apostates. Tom A’s pathetic deception is what he actually closed his satire above with and to quote him:
“Yes this scenario is absurd and extremely improbable, yet it is not impossible.”
He actually as literally destroys his own facade in his last statement, as he now uses syncretic construction, the signature of a Modernist, adjoining two or more concepts together which cannot in truth belong together. He begins, “Yes this scenario is absurd….yet is not impossible.”
There, for all those who seek the Truth, as He is a divine Person, as the Son of God made true Man, is an error which shudders the cosmos. Once again, he demonstrates either an abysmal understanding of scholastic metaphysics or a deceptive attempt to malign. It cannot be understood otherwise in the objective realm of being. To be “absurd” is to have metaphysical “non-being”. To have “non-being” is to “not exist”, as absurdity has no meaning, and therefore it is not of Christ, as the Logos, the very Meaning of the cosmos He created, ex nihilo, from nothing. A colloquial expression of “absurdity”, would be a “round square”. A “round square” does not exist, as it cannot exist, as God’s cosmos is ordered by Him in reality, not in the absence of reality, as absurdity. I pray this helps for all those who may bear witness. In closing, for Tom A to say first that his satirical facade is absurd, is true, but then to say that which simply cannot exist, because God deems so, as to be “absurd” is to have “non-being”, and then to claim, “yet is not impossible”, is to defy Almighty God as the Author as Creator of His cosmos, which is His Signature of Order, and not chaos as Tom A has suggested again and again can exist in His true Church. For all eyes to see which can see, Tom A has demonstrated what chaos looks like, as it is the signature of the Liar. That dear Catholics, is diabolical. In your attempt Tom A, to lure Melanie into your diabolical satire, which you claim initially and as properly understood, cannot even exist, as you, yourself, call it “absurd”, is an attack on Christ’s children who are innocently pursuing His truth as Truth Himself. What did Christ command regarding those who would attempt to lead His innocents into the lie, Tom A? You are warned. In caritas.
Good Sunday afternoon in the Octave of Blessed Easter,
A Simple Beggar,
May Almighty God, in His infinite Mercy, continue to guide and bless you and yours’. It is wonderful to read the truth as Truth, as you have written Melanie here. Amen. Alleluia. In caritas.
God bless you in the Octave of Blessed Easter, The Papal Subject,
You speak the truth as Truth here. Amen. Alleluia. In caritas.
2Vermont: The Truth is hard, isn’t it? Who can bear it? An Abjuration, in the present extraordinary circumstances, is made in private directly to Christ, the Head of the Church and Mystical Body, in FEAR and TREMBLING, relying solely on His infinite Mercy until which time His Church is resurrected from the tomb and restored.
And good afternoon to you as well, IC. A Blessed Easter to you. The Truth gives me joy, as Christ is the Truth. I hold onto Faith and Hope, as Our Lady of La Salette once stated would be all that is left, and the remedy: devotion to the Immaculate Heart of Mary as Sr. Lucia was told. She was told that devotion to the Immaculate Heart was the last remedy (1957 interview). How could this be the “last remedy” when in normal circumstances the remedy is the Sacraments? The “remedy” could not possibly supersede the Sacraments, unless they are no longer publically available. May God continue to have mercy on you, and yours. God bless you. Please pray for me.
Dearest Simple Beggar,
I hear in your words, the voice of the true Shepherd, and this thing, the Truth, itself speaks, for all those with ears which hear. Amen. Alleluia. In caritas.
2Vermont: Now that the rules have been set down by a true Pope, we have NO right to circumvent them at whim, for any reason whatsoever. I’m strict JUSTICE we must obey CHRIST. Again, are you saying that Christ did not foresee the situation to come within but a few months’ time? If we can make our own rules under the circumstances, then please tell me, if not now, when and how then the Sacrifice will ever fail? And if not now, when exactly will the Church flee into the wilderness to be “fed by God”? Also explain how it is that God is constrained by His (true) Sacraments? The Operation of Error is an insidious trap set at every exit door. God couldn’t possibly forsake anyone who sacrifices ALL, in sheer Faith and Hope, to avoid IN STRICT JUSTICE the breaking of one iota of HIS Laws.
The above should read “IN strict Justice”.
Melanie: Your point re: 2Vermont “doing the same thing” is excellent.
2Vermont: Nobody you describe as “home aloners” (Catholics) have “anathemetized” anyone. You are rash judging and God withdraws Grace for that offense. As for me, my true disposition (and far contrary to what you judge it to be) is that I am holding onto sheer Faith and Hope alone that God has reinstated me into HIS Church by the fact of my private Abjurarion and Perfect Acts of Contrition, and my good will in not wanting to commit sacrilege or idolatry (I shudder) and break one iota of HIS Laws. “You are either with me, or against me.”
