An English translation of an article written by Fr. Jean-Michel Gleize, SSPX, has been published online by the Remnant under the title:
A MAJOR SSPX CLARIFICATION: Towards a Doctrinal Agreement?
The article originally appeared in the French publication, Courrier de Rome, and was subsequently published on the official website of the SPPX in the District of France.
In the article, Fr Gleize raises a number of points that are worthy of our attention. In this post, however, we will take a closer look at what I consider to be the most pressing matter:
Having read the article in full, I am not at all convinced that the essay truly represents a “major clarification” on the part of the SSPX itself; i.e., the official position of the Society.
As we will see momentarily, there is good reason to suspect that it is more akin to an editorial that simply reflects the opinion of the writer and his publishers.
I have requested confirmation one way or the other from my contacts at the SSPX District House here in the U.S. and will inform readers as soon as I receive a response.
Cutting right to the chase, Fr. Gleize concludes that “Rome must agree, not with the Society of Saint Pius X, but with the doctrine of all time, and return from its errors” as a prerequisite for entering into any agreement ordered toward canonical recognition.
Is this opinion shared by Bishop Fellay?
I have no real reason to believe that it is; in fact, Fr. Gleize seems to acknowledge that it is not when he writes:
“Up until now, Archbishop Lefebvre’s successors made a point of envisaging things from the perspective of [the return of Rome to tradition as a prerequisite for regularization].”
Up until now…
NB: In other words, the current Superior does not see things in this way.
With this in mind, Fr. Gleize stated that an agreement that simply amounts to a “formulation of a common doctrinal position which would be sufficiently acceptable to both parties,” with the solitary goal of establishing canonical recognition, “will always be insufficient so long as Rome has not inserted a correction of the Council’s errors.”
Fr. Gleize went on to state:
“From this point of view, it is not enough to sign a text which only expresses part of the truth; it is necessary for Rome to profess the entirety of the whole truth and, ipso facto, condemn the errors which completely vitiate all those partial truths which can be found in the Conciliar and Post-Conciliar magisterium.”
My friends, unless I am missing something (and I very well may be), this looks an awful lot like a non serviam declaration, or at the very least, a warning shot, directed, and rather boldly so, at Bishop Fellay himself – not just from Fr. Gleize, but from the leaders of the SSPX District of France who decided to publish the text on its official website!
Bear in mind that we are discussing an English translation of the French original, and it is possible that something has been lost in the process.
Again, I await confirmation one way or another from my sources here in the U.S. as to the nature of the article, and until that comes, we can only discern what we are reading as best we are able.
As things stand at this very moment, I would have to say that all indications are that we are witnessing something truly extraordinary.
Stay tuned.
Things are going to get really awkward is Fellay wants to make peace with this monstrosity:
https://veritas-vincit-international.org/2017/06/20/vatican-reportedly-working-on-ecumenical-rite-of-mass-for-joint-worship-with-protestants/
But this is probably why Francis is keen to bring them back in. They’ll be the consessionary bone he’ll throw on the ground in front of the actual Catholics who will naturally refuse to go along with the above possibility.
Things are turning out precisely like in that bad dream I’ve had for a long time —
“Italian journalist and Vatican expert Marco Tosatti has reported that Pope Francis has formed a top-secret commission tasked with implementing a new kind of “mass” that is acceptable to Catholics, Lutherans and Anglicans.
The commission consists of representatives from all three denominations, all bound to secrecy.
…
According to Tosatti, the central issue lies in the Eucharist, since the Catholic understanding of the Eucharist is profoundly different from that of the Lutherans or of other Protestant denominations. Catholics believe in Transubstantiation and the Real Presence of Jesus in the Eucharist, while Protestants believe that it is merely a memorial.
Tosatti reports that a possible “solution” being proposed is that the words of Consecration be replaced by silence:
But how can a common liturgy be celebrated that clearly differs in the wording right at the most important point of the event?
One of the proposed possible solutions would be silence. It would mean that after the Sanctus, at the moment in which normally during the Mass the priest would say the words: “Father, you are holy indeed…” the different celebrants would keep silent, everyone mentally repeating “his own” formula.
