Bishop Athanasius Schneider has authored yet another essay (published at Rorate Caeli) on Vatican II, the issues stemming therefrom, and what he considers to be the way forward.
Once again, His Excellency is being hailed for his efforts; one of the “money quotes” being:
Some of the new statements of Vatican II (e.g. collegiality, religious liberty, ecumenical and inter-religious dialogue, the attitude towards the world) have not a definitive character, and being apparently or truly non-concordant with the traditional and constant statements of the Magisterium, they must be complemented by more exact explications and by more precise supplements of a doctrinal character.
Let’s give His Excellency credit where credit is due; at least he recognizes that the Council and its deleterious effects are a serious problem – even if he stops well short of identifying it for what it truly is – the problem, and identifying the only way to truly address it. (More on that later.)
As such, the path that Bishop Schneider has laid out, while winning the support of many thanks to its traditional-sounding guideposts, will only further guarantee that the conciliar crisis continues.
In order to make sense, such as one is able, of Bishop Schneider’s thoughts, it may be useful to begin by considering his “orientation” with regard to the Council. He states:
Vatican II was a legitimate assembly presided by the Popes and we must maintain towards this council a respectful attitude.
A respectful attitude…
This is a problem.
Yes, but the Council was legitimate!
It must be said that in spite of being convoked by the popes, having been presided over by him, and its decrees having receiving papal confirmation (presumably the benchmark for legitimacy that Bishop Schneider has in mind), the Council – being devoid of any intent to define and bind and therefore its utter lack of infallible character – is of questionable validity with regard to its status as an “ecumenical council.”
In any case, while it is commonplace in our day for prelates to urge respect for things that are evil (e.g., false religions), due reverence for the Truth should preclude as much.
As for the way forward, Bishop Schneider states:
New statements of the Magisterium must, in principle, be more exact and clearer, but should never be ambiguous and apparently contrast with previous magisterial statements. Those statements of Vatican II which are ambiguous must be read and interpreted according to the statements of the entire Tradition and of the constant Magisterium of the Church.
I’ve little doubt that every reader of this space knows very well what this is:
It is nothing more than the failed conciliar implementation program that Benedict XVI famously articulated during his Christmas Address to the Roman Curia on December 22, 2005; best known as the “hermeneutic of continuity.”
Bishop Schneider, for some reason, seems to believe that it is different, stating:
A blind application of the principle of the “hermeneutics of continuity” does not help either, since thereby are created forced interpretations, which are not convincing and which are not helpful to arrive at a clearer understanding of the immutable truths of the Catholic faith and of its concrete application.
It isn’t immediately clear to me why His Excellency believes that a distinction is to be made between his proposal and that of Pope Benedict. Perhaps it is with respect to a “blind application.”
In any case, he goes on to say:
As to the attitude towards the Second Vatican Council, we must avoid two extremes: a complete rejection (as do the sedevacantists and a part of the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) or a “infallibilization” of everything the council spoke.
As for why one mustn’t reject the Council completely, Bishop Schneider suggests that doing so would be like throwing the treasure out with the trash.
At this one must ask, but where’s the treasure?
In other words, what of value did the Council provide to the Church and her faithful that was lacking before 1960? What contribution did the Council make to the mission at hand – the salvation of souls?
According to Bishop Schneider, strewn amid the conciliar garbage are four – count them, four – pearls of a great price to be found.
He tells us that “the original and valuable contribution of the Vatican II consists in” the following:
- The universal call to holiness of all members of the Church (LG, Chapter 5)
Not to be flippant, but anyone who has ever read the epistles of St. Paul alone realize that the Church has been calling all of her members to holiness from day one. I find it particularly irksome when it is suggested that the Council invented the idea, and frankly, I am surprised that Bishop Schneider is buying into this nonsense.
- The central role of Our Lady in the life of the Church (LG Chapter 8)
Let’s be honest – the eighth chapter of Lumen Gentium came about because plans for a document on Mary were attacked by the ecumenists who feared upsetting the precious protestants.
If pressed to specify precisely what the Council provided in the way of “original and valuable” teaching on Our Lady, I doubt that His Excellency would be able to deliver much.
Perhaps I can help.
The Council refers to Mary as she “who occupies a place in the Church which is the highest after Christ and yet very close to us.”
Really? Mary – the Immaculate Conception, the Queen of Heaven and Earth – is very close to us?
This tells us all we need to know about the Council’s contribution to Mariology.
Oh, and guess who the Council Fathers were quoting here?
Pope Paul the Pathetic.
- The importance of the lay faithful in maintaining, defending and promoting the Catholic faith and in their duty to evangelize and sanctify the temporal realities according to the perennial sense of the Church (LG Chapter 4)
In this, one may say that the Council perhaps stressed the role of the laity as participants in the mission of the Church in a particular way (while failing, in my opinion, to stress nearly enough the laity’s dependence upon the clergy), but let’s not forget that Confirmation has long been understood to make one a “soldier for Christ.”