Go ahead….I dare you to condemn me for that.
Hello again, A Simple Beggar,
Amen and Alleluia. Christ simply IS, as He can only be, the Head of His Mystical Body and Bride, His Church; commanded into being ex nihilo by Being Himself. Who is Christ Jesus our Lord as Truth Himself? “I AM WHO AM”. Praised be Christ the King. As you intone, A Simple Beggar, we are in the Tempest of tempests, as we float now with a fixed rudder, fixed in the Magisterial Truth and its attendant Governance, provided for us by Almighty God in His infinite mercy, protected in the Love of the Holy Ghost, minimally with the negative protection of infallibility, the Governance, as Christ Jesus simply cannot bind us to error, as He commands truth as Truth Incarnate. Christ is Order Himself and chaos and lawlessness do not, as they cannot, belong to Him. Amen. Alleluia. We are as the Twelve on the Bark, with Christ out of our view in the sensate realm, as while asleep on the Boat, all the while amidst the Twelve, but invisible while asleep below. But unlike the Blessed Twelve, Amen, we do not have the excuse to doubt our Blessed Jesus the Christ and His infallible Church, as we now as the Twelve at Pentecost, have been given divine Protection in Truth, as He promised us in John 14: 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. God is good as infinite Goodness Himself, as you well know A Simple Beggar, in the proper ontological understanding, that Almighty God simply IS all of His divine attributes, as all that is Good, finds its wellspring in Him. Amen. In caritas.
God’s own Laws are what athematize people. It is His Church Laws that YOU are anathematizing to satisfy your own will. None of us can see the heart and know who is ultimately of bad will and who is of good will but God, although there are signs that we may discern. There are people of good will who are sincerely seeking Truth in this combox and still finding their way (as it is a precarious journey within all the confusion which can take time) and those who, in the face of Truth and facts, still insist that they have it (the Mind of God) all figured out.
And yet again. Whatever miserable you or I believe, can as it will, take us to an eternity in Hell all day, everyday, and everywhere in the cosmos, unto the end of time. Amen. Precious all that matters is that whatever any human person believes is the teaching of the One, True Church, period and end, and as you well know, not because this miserable wretch writing to you says so, but because the Son of God has commanded that reality as Truth into being. As A Simple Beggar has written: “The Truth is hard. Who is it that can stand it? The answer, as A Simple Beggar well knows, as immanent to the human person, is NO ONE, not a one of us miserable wretches alive today, yesterday, or tomorrow, without receiving freely into the operation of our wills, His graces of fortitude, perseverance, and His intellective light as Light Himself. I pray this helps. In caritas.
2Vermont: After your ad hominem attack, you stated: “No one can get permission from someone who is not there.”
Let me give you an analogy. Let’s say that your household rule is that you can go nowhere with your friends without first receiving permission from your father. You have received an invite to attend a movie.
Your father is not home, you do not know where he could possibly be, and you cannot reach him.
Do you commit a serious sin by disobeying him because you cannot speak to him and get his ruling on the matter, or do you simply stay home?
The True, the Beautiful, and the Good, A Simple Beggar,
You demonstrate so clearly, again at once, that the truth as Truth is very simple, that which a virtuous 12 year old in the state of grace would know. God bless and keep you. In caritas.
Sure. The pastor of my parish. The pastor of the parish to the south. The pastor of the parish to the north. The associate pastors. That’s just in a 10-mile radius.
Hello again, The Papal Subject,
Be assured that to “interpret” the Holy Writ is indeed to be Catholic, as Christ Jesus our Lord and King, promised us that He would be with us unto the consummation of the world and that the Father would not leave us alone, but send us the Blessed Paraclete, the Holy Ghost, Who would remind us of all that He taught us and teach us more. Remember, that the Holy Writ can only be read in unity, as there can NEVER be one iota of contradiction within it or in communion with Holy Tradition. In the holy Gospel of Matthew 24:15, Christ the King commanded, “…let he who readeth understand.”. Again, The Papal Subject, Christ the King commanded there precisely what a virtuous 12 year old in the state of grace would clearly as pristinely understand, Amen. It is an absurdity to suggest that somewhere as anywhere in the Holy Writ, Christ Jesus our Lord would command, “he who readeth, let him understand”, and then somewhere else as anywhere else in the Holy Writ, we are somehow NOT commanded by Him to understand. To believe the contrary is to be deceived. All that any of us miserable human creatures know that is True, is known only by us through the intellective light of grace afforded us by Light Himself, in the divine Person of the Son of God, made true Man. Do not be tricked by Lucifer and his human slaves masquerading as prophets. To be anti-Catholic and as thus “protestant” or antichrist (as they are similes), is to parlay some interpretation which contradicts divine Revelation or the Magisterium. Again, Christ Jesus our Lord and Master admonished His disciples for not knowing the signs of the times. One cannot know the signs of the times, as perfectly and infinitely understood, without divine assistance. To suggest otherwise is to suggest man as God, period and end. I pray this helps. God bless you and yours’. In caritas.