The silence is broken in the congregation with the recitation of the Our Father. It is still not clear how the lines for Communion would be formed.
In light of this well-founded rumor, we should take heed of the remarks of Cardinal Francesco Coccopalmerio, a close collaborator of Pope Francis and currently the President of the Vatican’s Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts. The Vatican cardinal has suggested that we stop thinking of sacraments so rigidly as only either valid or invalid. For the sake of ecumenism, he opined that we should start looking into sacraments perhaps having “imperfect” or “partial” validity.”
Enjoy those loaf-of-bread adoration sessions coming to a Novus Ordo Church near you! It wouldn’t surprise me if they replace every real Eucharist in adoration chapels without telling anyone with one of these.
As I’ve said elsewhere, we have a partial Papacy for the partially married under partial sacraments for a partially schismed Church under a partial Council with partial doctrine coming with a partial Mass with a partial Eucharist.
Now you all know why the blood of St. Januarius partially liquified in Francis’ hands. The saint was trying to tell us something!
Archbishop Lefebvre:
“May St. Michael the Archangel inspire us with his zeal for the glory of God and with his strength to fight demons.
May St. Pius X share with us a part of his wisdom, of his learning, of his sanctity, to discern the true from the false and the good from the evil in these times of confusion and lies.”
We are scattered and all held hostage. Our Lady of Good Success, liberate us.
Louie, I think you’re absolutely right that Father Gleize’s position is indeed his private position, and not the position of the top leadership of the SSPX. I also agree that Father Gleize was publicly opposing Bishop Fellay’s position on this matter, as he must be aware of the latter’s position and knew that his article would be widely read. However, I think you are wrong about this being a Non Serviam on the part of the entire French SSPX District, even though this article was indeed published there.
To attempt to explain the apparent paradox… Anyone who knows the French SSPX District will confirm that there are a good number (maybe even the vast majority) of high-ranking priests there who share Father Gleize’s concerns about doctrinal agreement/canonical recognition. The articles written by them in their Priory bulletins (and which are just as explicit as Father Gleize’s) are appearing regularly on the French District website these times. Nevertheless, I don’t think the District Superior agrees with them; as far as I can see, he (and by extension Bishop Fellay) tolerates them because to do otherwise would make the District practically ungovernable.
Here’s a partial quote from another French priest:
(Abbot Raphael of Abbadie, fsspx – The Little Eudist – June 2017):
“If we have rejected the Second Vatican Council, it is precisely because it is moving away from the doctrine of the past, to the point of contradicting it, on the pretext of “revisiting” it to bring it up to date. Our opposition is part of our commitment to faith. Now, Rome would like to reduce this attachment to a mere opinion, which we could defend, but as an opinion: these would be “open questions” (whereas the Magisterium has always spoken these questions). We find here a revolutionary tactic, denounced by Jean Ousset, 3 which consists in attacking the truth (which excludes error), before gradually giving it a right of citizenship, but on the condition that it is at the rank of ” A simple opinion which does not exclude the contrary opinion: truth is placed on the same footing as error.
Thus to relativize faith is to destroy it, and it is thereby to destroy the very foundation of the unity of the Church and its government: “a unity of government, without the unity of faith, would be Therefore a purely legal and legalistic unity, contrary to the very nature of the Church. A unit more apparent than real. Such is the ecumenical unity dreamed of by Paul VI, John Paul II and their successors. Such would also be the unity of “full communion”, which the Holy See has long been embellishing for the heirs of Archbishop Lefebvre. »4
Our true union with the Church, therefore, requires the intact profession of faith, even if this is contradicted by the present authorities, and causes us to be sidelined: “this unity [of faith], which is the very unity of The Church, must retain primacy over all pseudo-canonical arrangements. It is by relativizing faith that one would lose true unity (and this is what is called a schism), and compromise one’s salvation.
These principles allowed the founder of the Fraternity to keep a clearly Catholic line in the midst of the conciliar storm, which he thus expressed on the eve of the sacraments: “The official link to modernist Rome is nothing compared to The preservation of the faith!”