In other words, it simply is not the case that the laity had never before been called to maintain, defend and promote the faith.
- In the primacy of the adoration of God in the life of the Church and in the celebration of the liturgy (Sacrosanctum Concilium, nn. 2; 5-10)
Seriously? The first demand of justice (to offer unto God the adoration that He is due) just dawned on the Church at Vatican II and in such a way that this can be considered an “original” contribution of the Council?
All of this having been said, if, just for the sake of argument, we grant that Vatican II really did gift the Church with these “original and valuable contributions,” the question remains:
What are we to do about the garbage?
Recall Bishop Schneider’s answer:
New statements should never be ambiguous or contrast. Those that are must be read and interpreted according to tradition.
We’ve been down this road before folks. Benedict launched the Church on this path in 2005 and pressed for its application for nearly eight years, and what have we to show for it?
Bergoglio.
Clearly, the only truly Catholic response to those things that should “never be;” in this case, statements that risk leading souls not to salvation but away from tradition is very simple: they must be rejected and condemned.
“All of this having been said, if, just for the sake of argument, we grant that Vatican II really did gift the Church with these “original and valuable contributions,”…
Sorry, but this is a bridge too far. It needs to be acknowledged that VII was a failed council, speaking as a Catholic. Those who find any value in it, have departed from the Faith, in direct proportion to their acceptance of its dogma. Speaking as a worldling and a relativist, it was a great success.
Good article. The whole of which should be read in its entirety.
I agree that the path that Bishop Schneider has laid out will only further guarantee that the Conciliar Crisis continues. There are indeed some traditionalists who agree with Bp. Schneider, unfortunately.
As an aside, what bothers me, too, is that Bp. Schneider seems to believe that he understands the mind of the late Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre. In this he cannot be more wrong.
Bishop Tissier de Mallerais, SSPX:
“I will say, one day the Church should erase this Council. She will not speak of it anymore. She must forget it. The Church will be wise if she forgets this council.”
[…] Forget it, yes. As a blank – tabula rasa…”
(2006 Interview with Mr. Heiner, The Remnant)
Archbishop Lefebvre:
“We believe we can affirm, purely by internal and external criticism of Vatican II, i.e. by analyzing the texts and studying the Council’s ins and outs, that by turning its back on tradition and breaking with the Church of the past, it is a schismatic council.”
Archbishop Lefebvre:
“All those who cooperate in the application of this overturning accept and adhere to this new “Conciliar Church”, as His Excellency Mgr. Benelli called it in the letter that he sent me in the name of the Holy Father last June 25, and they enter into the schism. The adoption of the liberal theses by a council could only have taken place in a pastoral council that was not infallible and cannot be explained except through a secret and meticulous preparation, that the historians will end up discovering to the great astonishment of the Catholics who confuse the eternal Roman Catholic Church with human Rome, susceptible of being invaded by enemies covered in scarlet.”
maryiloveher—Do you send these quotes to +Fellay?
Vatican II will be erased along with all the enemies of the Church (two thirds to three quarters of the global population). The handful of Bishops that remain will have no problem with Consecrating Russia. Who can doubt that the Material Chastisement of Heaven is imminent?
Our Lady promised to place devotees of her Immaculate Heart as flowers to adorn God’s Throne. This should be the focus of the ordinary Catholic. Focus on Eternal Rome and let God deal with human Rome. The state of individual souls cannot be known. To judge other changes nothing and puts your soul at risk of judgement.
The SSPX is fulfilling their apostolate of continuing to ordain Catholic Priests. The SSPX is currently sponsoring a world wide Rosary Crusade. Focus on that instead of placing yourself in an ever shrinking corner.
Thank you, Mary I love her, for providing these timeless quotes from Archbishop Lefebvre. They clearly show that he did not think about the Council in the same way that Bishop Schneider does at all. But then Archbishop Lefebvre was present at the Council and saw what happened.
What is this “corner” that you write of, and way is it shrinking?
Correction: I meant to ask:
What is this “corner” that you speak of, and why is it shrinking?
Because now the mainstream SSPX is bad for dialogue with Rome. Who will fail the Sede Purity Test next?
Is it really only “dialogue” that’s the problem?
And there’s a growing number of trads who realize that it’s not a good idea to reconcile with Rome until Rome comes to its senses and accepts tradition. It isn’t a corner that is shrinking.
