At present, and for good reason, there is a great deal of speculation that Francis is preparing to re-examine the possibility of conferring Holy Orders on women.
There are even rumors coming out of Rome that it has already been decided that the diaconate for women will be a reality as early as November 2017.
Whether or not there is any substance to these prognostications might make for some interesting discussion, but that isn’t the focus of this particular post.
Instead, I’d like to invite readers to engage in a little “thought experiment” concerning female ordination that just might prove useful in lending clarity to the situation with Francis such as it is at this very moment.
“The teaching that the sacrament of holy orders can be conferred only on a baptized male is an infallible teaching of the Catholic faith which has been passed down since the time of Jesus. Of necessity, this has been clearly re-stated in recent documents of the Magisterium.”
So wrote conservative apologist Jimmy Akin; making it clear, at least on this note, that so-called “traditionalists” and the Catholic Answers crowd are in agreement.
Among the recent documents of the Magisterium on this topic is a General Decree regarding the delict of attempted sacred ordination of a woman that was issued by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith in 2007, which reads in part:
Both the one who attempts to confer a sacred order on a woman, and the woman who attempts to receive a sacred order, incur an excommunication latae sententiae reserved to the Apostolic See.
“Excommunication latae sententiae” simply means that the offending parties are excommunicated “as soon as the offence is committed and by reason of the offence itself (eo ipso) without intervention of any ecclesiastical judge.” (cf Catholic Encyclopedia)
What if a pope attempted to introduce the ordination of women into the Church; decreeing that such is henceforth to be considered valid?
As I write today, this hypothetical scenario no longer appears all that far-fetched. Be that as it may, imagine being asked this question five years ago.
How would you have responded then?
Seriously… stop here for a moment and think about it.
I’ve actually had this conversation with any number of Catholic friends; both prior to the Franciscan reign of terror and since.
Generally speaking, three intersecting lines of thought tended to emerge from those conversations such that the consensus conclusion was always essentially the same:
1) Impossible! The Holy Ghost will not allow such a thing!
2) If this was to happen, then we would know without any doubt that this man is really an anti-pope.
3) The pope who attempts to decree female ordination would automatically place himself outside of communion with the Church (i.e., incur excommunication latae sententiae) thus abdicating the papacy.
So, how did you answer?
I can tell you that I had precisely this conversation with a fellow “traditionalist” several months ago concerning Francis, and item #2 above is a near verbatim representation of his position.
The reason we discussed the ordination of women as a hypothetical scenario wasn’t just because Francis had given us reason to believe that he is actually willing to consider it, but rather because it’s just so obvious:
Any “pope” that would attempt to decree female ordination simply cannot be the pope, and what’s more, we wouldn’t need anyone to tell us so!
It may interest you to know that this same friend disagrees with my conclusions concerning Francis given the absence of an official decree announcing to the world that Jorge Bergoglio is not the pope.
Now, back to you…
If you drew the same kinds of conclusions outlined above concerning a pope who just might decree the ordination of women, I have some questions for you:
What exactly is the difference between this hypothetical scenario and the very real decree of Francis stating that adultery isn’t a mortal sin, that the Divine Law is too difficult for some to keep, and that God actually wills that we should persist in adultery?
Is the Church’s teaching that the sacrament of Holy Orders can be conferred only on a baptized male somehow more infallible than the teachings that are contravened in Amoris Laetitia?
Is there anything an alleged “pope” can do to reveal himself as an imposter (i.e., an anti-pope) that is clearly discernible to the well-formed Catholic even without an official proclamation of the “proper authorities”?
At this I will leave you to ruminate in relative peace.
The line that “John XXII was a heretic and not deposed, so the same goes with Francis” will no doubt be rolled out yet again by the usual suspects to get anything Francis says or attempts off the hook.
This is just in from the SSPX (link below) on the question of Papal heresy, where Fr. Jean-Michel Gleize, a professor at Econe for more than 20 years, puts the John XXII legend back in its rightful place. The timing of this SSPX article is insteresting…
There is no comparison between John XXII and Francis; let those who keep promoting such nonsense remain silent.
I am absolutely positive that if Francis approves ordination of women, that nothing much will change vis a vis the SSPX and the resisters. R&R has long ceased being a matter of doctrine. It is now a matter of politics. SSPX would lose too much money if they moved to close or too far from Rome. So Fellay will continue to walk a tight rope while his mouthpieces will continue their denounciations of Francis will continuing to proclaim him true Vicar of Christ. There is simply no money in sedevacatism.