Rorate published this article from Fr. Puga of the French district (partial quote):
“Since the last Council, of sinister memory, Satan has been attacking our Holy Church with the subtlety of that highly intelligent being, which indeed he is, compared to us poor mortals. And for this reason, if we don’t want to be crushed by the subtle blows dealt by the fury of this evil spirit, we eminently need divine help. And the Feast of Pentecost, which this year opens the month of June with its magnificent octave, re-doubles our hope.
The Gifts of the Holy Spirit, in an upright soul, that is – he who is in a state of grace – come to aid in unmasking all the falsehoods, all the half-truths, all the sophistry of the Prince of darkness, who knows [well] how to conceal himself acting through human instruments. The Holy Spirit makes us say no to all compromises, He teaches us to reject diplomatic language, senseless political words, hyper-legalism which dismantles the healthiest reactions, and invites us to renounce the temptation of the mass-media facade, [which is] contrary to the full and clear confession of the faith.
Let us purify our souls then, let us increase this grace in our souls, let us find it again if we have lost it through sin. Then we will be armed against the legion of spirits who are prowling through the world seeking the ruin of souls.
Let us place at the center of our lives the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, which, as Monsignor Lefebvre said, is the exorcism par excellence. If we don’t, we will all perish!”
Dear maryiloveher,
Thank you again for writing the words of those priests and prelates, from the SSPX, who as their founder, speak the unvarnished truth to power, which is speaking in the reflection of Truth Himself.
In the wording of Fr Gleize’s most recent publication, as translated at “The Remnant”, the third topic’s heading of the shortened, as translated from French, essay is entitled, “Accepting a canonical recognition – a morally indifferent act…with a double effect.” As Louie has identified in the past with Fr. Gleize, his language is problematic, with his now infamous (at least at akaCatholic), analysis of A.L. Before it is concluded that Fr. Gleize has somehow transformed his position, understood from his analysis of A. L., by virtue of discerning his theological writings, we need to examine very carefully the language which he used to title the short topic of the third section of this partial translation of the total essay that is written in French, as we are told. The focus is now on four words of that title quoted above: “…–a morally indifferent act…”. Fr Gleize is positing that to accept, “…a canonical recognition…”, in this very specific case of the SSPX and while considering their historical position, as formulated by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre from its nascent genesis, while making his (Fr. Gleize) argument regarding all the harm that would ensue from having this accord, he stakes the claim in his title and in the first sentence of that section as quoted here, “Our accepting a canonical recognition in the current circumstances corresponds to a morally indifferent act, but which has a double effect.”, that “accepting a canonical recognition [is]—a morally indifferent act…”. That is simply and patently erroneous, for all the reasons that Fr. Gleize himself elaborates on in his essay. As he begins this section of his essay with the false premise that to engage in détente with the “Modernists”, as he refers to the current, “Hierarchy of the Church” (quoting him exactly: “and to conclude that the members of the Hierarchy of the Church are currently Modernists.”), is “a morally indifferent act”, we are now compelled to understand precisely what this “indifference” means.
An analogy: A man is purchasing a building for the purpose of investment. The current owner has a long term lease with a tenant who operates a “business” from that same property. The buyer of said property is informed by the seller that the “business” which operates from this property is prostitution. The buyer concludes that it is “morally indifferent” for him to allow the current lessee to continue to operate this business of prostitution from the property which he has now purchased, because he had no direct involvement in the original propagation of the lease. The purchaser of the property believes that it is an “arms–length” relationship that he now has with the owner of the “business” of prostitution and further that he can mitigate any “scandal” that may occur when people discover just what “business” it is that operates from his property, by alluding to this arms–length relationship and his lack of initial engagement in securing this lessee.