Dearest Louie,
The degree of sorrow which is to be as existentially understood in our time, is as it can only be imagined, as heretofore and simply stated, unprecedented in the entire 2,000 year history of Holy Mother Church. What Athanasius Schneider has accomplished in the here and now, is to pristinely make as evident his own personal role in this Luciferian conundrum which is the “conciliar church”, which is more precisely and accurately understood as the false church of the Antichrist. Any church which stands in utter contrast to, while nearly perfectly juxtaposed in its opposition to the One and True Catholic Church established by the Son of God made true man, is the ultimate preternatural work of Lucifer, assisted by his mercenaries, as the emissaries of Satan which they indeed are. A false church can only have a false pontiff, false bishops writ large, a false council as vatican 2, false exegesis with its attendant false catechesis, false sacraments, a false missal with its false mass, and false breviary, etc, etc., leading eternal souls not to Heaven but first into the Great Apostasy, and ultimately to spend an eternity in the fires of Gehenna. This Great Apostasy, as the beloved Apostle Saint Paul tells us, must come first, before the “wicked one” is revealed as brought forth by the forces and power of the Mystery of Iniquity, and only after, “…he who do holdeth, do hold, until he be taken out of the way.” It would seem that we are now living that time. May Almighty God in His Triune Godhead have mercy on me and on His One True Church. Amen. Alleluia. I pray this helps. In caritas.
Quote:
“May God almighty in his Triune Godhead have mercy on me and on His One True Church.”
A good prayer. However, I would like to ask….where is the True Church, in your opinion?
Archbishop Lefebvre:
“This “Conciliar Church” is imbued with the principles of 1789. These are Masonic principles with respect to religion and religions in general and with respect to civil society. Its foundation was an imposture inspired by Hell for the destruction of the Catholic religion, of its Magisterium, of its priesthood, and of the Sacrifice of Our Lord.
This new Church can no longer sing the praises of Jesus Christ, universal King of nations, can no longer have the thoughts of Our Lord with respect to the world. That is why the whole spirit of the liturgy has been modified by the changing of a multitude of details, in texts and in gestures.”
Bishop Tissier de Mallerais, SSPX:
“The conciliar church is the society of the baptised who follow the directives of the current Popes and bishops, in espousing more or less consciously the intention to bring about the unity of the human race, and in practise accepting the decisions of the Council, following the new liturgy and submitting to the new Code of Canon law.”
Dear Caimbeul,
Our Lady of LaSalette: “Rome will lose the faith and become the seat of the Antichrist.”, “The Church will have a frightful crisis.”, and “The Church will be in eclipse, the world will be in dismay.”. As our Lady speaks as her Beloved Son, the God-Man, we know with certitude, that which she pronounces will come to pass. As our Blessed Lord and Savior commanded His Church will prevail until the end of time, we know it to be in our midst and yet we know it to be “in eclipse”, as our Lady of LaSalette forewarned. That which is in eclipse remains as it always has, in being as its metaphysical “substance”, and yet sensually absent to the human person in its metaphysical “accidentals”. The Church of Christ Jesus, the Lord of lords and King of kings, is here as it has been since He founded it, while its temporal manifestation is in eclipse, its Supernatural manifestation remains superabundant, as it only can. It would seem that, thanks be to Almighty God and His faithful Shepherd, Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, we can yet find the praxis of Christ’s Church in Her fullness, as faithfully manifested within the SSPX. How long that continues, God knows. In caritas.
Caimbeul–Love your question. Is the True Church in the Modernist V2 “church”? Is it with Traditional Societies attached to the V2 “church”? Is it with the SSPX which seeks “regularization” from the V2 “church”? Is it with the SSPX resistance? Is it with the Society of St. Pius V? I’d like to know also. The devil is having his day. I feel like I’m on a merry-go-round that just won’t stop. Our Lady, Help of Christians, pray for us!
Dearest maryiloveher,
Thanks be to God. Praise be to God. Amen. Alleluia. May you continue to find Peace in your heart, that peace which our Lord of lords commanded not to be of this miserable world, and further that as He alone gives it, we shall not let our hearts be “troubled or afraid”. In caritas.
maryiloveher–Should the above quote of Bishop de Mallerais frighten me?
+Tissier de Mallerais:
“But in the same way that Saint Joseph in his exile in Egypt carried the Infant Jesus and His divine Mother, so too does the traditional family in her exile carry the Church in her, without being exclusive in the glorious role, but having the marrow and heart of it, in integrity and incorruption. It carries in her by consequence the roman pontiff, who being the successor of Peter will liberate her someday from a long captivity and will come out of her great illusions, to proclaim as once the first Pope did at Caesar Philippi to his Divine Master; ” You are the Christ, the Son of the Living God!“
Paul 6, JP 2 and Benedict 16 had ample opportunity to interpret Vatican 2 in light of tradition, but did so only in a limited way. They purposely left in place V 2’s ambiguities and other defects. They also refused to excommunicate heretics like Kueng, and pro-abort politicians like Cuomo and “Justice” Kennedy, who are responsible now for millions of deaths of unborn children. There was no “continuity,” no “renewal.”
There is a battle intensifying to restore the Church.
Maryilover, I enjoy reading Arch. LeFebvre’s quotes and, imo, he is absolutely, positively, the only legitimate preaching shepherd throughout the Church that we’ve had the last 60 years that’s even worth quoting because he get’s to the root of the problem and everything he says is based 100 % on the Catholic faith and what the Catholic Church has always taught. Maybe no worldly accolades, t.v. awards, ewtn hero worshipping reruns or photo ops with PJPII but than again those modernist benefits only come with watered down abstract generic/GOD mumbo jumbo stuff. Yep, Archbishop LeFebvre nothing but 100% traditional Catholic teaching. Can’t read enough of him. Wonder if ewtn will ever run a weekly show commemorating him. Deo Gratias!!