Good Sunday evening in the Blessed Octave of Easter, Blunderbuss,
Your flippant array of sophomoric satire, as that is simply what it is, as objectively understood, literally as actually speaks as res ipsa loquitur about your very lack of concern, for the actual salvation of your eternal soul. Imagine for one moment, simply repeating your cynical response to the Papal Subject above, over and over and over and over again into the infinite abyss of an eternity with Lucifer, as your singular torment, NEVER, EVER ENDING. Imagine yet that unmitigated and unimaginable pain, just for a moment Blunderbuss. Know that your soul is more important to Almighty God than all the balance of His entire created cosmos. Every planet, every star, etc., etc. and you treat your own soul as though it is a toy. The so called “conciliar church” teaches heresy Blunderbuss. You never answered the question of you about whether the Church which Christ established can contradict the Apostles’ Creed, as does the so called, “Dogmatic Constitution on the Church”, “Lumen Gentium”, at paragraph 16. Know with divine certitude, that even one error to be found as anywhere in the “Council’s” documents, and this blasphemous error patently denies the Triune Personhood of Almighty God, brings down in one fail sweep, the entire facade of the church of the Antichrist, masquerading as Catholic, and every so called, Bishop, priest, Pope, Cardinal, and layman who subscribes to it. Know this from the very fiber of your ontological substance as your salvation does utterly depend upon it, as, “extra ecclesium nulla salus”, is deFide, and thus that which a virtuous 12 year old in the state of grace would as must understand, and is forever unchangeable from its original meaning as dogmatically defined. Amen. Alleluia. I pray for you that this helps. In caritas.
Blunder, IS the Church that Christ established, the Catholic Church OR does that Church SUBSIST in the Catholic Church?
I thought you said to 2Vermont: “until which time His Church is resurrected from the tomb and restored.” According to you and IC, are we not in the “end time” as you have definitively declared based on your private revelation concerning Daniel 12:11? Or alternatively, do tell where we are with respect to the “thousand two hundred ninety days”?
Of course, yes, we both have stated that we are in the end times. One would have to be deaf and blind not to see the signs all around us and especially in that entity most mistakenly call the Roman Catholic Church. As far as private revelation, which I take you to mean interpretation, Our Lord Himself complained that although we could predict the weather, we could not read the signs of the times. The real Sr. Lucia herself stated in her 1957 interview (in which she warned that the chastisement was “imminent”, that the “fall of the clergy” was Our Lord and Lady’s greatest concern, and which also happened to be 10 months to the very day of the “elevation” of “Pope” John XXIII), that she was given to know that we are in the end times by Our Lady herself for 3 reasons (see YouTube). As for the 1,290 days, I do not know if that is to be taken literally, as it could very well be a symbolic number as is often the case in Scripture.
I forgot to mention that Our Lord when stating that when we would see the Abominatiom of Desolation standing in the holy place, added “Let the READER understand”. That reader is you and it is me. Nevertheless, it is God who withholds sight from the blind, or, on the other hand in seeing our good will, opens our understanding by His Grace and His Grace alone.
“Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me, a sinner.” (Humility and repentance come first.)
“What will you that I do to you?”
“Lord, that I may see.” (Then sight is restored to the blind. Rinse and repeat in the Scriptures.)
We can’t make sense of any of this mess without God’s Grace. We must surrender our own will and all that we want to believe and ASK for this Grace. We must love the Truth and desire it AT ALL COSTS to ourselves.
Lenny B, I wondered this myself. Christ also said those days shall be shortened. But this is speaking of the time after the abomination of desolation and Daniel 12 says, “the continual sacrifice shall be taken away, and the abomination unto desolation shall be set up.” Maybe they are successive events instead of concurrent and the abomination is an actual specific abomination that will be set up, like The Temple of Reason during the French Revolution. I’m just taking a stab.
Actually Lenny B, I don’t know what I’m talking about, now I read it again it sounds like there are thousand two hundred ninety days between the two events not after the events. I have no idea but I can’t imagine a reason we’d have an apostate fake pope if it weren’t the end of the world, otherwise it seems like what we believed wasn’t really true. I have no idea.
See 1 Macc 57 & 62. It is more than likely that the Abomnation of Desolation is the Masonic table which was set up near the true altar in the Novus Ordo church.
“Let the reader understand.”
Exactly, Melanie. If we do have an apostate fake Pope, then the gates of hell have prevailed and we call Christ a liar.
By the way, “the gates of hell” are the mouths of heretics, per Church teaching.