Just as allowing for the relationship to continue, as per the will of the new owner of the property with the “business” owner of the prostitution, causes a complicity with the intrinsic evil of prostitution on the part of the new owner of the property, and as this is morally illicit, so is “accepting a canonical recognition” by the SSPX from the same ecclesial structure which Fr. Gleize, in his own words, identifies as, “… the Hierarchy of the Church are currently Modernists.”, also morally illicit. As Saint Pope Pius X taught infallibly in “Pascendi Dominici Gregis”, Modernism is the synthesis of all heresies. As heresy always induces schism without prejudice (see Catholic Encyclopedia), as being cannot both be and not be, at the same time and under the same respect (the “respect” here speaks to what the “act” of embracing heresy, which is always opposed to Faith, causes to happen in its opposition to Faith–and that is schism, which itself is opposed to charity), so having “Modernists” as the “Hierarchy of the Church”, is a metaphysical absurdity, as those same Modernists have, by virtue of their own free will assents, caused their own schismatic separation from the Mystical Body of Christ, outside of which there is no salvation, which they hate as they attack Her unceasingly, using the subtle and not so subtle teaching of heresy as their weapon.
Fr Gleize even alludes to this reality just proffered as he uses the, perhaps or perhaps not, subtle distinction of referring to the “Conciliar and Post-Conciliar”, “magisterium” as “magisterium”. Whereby, when he refers to the pre-Conciliar Magisterium, he uses the distinction of “Magisterium” as “Magisterium”. In his very own language and syntax usage, he is codifying at least the perception that he does not believe that the so called “conciliar church” is authentic and if it is not authentic, it cannot be Catholic. If it is not Catholic, then it is some other religion. As some other religion which is not Catholic, it simply cannot have a “Holy Roman Pontiff” as its Chief Shepherd and Pastor, and it only logically follows then, that Jorge Mario Bergoglio as Francis, simply cannot be the Roman Pontiff of the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church. These truths are hard, as Truth is a divine Person and His name is Jesus the Christ, Son of the Living God, who commanded: You think I came to bring peace. I came to bring the sword. In those words of our Blessed Lord and Savior, Jesus the Christ, we know that it is in division that the truth springs forth and is plainly seen. I pray this helps. In caritas.
Archbishop Lefebvre two quotes:
“I should be very happy to be excommunicated from this Conciliar Church… It is a Church that I do not recognize. I belong to the Catholic Church.”
“So we are [to be] excommunicated by Modernists, by people who have been condemned by previous popes. So what can that really do? We are condemned by men who are themselves condemned…”
Any statements coming from the SSPX should be crystal clear. We have enough ambiguity coming from Bergoglio. Confusion is the tool of the devil. I expect that from Modernist Rome.
2 John 9-11
9 Whosoever revolteth, and continueth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that continueth in the doctrine, the same hath both the Father and the Son.
10 If any man come to you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into the house nor say to him, God speed you.
11 For he that saith unto him, God speed you, communicateth with his wicked works.
I am living in Sodom and Gomorrah here in Dublin – all officially and loudly and frenetically and diabolically celebrating the most terrible depravity. The evil blatantly foisted upon us even by the supermarket where one buys one’s food. They’ll soon not permit us to eat anyway. Lord have mercy! Reparation! Give us the grace of strength and consolation and let us not betray thee or aid the loss of a single soul through act or omission. Our Blessed Mother, intercede for us that we may endure and soon get Catholic Pope, bishops and priests to lead us in the One Holy Faith.
Google for this Vdare essay by Maidhc Ó Cathail :
Brave New Ireland—How the Island of Saints and Scholars Became a Multicultural Dystopia
Do you go to the SSPX Mass at St John’s in Dun Laoghaire?
I’m in the Orange County/Los Angeles area where newspapers like the L.A. Times celebrate the campaign to erase me and mine. See my new Youtube video entitled:
They Want to Erase Us
I know that very few here want to hear this….and this is pretty much why I rarely ever engage in commenting anymore…but THIS article reaffirms to myself why I became a sedevacantist. For almost four years now I havent had to try and figure out how to make the impossible possible.
I have many difficulties in my personal life, as we all do, but the confusion over the Catholic Church vs the vatican 2 religion, is not one of mine.
On that note, and all opinions aside on the source, would anyone like to take a stab at refuting any of this?