Well said Louie. Vatican II was an unmitigated disaster plain and simple. “By their fruits you shall know them”. Since, evidently, Bishop Athanasius Schneider is unwilling to say this it would be better that he said nothing as he is now harming his own credibility.
Michael Dowd
From http://remnantnewspaper.com/web/index.php/fetzen-fliegen/item/3306-the-revolution-of-vatican-ii-was-misinterpreted
Consider Lefebvre’s own words: “From the very first days, the Council was besieged by the progressive forces. We experienced it, felt it…We had the impression that something abnormal was happening and this impression was rapidly confirmed; fifteen days after the opening session not one of the seventy-two schemas remained. All had been sent back, rejected, thrown into the waste-paper basket…The immense work that had been found accomplished was scrapped and the assembly found itself empty-handed, with nothing ready. What chairman of a board meeting, however small the company, would agree to carry on without an agenda and without documents? Yet that is how the Council commenced.”
What you seem to be saying, though not very clearly to me, is that the SSPX is the True Church.
I’m not sure that Archbishop Lefebvre believed that the SSPX is the True Church. In fact, I’m pretty sure that he didn’t believe that, but you can correct me with evidence that he did. I attend an SSPX chapel, and I’m very grateful for the SSPX.
Archbishop Lefebvre said that the Church is currently occupied by a modernist sect. I take this to mean that the Church is still there, but taken over at this time by Modernists. This does not mean that there is nothing left of the True Church in the conciliar church. There are still elements left, though they may be difficult at times to ascertain. Bishop Tissier de Mallerais wrote a good study on this, which is on the Dominicans of Avrille website (the Dominicans of Avrille were started by Archbishop Lefebvre in 1974).
Regarding Our Lady of La Sallette – yes – it may indeed be the case that Rome has now become the seat of the anti-Christ. However, the visible church must still exist nonetheless. As Bishop Williamson has said: it would be a mistake to think that there is no faith left in the conciliar church.
Louie bring up a good point regarding what Bishop Schneider said about “the original and valuable contribution of the Vatican ll consists” in the following:
“The universal call to holiness of all members of the Church.” (LG chapter 5).
Louie says that anyone who has read the epistles of St. Paul realizes that the Church has been calling all of her members to holiness from day one. And he (Louie) finds it irksome when it is suggested that the Council invented the idea, and it is surprising that Bishop Schneider is buying into this idea.
Well, I couldn’t agree more with Louie, and I’d like to add that how is it that the Council has aided Catholics to achieve holiness? I don’t think that Bishop Schneider has addressed this at all. Certainly Catholics nowadays are not so concerned with holiness, and they seem, for the most part, to not hear from their pastors about how to attain holiness. There are some Novus Ordo clergy who do focus on achieving holiness, but they aren’t the norm. For the most part, however, holiness seems to mean that we love everyone and “live the Gospel message” – whatever that means.
I do think that the True Church is still in Rome, despite the modernist takeover. That’s just my opinion, based on what I have studied of Archbishop Lefebvre. Archbishop Lefebvre didn’t intend to create a counter-church. He maintained that he wanted to keep the traditional sacraments alive until they are wanted again. Well, they still aren’t wanted by the Modernist authorities in Rome, but we must be patient and pray that they will be.
You forgot to mention the Russian orthodox.
KISS — here’s what we know and all we know. A true Pope is needed, along with all the bishops of the world–his bishops–to consecrate Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. This is the only solution. The SSPX, all other traditional groups, or the orthodox, cannot elect their own pope. Therefore the current Church, as it exists in Rome and all throughout the world, is the Church.
The Conciliar church is THE counter church.
What happened exactly 75 years following the vision of Pope Leo XIII? What happened on Jan 25th, 1959, and what did the real Sr. Lucia warn was coming by 1960 in her 1957 interview with Fr. Fuentes? We really must keep searching for the Truth.
Good afternoon Caimbeul,
You misunderstood what was written about the SSPX and Christ’s One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church, in this wretched world, as His divine Society. The Church is the divine Society of Jesus the Christ in this world. The SSPX is the human society of the faithful which makes manifest Christ Church in this world today, by following precisely just what Christ established in His Church, as Christ established in the Gospel of John, chapter 14, paraphrased as compiled: 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. You see, Christ never promised that “Peter” would remain until the end of the world, as He did indeed command that His Church would prevail until the end of time (Matthew 16:18). In fact, the blessed Apostle Saint Paul inerrantly prophesied that the day would come when Peter would be “taken out of the way” (Second Epistle Thessalonians; chapter 2, verse 7) and he stated this in a mysterious way, as is often the case in the Holy Writ, as the Holy Ghost reveals to us His Truth.