I pray for your sake that you are sincere in your quest for Truth, as He is a divine Person, and He commands that we know Him, as we cannot love Him, if we do not know Him. It is blasphemy to suggest any certain knowledge of the time, other than the “season”, as Christ our Lord and our King admonished His disciples for knowing when the storm was coming but not knowing the signs of the times, the “season”, so to speak. The “season” is certainly the end, LennyB. Christ Jesus commanded that only the Father knows the day and the hour but He also commanded that we prepare, as for a thief in the night, as we do not know when He may come.
How do we know it is the end? The signs of the season are here. We are in the midst of the Great Apostasy, “the revolt”, as per 2 Thes 2. There is only one “revolt” spoken of in the Holy Writ, another does not yet come, as that which is not prophesied, simply cannot have being. As Saint Paul prophesied, those who do not truly love Truth, and therefore have no true zeal for Truth, but rather reject God’s grace thus and embrace a life of comfort, as in the flesh and of iniquity, will receive what they freely will, and into the operation of their will God, “sends them the operation of error to believe lying.”. Once the operation of error is received into the operation of the will, which resides in the human soul, there is no immanent remedy, no capacity therefore to receive truth as Truth, rather only to receive truth as deception, because God commands thus as we freely will it. Only through perfect creaturely detachment then, can a soul be restored to grace, freeing it of the “operation of error to believe lying”. When you believe lying, you simply believe lying, and there is no human person that is somehow going to lead you out, as from the human perspective, it is implacable. The Truth is hard, LennyB.
It is certain that we are in the Great Apostasy, “the revolt”, as Saint Paul refers to it, and this certainty rests in the objective realm of reality. Again, this is something that a virtuous 12 year old in the state of grace must know. So called “Vatican II” teaches heresy by literally as actually denying the Triune Personhood of the Blessed Trinity, with a “slight of hand”, a tacit denial. This, the work of Lucifer himself, and the conciliar slaves of Lucifer do this in Lumen Gentium, 16. This is objective as factual reality for all eyes to see, irrefutable, non-negotiable, no possibility for debate, as it speaks as res ipsa loquitur, period and end. It is a blasphemy that literally rattles the cosmos and that creature beast thing from the bowels of Hell itself, “Vatican II”, calls itself “Catholic”. Anyone as anyone, who holds that council from Hell as being a repository of the language of the Catholic Church, subscribes literally as actually, whether they know it or not, to the unutterably stunning blasphemy of denying the God Whose Church is the Catholic Church, which teaches the One, True, Faith, and offers the Credo, which professes the Catholic belief in the Triune Personhood of the Triune Godhead, Three divine Persons in One God, as One Intellect and One Will, infinitely knowable, while only infinitely known unto Himself. Amen. Alleluia. This is the Great Apostasy LennyB. The reality as deception, which all but all of the Baptized in the world today and since 1958, literally as actually believes, is that this creature beast thing from Hell, which controls all of the temporal structures that the Catholic Church once controlled, and prances men around dressed as Popes, Cardinals, Bishops, and priests, many as sodomites, who are no more recipients of the true Sacrament of Holy Orders than you or I, is ACTUALLY the Church which the Son of God made true Man commanded into being.
How can we know with certitude that these men simply do not have the ontological as substantial change in their being, the ontological mark of Orders? Again, what a virtuous 12 year old in the state of grace would see. It’s simply not the Catholic Church which bestowed the Sacrament of Orders upon them, rather it was the church of the Antichrist which did this, the “conciliar church”. We know that with certitude because the Catholic Church cannot hold heretical blasphemy by denying its very Creed in its so called, “Ecumenical Council”. It is that simple LennyB.
In closing, I think A Simple Beggar, when saying this,
“until which time His Church is resurrected from the tomb and restored.”, is alluding to, the “Resurrection of the Dead” and the “Final Judgment”, when the Church Militant joins the Church Triumphant, and all Truth is revealed, and then the Church is joined in the Beatific Vision. Amen. Alleluia. In caritas.
So A Simple Beggar, why such a big discrepancy with the time? A few years is much shorter than over a half century. Didn’t it say someplace this would all take place in a generation and we’re crossing over a few now, my Grandparents, my parents, mine, my children.
Lenny, I answered you as well, below, but seems I hit “reply” in the wrong place. I’m blurry-eyed at this time of night. See below my responses.
For now, see my responses to Lenny below. I can say more to answer your question directly, using approved prophecy, but it’s too late now. I’ll try to write something up within the next few days and post it here for you.
In the meantime, I hope you saw the link I posted for you in one of my earliest responses in this discussion.
If you learn about how modernism works then you will see there’s no confusion here, contradiction yes, but thats what they do best contradict. Heresy is all about contradiction no matter what face it wears.