On the confusion: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=z5w9RvyvI44
More, stay until the end (22 minutes): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4KbtR3Chxsw
After watching the first video you link to, I would have to defend Michael Matt who does not at all support John Paul II. He was a very vocal opponent of his canonisation. He co-authored the book “We resist you to the face”, which addresses JP II’s many offences, especially those against the First Commandment.
Anyone who has spent a little time on the Remnant webpage, will have no doubt as to their critical attitude of Vatican II and the post-conciliar popes.
If the Dimond brothers get these basic facts wrong, how much can they be relied on if one is looking for the Truth?
rich, your comment makes sense. Is it possible to accept Francis as a REAL Pope without accepting the N.O. as a REAL Church? That is why the SSPX’s recognition of Francis’ authority as Supreme Pontiff is frightening to me. How do you engage in battle with an enemy whose authority you accept? It is a recipe for disaster. They might as well just wave the white flag and get it over with.
The Remnant have lost the plot.
Try posting a comment there which contains even a whiff of the faintest criticism of Salza and Siscoe and get yourself blocked and deleted by the mods. No discussion allowed,
This was not the point the Diamond Brothers were making and to which my response was directed.
Rich, there are many people who read these comments and are influenced. I accepted the sedevacantist position from reading the debates on various website comboxes and then researching the arguments presented pro and con. I came to the same conclusion you did. You should comment more since it could help sway more people to stop saying Francis the heretic is pope. The modernists count on the faithful believing in their legitimacy. The biggest obstacle we have to restoring tradition is the trads who think Francis is pope. The guy isnt even Catholic! This is the contradiction we face.
How many “last straws” is Michael Matt going to place on his camels back??? Matt is confused because he is trying to place a round peg in a square hole. It doesnt fit and his confusion will last as long as he willfully discounts sedevacantism. I am no longer confused as to what comes out of Francis’ mouth these days. It makes perfect sense that a papal imposter would seek to destroy the faith. It is a mystery to me why God has allowed this to happen but that is a huge distinction from confusion. It is ok to not know but if your confused Michael, its only due to the false premises you make.
Ursula, the point the Dimond brothers were making in the video was the fact that Matt and the R&R group believe that JPII was a valid or true pope and with that belief, they can’t understand how a true pope could practice idolatry, teach heresy, and ultimately, lead souls to eternal damnation. The fact is they will not entertain the fact, under any circumstances, even and especially with Francis, that a true pope cannot be both Catholic and anti-Catholic at the same time, and that is why they are so confused.
The video simply gives an explanation of how prophecy is being revealed as to how and why the idolatry, sacrileges, blaspheme’s, contradictions, confusion and ambiguities which create doubt about what is true have occurred.
Good Sunday afternoon, Ursula,
Katherine yields a very clear and succinct response to your question of the Dimond Brothers. In humility, I would suggest that you not trust in men nor princes, as the Holy Writ commands of us, first and foremost. Contemplating that command more deeply, what it indeed is commanding, is not to trust in the immanence of men nor of princes. Trust in the truth which they may profess, lay men (as am I, a layman) or princes, not in them immanently. Otherwise said, we can only trust men and princes in Truth. If so called “Saint” “Pope” John Paul II would have been an authentic Pope of Holy Mother Church, as opposed to a false pope of Holy Mother Church, while at once a pope of some other church, and arguably that is the church of the Antichrist, he simply and utterly could not, as Tom A wrote in his response to you, cause these utter internal contradictions to occur in his papacy. You see, our Lord and our God, Jesus the Christ, commanded that, My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me. The Holy Ghost can never let any Catholic go astray, in Caritas, as Caritas Himself, who knows Christ Jesus commands and follows them, as 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. In that chapter He also commanded that: soon He would be leaving and returning to the Father Who loves Him and if we love Him, we will be joyful for Him. But He commanded, the Father will not leave you alone, He will send you the Holy Ghost, the Blessed Paraclete, 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. You see Ursula, we are commanded by Jesus the Christ, Son of the Living God, to have the fortitude and perseverance of the Holy Apostles AFTER Pentecost, not as they were in the boat, as Christ was invisible to them asleep in the hull during the tempest and they doubted Him.