Out of the mouth of our Blessed Lord and Savior Himself, came the words which allowed us to know that His Church would only be inhabited by a precious few in the end of time; when He asked the question: When the Son of man returneth, will He find any faith left in the world?. This He asked not long before suffering His holy Passion, if my memory serves. In order for only a few truly faithful lovers of Truth as Love Himself, Who is Christ the Lord of lords and King of kings, to remain in this world at the end of time, there must be a Great Apostasy first, as Saint Paul prophesied in Second Thessalonians, chapter 2. In order for 1.2 billion Catholics, that is the overwhelming majority of them, to enter into apostasy writ large, it would have to occur without them even knowing with perspicacity, that this apostasy of theirs’ had actually been existentially manifest in them as having occurred in time and space. In other words, and to use the language of the Holy Writ from the blessed Apostle, Saint Paul once again, from both his Epistle to the Romans, chapter 1, and Second Thessalonians, chapter 2, he used the words, “deceiving influence” in Thessalonians and Saint Paul made this statement in Romans: ” Ever since the creation of the world, his invisible attributes of eternal power and divinity have been able to be understood and perceived in what he has made. As a result, THEY HAVE NO EXCUSE; for although they knew God they did not accord him glory as God or give him thanks. Instead, they became vain in their reasoning, and THEIR SENSELESS MINDS WERE DARKENED. While claiming to be wise, they became fools and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for the likeness of an image of mortal man or of birds or of four-legged animals or of snakes.” (from Romans 1: 18-32). This “deceiving influence” allows the human mind to become “senseless” and “darkened” and as such, the human person has from an infinite understanding in this case, no other option but to believe the LIE as the TRUTH. This is what has allowed the Great Apostasy to have occurred in our very midst, while people, yet alone baptized Catholics, don’t even know that it has occurred to them and because of them, as their free will assent. This is the summa and summit of the manifestation of the deception of Lucifer himself, as the diabolical disorientation of the mind. This deceiving influence is God’s allowance for His miserable human creatures to fully exercise their free will assent into evil, as the privation of the good which is due the human person in every act. The deceiving influence is received in lieu of grace, which would have allowed them to see the evil in their midst and the evil of their ways. But when the human person does not have or has lost his love for the Truth and has fallen into the grasp of sin, he rejects grace, and God as Love Himself, has no option but to allow for the free will of His miserable creature to seek sin in lieu of Truth, on his way into eternal perdition in lieu of the Beatific Vision.
In the sum Caimbeul, the Mystical Body of Christ, His Church in this world, is a Supernatural Society and as it is thus, the Church remains as Christ commanded until the end of time, whether fully visible or in eclipse, as our Blessed Lady of LaSalette commanded that it would be. Eclipse occurs when one cosmic body is placed in such a position that it either fully or partially blocks the view of the other cosmic body which finds itself in opposition. Our Lady promised us that her Beloved Son’s Church would be as such, in eclipse, and at the same time, the world would find itself in dismay. It would seem that we now find ourselves, as existentially understood and contemporaneously, with a world in utter dismay and the true Church of Jesus the Christ, Son of the Living God, as all but invisible in this world. If this is correct, may Almighty God have mercy on me and His Church, as Saint Paul said in Thessalonians, chapter 2: 3-11, that once the Great Apostasy had occurred, and as, “…that he who now holdeth, do hold, until he be taken out of the way.”, then the “wicked one” (aka, the singular person of the Antichrist) shall be revealed. Amen. Alleluia. I pray this helps. In caritas.
Dear John314,
Our Lady of LaSalette: “Rome will lose the faith and become the seat of the Antichrist”. As being cannot both be and not be, at the same time, and under the same respect, it is a metaphysical absurdity to suggest that while at once, the Mother of God proclaims that Rome will lose the faith and become the seat of the Antichrist, therefore not the See of Peter any longer, and at the same time, John314 proclaims that Rome holds the Faith, as Christ’s Church, and remains as the See of Peter. One of you is wrong. The Truth is hard as He is a divine Person, whose name is Jesus the Christ, Son of the Living God, made true man. In humility, reflect deeply and contemplatively on the Gospel of John, chapter 6, in lieu of the hardness of Truth in our time. I pray this helps. In caritas.
“…he is absolutely, positively, the only legitimate preaching shepherd throughout the Church that we’ve had the last 60 years that’s even worth quoting…”
And into this ever shrinking corner, johnjobilbee.
Dear Caimbeul,
Quoting you, “Archbishop Lefebvre didn’t intend to create a counter-church.”. Of course he did not intend to create a “counter-church”, nor did he, as the only faithful son of Holy Mother Church, as Bishop. It is the “conciliar church” which is the counter-church. The wolves all dressed in the robes of the Church have created their own church, in their likeness and image, as the image of the Antichrist. This anti-Church, while all dressed up “Catholic”, is devoid of all things Christ Jesus as His true Sacraments, and is taking them and all the inhabitants as laity of that Luciferian manifestation, which are under the “deceiving influence”, on their path to eternal perdition. The anti-Church can only lead souls to hell, because it remains in antithetical opposition to the teaching of our Lord and Savior, Jesus the Christ, His holy Apostles, and their true successors. The “Church of Rome” has lost the Faith and has become the seat of the Antichrist, while as for the first 2,000 years, it was the See of Peter. These truths are hard as they are clear Caimbeul, for those with eyes that see. There is no room for “opinion” here. These are matters of our eternal salvation or damnation. This is no place for “opinion”, which finds its wellspring from within the miserable human creature’s immanence. These are things of the Holy Ghost, Who manifests the Light of the world in the hearts of His faithful. Christ Jesus commanded this in John 14, when He said, as is paraphrased as compiled: Soon I will be leaving you, 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. May Almighty God have mercy on us. In caritas.
Our Blessed Mother did not say that we are to completely detach ourselves from the Pope, or from Rome, and that we are to deny the legitimacy of the Pope. You may infer this from “Rome will lose the faith and become the seat of the anti-Christ,” but we are not required to believe in inferences. However, we ARE required to accept all of the dogmas of the Catholic Faith, which includes submitting to the Pope. Part of submitting to the Pope is acknowledging his legitimacy, even if he’s a modernist. You may be alright with not adhering to that particular dogma, but I am not.
Caimbeul–Are we required to accept all of the dogmas of the Catholic Faith and submit to the Pope who does NOT accept all of the dogmas of the Faith? Makes no sense to me.
Caimbeul
Do you know if the above translated quote from Bishop Tissier is accurate?
This part: “the successor of Peter will liberate her someday from a long captivity and will come out of her great illusions, to proclaim as once the first Pope did at Caesar Philippi to his Divine Master; ” You are the Christ, the Son of the Living God!”
Do you have the original in French? I was wondering if “her great illusions” might be “his great illusions”. Or do you think this is a correct translation?
It is infallible Church teaching that in order to be Catholic and to be saved, one must be entirely subject to the Pope. If F is the Pope, AL must be adhered to as a Magisterial teaching of the Church, for example.
Keep praying and searching for the Truth.
Accepting the dogmas of the Catholic Faith are not dependent on the faith of the Pope.
We are not required to accept that which goes against the Catholic Faith. The Church is infallible. The Pope is only infallible under certain strict requirements.
MaryIloveher,
I’m sorry to say that I don’t read or speak French. From where is the quote taken? I’m not familiar with it. Maybe an English translation can be found somewhere.
Dear Caimbeul,
Our Lady of LaSalette: “The Church will be in eclipse, the world will be in dismay.” When in eclipse, that body which finds itself in such a way as eclipsed, is invisible, either in its totality or partly. As the world will find itself in dismay, at the same time the Church is in eclipse, near total obscuration is most likely, in contrast to the partial obscuration of Holy Mother Church while in eclipse. You write of a Church “dogma” as you claim, “However, we ARE required to accept all of the dogmas of the Catholic Faith, which includes submitting to the Pope. Part of submitting to the Pope is acknowledging his legitimacy, even if he’s a modernist.”
As we accept and hold the Faith, we accept and hold Her true teaching as dogmatic, yes. As you say, “…which includes submitting to the Pope.”, and in reality one must understand first who the “Pope” is. In the Gospel of Matthew, chapter 26: 31, our Lord and Master as the true Head of His Church said this,
“Then Jesus said to them: All you shall be scandalized in me this night. For it is written: I will strike the shepherd, and the sheep of the flock shall be dispersed.”