My dear Ursula, we now find ourselves and our world in the midst of the tempest of tempests, with the Holy Church of Jesus the Christ as an utterly tiny remnant, in full eclipse to even those who claim the Faith, One and True, and purport the following Her Tradition. Our Blessed Lady, our Mother, our love, the Mother of the One Who Is Love, promised us at LaSalette that, “The Church will be in eclipse, the world will be in dismay.”, “The Church will have a frightful crisis.”, and “Rome WILL LOSE THE FAITH and become the SEAT of the ANTICHRIST. Ursula, it simply and purely places an affront to the Thomistic law of non-contradiction for us to somehow believe that as Our Lady of LaSalette PROMISED (as she cannot deceive nor lie), “Rome will lose the faith and become the seat of the Antichrist”, that Rome can, at the same time and under the same respect (the “respect” here is in relation to Rome as the Eternal City which holds the Faith and as the Chair of Saint Peter as the Vicar of Christ), remain as the bastion of the Faith holding the Chair of Saint Peter as the Vicar of Christ in this world. At its most fundamental observation, the so called “Recognize and Resist” (aka: R&R) position can only be rooted in the vice of cowardice, making manifest also then the loss of the virtues of fortitude and perseverance. The Truth is hard Ursula, because He is a divine Person and His name is Jesus the Christ. He commanded, “You think I came to bring peace. I came to bring the sword”, as it is in division that the truth springs forth and is plainly seen.
In summary dear Ursula, please contemplate and most deeply, Saint Paul’s Second Epistle to the Thessalonians, chapter 2, and particularly these words: “”the mystery of iniquity already worketh; only that he who now holdeth, do hold, until he be taken out of the way.” Could it be that “…he who now holdeth…” is the person of the Holy Roman Pontiff as the Vicar of Christ in this world? And if this man, who lives in this world, whom Saint Paul refers to inerrantly in the Holy Writ, while using the third person, singular pronoun “he”, is not the Holy Roman Pontiff, who has been the “he” who has held off the coming of the person of the Antichrist for the past 2,000 years, then who could “he” possibly be? To suggest that the, “he”, whom Saint Paul refers to is someone other than the Chief Pastor as the Vicar of Christ, who is the singular Guardian of the Faith, as the sole interpreter of Holy Scripture and of Holy Tradition for this world, undermines the very Papacy established by Jesus the Christ, Son of the Living God, to ensure that the gates of hell could not prevail against Her. Saint Paul also proclaimed inerrantly, that the day would come when the protection offered by Almighty God, holding at large the Spirit of Iniquity, which was already present in the world in the Apostolic Age as Saint Paul allows for our knowing, from positing in this world literally—the person of the Antichrist, would END, as St. Paul said, “…until he be taken out of the way.”
Finally then, we have Our Lady of LaSalette, who as the Mother of God and the Queen of Heaven and earth cannot deceive, promising us that the day would come when, “Rome will lose the faith and become the seat of the Antichrist.”. While at once we have St. Paul proclaiming inerrantly from the Holy Writ that the day would come when the Spirit of Iniquity would no longer be held at large from positing the very person of the Antichrist into this world, when St. Paul proclaimed, “…until he be taken out of the way.” In that understanding St. Paul also proclaimed that for the person of the Antichrist to be made manifest in the world, there would have to first come the “apostasy” and Our Lady of Fatima promised that there would come a “diabolical disorientation of the mind”. These two understandings are perfectly linked in their essence. In the Douay Rheims copy of Holy Writ, Saint Paul proclaims that the baptized will receive a “deceiving influence” which will lead them into the “apostasy”. This “deceiving influence” would cause the “diabolical disorientation of the mind”, as Our Lady of Fatima refers to it. She allows us to know that this is occurring in our time, as all with ears that hear and eyes that see know, as Christ promised we would as by the power of the Holy Ghost, while at once, “The world will not know Him nor see Him but you will.” Our Lady of LaSalette promised that “The Church will have a frightful crisis.” What could we possibly imagine as a more “frightful crisis” than to have Holy Mother Church hidden, “in eclipse”, while that which is proffered as Holy Mother Church, while it