As we know, the Holy Writ was given us by the Holy Ghost in time and for all time. Christ the Good Shepherd commanded, “I will strike the shepherd, and the sheep of the flock shall be dispersed.” In Saint Paul’s Second Epistle to the Thessalonians, chapter 2: 3-11, he said in verse 7, “For the mystery of iniquity already worketh; only that he who now holdeth, do hold, until he be taken out of the way.” Christ commands that he will strike the shepherd and the sheep of the flock shall be dispersed and Saint Paul inerrantly proclaims that the “he” who holds the “mystery of iniquity” at bay, does “hold”, “until he be taken out of the way.”. You see Caimbeul, while there simply is no dogmatic teaching of Holy Mother Church which commands that the Successor of Peter will remain until the end of time, there is dogmatic teaching that Christ’s Church will be present in the world until the end of time. While at once, we have words from the Holy Writ which tell all those with eyes that see, that the Holy Roman Pontiff will at some point be “…taken out of the way”, and only then, as this occurs in the midst of the Great Apostasy, can the “man of perdition”, the “wicked one”, as the very singular person of the Antichrist, be revealed. As long as the authentic and true Holy Roman Pontiff is visible to the world, the person of the Antichrist cannot be revealed, as Saint Paul states this reality inerrantly, in the negative understanding, such that when “he” as the Holy Roman Pontiff, is “taken away”, the mystery of iniquity can then bring forth the person of the Antichrist. Saint Paul proclaims that prophetic reality this way in 2 Thessalonians 2; verses 8-11: “[8] And then that wicked one shall be revealed whom the Lord Jesus shall kill with the spirit of his mouth; and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming, him, Whose coming is according to the working of Satan, in all power, and signs, and lying wonders, [10] And in all seduction of iniquity to them that perish; because they receive not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. Therefore God shall send them the operation of error, to believe lying: [11] That all may be judged who have not believed the truth, but have consented to iniquity.” Further, Jesus the Christ tells us that when he strikes the shepherd, “All you shall be scandalized in me this night:”. In this time, the time of the Great Apostasy in our midst, there can only be great confusion, such that even the elect would fall, as the author of confusion, Satan, is allowed to manifest all of his great powers in deception. Caimbeul, we cannot “legitimately submit” to an illegitimate “Pope”. The Good Shepherd commanded that His sheep know His voice and warned us about the wolves who would masquerade as shepherds. You write an absolute contradiction which aught cause you cognitive dissonance, when you say about the Pope, “even if he is a modernist”. The Mother of God has warned us that “Modernism” is the constellation of all heresies, the summa and summit, the very innermost ethos of heresy, and yet Caimbeul tells us that the “Pope” can be a “modernist”. That is diabolical disorientation, Caimbeul, as being cannot both be and not be, at the same time, and under the same respect. The pope as “Pope”, cannot both be an heretic and be Pope nor can he both be an heretic and not be an heretic, at the same time. This is metaphysical absurdity.
There is nothing easy about any of this Caimbeul. It is all very hard as is Truth, as Love Himself. Jorge Mario Bergoglio is an emissary of Lucifer as a false prophet. He cannot be the Holy Roman Pontiff, as Christ Jesus commanded, “You are either with Me or you are against Me.” The Holy Roman Pontiff, as any other man, cannot both be “with” Christ Jesus the King of kings and Lord of lords, and at once be “against” Him, as that places an affront to the Thomistic law of non-contradiction, which God cannot allow in His Church or anywhere in His created cosmos, as this places God Himself into contradiction, which is impossible as infinitely understood, because Almighty God is the Author of right reason, as all things good. Christ said, I am the Good Shepherd, my sheep hear my voice, and I know them. Jorge from hell does not, as he cannot, speak as the voice of the Good Shepherd and in that understanding, he cannot be Christ’s Vicar in this world. He is the vicar of the Antichrist, as he speaks as a serpent with preternatural cunning. I pray this helps you. The Grace and Peace of God the Father of our Blessed Dominus Deus Sabbaoth and Savior, Jesus the Christ, be with you and yours, Caimbeul. In caritas.
To “In caritas” —
The quote “Rome will lose the faith and become the seat of the Antichrist” has not been approved by the Church. It is not authentic. The Blessed Virgin never said it.
http://www.unitypublishing.com/prophecy/fake-salette.htm
You write:
“John314 proclaims that Rome holds the Faith, as Christ’s Church, and remains as the See of Peter.”
This is a lie. What I said was, and I quote:
Therefore the current Church, as it exists in Rome and all throughout the world, is the Church.
No more, no less.
Go and study Fatima, find a quote, and use THAT in your posts.
Caimbeul
It’s a quote from Bishop Tissier’s “Is there a Conciliar Church” on the Dominicans site.
Caimbeul: I used to believe that mistaken opinion also, that we don’t have to follow all a (true) Pope says, but as it turns out and according to Church teaching, it’s not true at all. That’s why we must be very careful here. A Pope can be a sinner in his personal life, as anyone is or can be, but he cannot be a heretic – this IS true Church teaching and history has been twisted in some cases to favor this lie. Francis was very much a public heretic prior to becoming Pope, therefore he is ineligible and CANNOT be a true Pope at all.
We all must be willing to let go of all of our prideful “opinions” and beg and plead for the light of Faith to see and find and know the Truth. We must begin again by admitting to ourselves that we are nothing and know nothing. Then, and only then, I believe, will God enlighten us. There are traps at every turn.
And what if Benedict (who some say is still Pope) should die, at any moment? He is 90 after all. Then what shall be said? He also, as evidenced by his very public actions and writings, had departed from the True Faith. We are all in such grave danger that my head is spinning.
John314: Sr. Lucia stated in 1957 that the terrible chastisement was “imminent” as it was due by 1960. A documented Freemason by the name of Roncalli usurped the Papacy in Oct 1958, and then announced the 2nd Vatican Council on January 25, 1959: exactly 75 years from the vision of Pope Leo XIII where Satan stated and was granted “75-100 years” to destroy the Church. There are a lot of lies out there re: LaSalette, and who do you think might be the source of those modern lies? It was indeed approved, and is perfectly consistent with the warnings of Fatima. Even Padre Pio stated that Satan would rule in the Vatican. Of course Satan would create a counter-church. Abp. Fulton Sheen said so as well. Pray for the light of Faith.
Dear John314,
In rebuttal of your comment that, “Rome will lose the faith and become the seat of the Antichrist”, as being “not authentic”, find another source here: http://www.traditioninaction.org/religious/a060_Knock_2.html. In your judgment of that statement as being, “not authentic”, you are indicting “Tradition in Action” as proffering words attributed to the Our Lady of LaSalette, that are according to you, something “The Blessed Virgin never said…”, just so that we are clear. Further, when I summed what you believe to be true about Holy Mother Church, I did not claim to be quoting you John314. That understood, what is it about the statement, “Rome holds the Faith, as Christ’s Church, and remains as the See of Peter.”, which holds in contradistinction that which you said, ” Therefore the current Church, as it exists in Rome and all throughout the world, is the Church.”? Your words of judgment as to my being a “liar”, for the “crime” which you hold that I committed against you, are quite harsh John314, as “Thou shall not lie” is a matter of the Decalogue. I beg Almighty God His mercy upon me and you. In caritas.
Quote:
Christ commanded, “You are either with me, or against me.”
And yet Our Lord Jesus allowed Judas, the traitor, to stay, even though Our Lord knew that Judas would betray Him. Just as He allows a bad Pope to reign from the Chair of Peter.
Simple beggar,
If you are believe that we are in such grave danger that your head is spinning, then perhaps it’s best to give up on the futile sedevacantist belief. It may be making you ill. It’s not worth it.
Dear Caimbeul,
In humility, your statement, “And yet Our Lord Jesus allowed Judas, the traitor, to stay, even though Our Lord knew that Judas would betray Him. Just as He allows a bad Pope to reign from the Chair of Peter.”, demonstrates your fundamental level of misunderstanding as it relates to the reality of Papal infallibility in both its “active” and “passive” charisms, to say nothing of your somehow conflating the realities of “Judas Iscariot” as Apostle, having one iota of anything to do with the Holy Ghost allowing an heretic to be the Vicar of Christ in the Chair of Saint Peter. It requires a logical fallacy for you to arrive at your conclusion, as to get there, you conflate ontological realities which are not at all similar, yet alone they are not the same, and as thus you use a “non-sequitur”, which causes your argument to implode under its own weight, and as thus not it is not in need of a logical response in rebuttal. I pray this helps. In caritas.
Who said I was a sedevacantist? I’m nothing but a Truth seeker, unlike some who think they are something, know everything, and that they’ve “arrived”. If you think you are something, that you’re not in danger, and that you’re smarter than Satan, you’ve got another thing (horror) coming.
I’m realizing in my honest searching and constant prayer, that the key may be found in the “eclipse”.
Caimbeul, everytime you write or say “modernist” write or say “heretic” instead and then see how logical your statement sounds. For modernist=heretic. And heretic cannot be Catholic.
Caimbeul, I recall St Paul telling us to completely seperate ourselves from anyone preaching a false gospel. That would inculde
Someone we thought was Pope. He said even if it appeared to be an angel from heaven. Well Bergolio certainly doesnt even come close to anything angelic. So why do you cling to him?
Caimbeul–My comment above does not question “accepting” all the dogmas of the Catholic Faith. It questions “submitting” to the Pope who does not accept all the dogmas of the Faith. It’s a total contradiction.
Amen, Mr. Rush.
Those who attack the SSPX to bolster their own fragile egos are unwittingly trying (but failing, for God’s will SHALL be done) to “auto-destruct” Traditional Catholicism, just as the modernists successfully “auto-destroyed” the mainstream church.
The “corner” starts with SSPV and Sedevacantism. It ends with sitting alone in your room, feeling smug, and beLIEving yourself to be a little personal Pope – with not even a handful of followers, like poor deluded Dave Bawden – and then, a little later, the bowels of Hell from which there is no exit. This “purity test” is a filthy strategy borrowed from feminism and Leftism, and has no place in the virile mind of a Traditional Catholic man.
https://thewarourtime.com/2017/04/13/after-nearly-236-years-the-plan-to-destroy-all-the-thrones-and-overturn-all-the-altars-in-europe-has-met-with-incredible-success-with-the-conquering-of-the-final-and-most-priced-throne-that-of-st-p/
–
Rome has lost the faith.
It’s is easy to see.
http://www.lepantoinstitute.org/uncategorized/satan-must-reign-in-the-vatican-the-pope-will-be-his-slave/
Francis, Muller and the SSPX-the demonic plot thickens:
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/vatican-rumblings-pope-francis-aiming-to-end-latin-mass-permission
Reminds me of a story. A father was getting extreme pressure from his two teen age children to allow them to got to the movie that ‘everyone else’ loves. He cooked them their favorite desert, brownies, and while taking them from the oven told them he had mixed some of the dog’s droppings in the brownie mix. If they then wanted to eat the brownies – they could go to THAT movie. Vat II has too much of ‘fido’s droppings’ in it!