controls Her visible edifice, is actually a diabolical deception the likes of which the world has heretofore never seen nor known? This diabolical deception is the church of the Antichrist, masquerading as the Church of Jesus the Christ–One Holy Catholic and Apostolic— which has prepared the past 59 years for his arrival. The “Council” of “Vatican II” created the language as the blueprint and wellspring for this creature beast thing from hell, called the “conciliar church”, the “post–Vatican II” church, the “new church”, and this thing has its “seat” which holds its vicar, and as Our Lady of LaSalette promised, it is the “seat of the Antichrist”. There could not possibly be a GREATER DECEPTION proffered by the “Angel of Light–Lucifer”, than to ape the Church of Jesus Christ into his own creature beast thing from hell, leading countless souls into the abyss with him, all the while they are deceived into believing, by virtue of the “deceiving influence” they have received by rejecting God’s grace—that gift which is both freely given and completely undeserved—,and as thus being literally blinded to the truth of that which has been inerrantly prophesied by Saint Paul and promised us by the Mother of God. I know this is hard. I, as a perfectly miserable human creature and as I can only remain this side the veil, have only come to this position in the past couple of months. I have been a “work in progress” for about the past 8 years, when my reversion into the One True Faith began, first with utter pain and near desolation. I went to my first “Latin Mass” about 4 years ago and now attend, almost exclusively, the True Mass as offered by validly ordained priests of the SSPX. Thanks be to Almighty God. Amen. Alleluia. I pray in humility this helps Ursula. In caritas.
Yes, jorge isnt Catholic….yet 99.99 percent of those who claim to be Catholic call this piece of filth their “pope”.
my2cents – This may help (although I personally believe Benedict XVI is still the true reigning pope).
“Is There a Conciliar Church?” A study by Bishop Tissier de Mallerais
http://www.dominicansavrille.us/is-there-a-conciliar-church/
“As things stand at this very moment, I would have to say that all indications are that we are witnessing something truly extraordinary.”
And most appropriate considering we are dealing with the infamous and double-dealing Pope Francis who has learned the teaching of Machiavelli quite well.
We still have to be careful to make that distinction between the person and what he says. I don’t like (Mr?) Bergoglio at all. I can’t see how he could possibly be the pope. But sometimes I look at a photo of him and am reminded that within the next few years, a decade at the most, this man will face his Particular Judgement. Either his eternal happiness or his eternal misery will be underway. What a thought that all of us reading this will also face it one day.
So, I don’t think you should call him a “piece of filth”. It’s going too far. Jorge Bergoglio has been Baptised and validly received the sacraments of Penance, Holy Communion, Confirmation, and Holy Orders to the Diaconate (at least). He has enjoyed the Blessed Trinity residing in his soul, if not now (it’s none of my business), then definitely in his past. God has shown mercy and love to him, as He has to us. So, don’t listen to him, but remember to “love your enemies”. Just a Hail Mary for him and his salvation next time his photo comes up, or something.
I understand the crisis is very distressing. It is for me also, but let’s continue to get through it with charity that is pleasing to God.
Would you object to calling Satan a piece of filth? While I see your point in that we should pray for the conversion of all apostates, I can also understand Rich’s anger. Remember, Jesus called the Pharisees some pretty harsh words too, “brood of vipers.” We should not sugar coat the current crisis in the Church. It is not simply a misunderstanding with modernism and a disagreement on Vatican 2. We are witnessing a diabolical infestation of what many believe is the Catholic Church. We are at war and our enemy, and those who do his dirty work, need to be identified and held accountable. PS- it is doubtful Bergolio received valid Holy Orders since he was ordained with the “new” ordination rites after 1968 from the imposter church.
I think he was ordained a Deacon before Paul VI’s radical and doubtful new rites came in. So he is at least a Porter, Lector, Excorcist, Subdeacon and a Deacon.
Anyway, I see your point. Things are extremely distressing, but really, we will all give an account of every idle word. It’s sobering to remember that promise.