I absolutely agree, Papal Subject. The situation we are now experiencing in the Church can, in no way, be compared to John XXII or Honorius. Not ever!
That frog just does not jump out of the water until it’s good and boiling! It has often occurred to me how shocked we would be if five or ten years ago anybody had told us what this pope would bring about. There would have been wailing and gnashing of teeth! But since his heresies drip out every couple of days, we’ve kind of grown accustomed, ALL OF US, even if we hate it. It’s human nature, we adjust. Now, we will never accept his heresies, most of us here, but, we have already adjusted. I believe this is the nature of corruption, it happens a little at a time, and none are immune. If taken even to extremes, say, the pope holds Vatican III and his “council” finds that homosexual priests should be able to marry each other, people would adjust. It sounds impossible, but there is only so much of this people can take, before they just give up, or do what we’re doing, stand around with a dazed expression. He is leading a very effective charge, they have made great inroads. I mean, they will continue to have whatever crowds they have in NO churches, probably diminishing, but, maybe not much. The pope is popular with the NO crowd, the elites, Democrat politicos, liberals everywhere, the media, and so on.
One thing I have concluded, and I could be as wrong as can be, I hope so, but I no longer believe there is going to be any “formal correction” or anything like it.
We have been waiting for something that is not going to happen. For whatever reason, the Cardinals are not going to make any moves against this pope’s heresies. Any meaningful intervention is going to have to be divine. The longer time goes on, the truer this is. There is already plenty to call him out on, if one had a mind to.
Cardinals should wear yellow from now on, the red is a lie.
Bergoglio knows from experience that he could say or do anything he wants without fear of consequences or accountability. He is “heresy gone wild” while sitting on the Throne of Peter (legitimately or illegitimately) and no one has the spunk to do anything about it. The Dubia (in my opinion) is too little too late. Perhaps, his attempt to ordain women will be his final downfall, but I’m not counting on it. As Louie says, he has already revealed himself as an imposter or anti-pope. What has been done about it?? I agree with Evangeline’s comments above.
I agree with your agreement 🙂
There is a 700 page book floating around that says that John XXII, Honorius and Francis are peas in a pod, and that essentially, the Catholic Church is a bumbling, dangerous and unreliable institution. But, but, 700 pages can’t possibly be wrong, can it?
Truth is simple. Error takes a lot more words to get it’s point across. Kind of explains why Francis is so verbose!
The frog actually dies.
Theres a reason why truth can be explained on a bumper sticker. Because the truth is simple, clear, concise, accurate, easy to understand, obvious, and apparent to all. Error needs nuance and complexity, so only those mighty few can grasp the intracacies. Hence many credentials are needed to comprehend. The next tome will have to be over a thousand pages to justify women priestesses.
You are correct. Nothing is going to happen. The change must come from faithful Catholics. They need to have nothing else to do with these heretics. Find a Latin Mass for the sacraments and convince everyone you can to leave the NO false religion.
The “bumper sticker” charge was thrown about a couple of rounds ago, wasn’t it?
Louis said: “Is the Church’s teaching that the sacrament of Holy Orders can be conferred only on a baptized male somehow more infallible than the teachings that are contravened in Amoris Laetitia?”
Louis, notwithstanding the fact that Amoris Laetitia is vague, it is also only an apostolic exhortation. As such, IT HAS NO LEGISLATIVE FORCE!
Think about it. What has to happen before the reign of the Antichrist? It has to appear that the Catholic Church has been destroyed as She is the only thing that stands in his way.
What gives the Church the power to stand against the Antichrist? The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass and the pope.
Since Satan has infiltrated the institutional or human governance of the Church and through it, the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass has devolved into a man-centered worship service. In reality, its sacrificial primacy no longer exists as the laity have been elevated to the same status as the priest. The laity, allowed to use their unconsecrated, filthy hands to distribute what is thought to be Christ’s body, is a testament to how easily the Catholic has been duped into believing the Mass is primarily a memorial service with the “community” as its center. Most do not believe Christ is Really Present but they do believe they are already saved. That is what Satan wants them to believe. They attend “Mass” only to keep being fed the lies and diabolical manisfestations necessary to keep them faithful to the Satanic infiltrators.
Since Francis, what does the papacy look to be except that he is the leader elected by the infiltrator’s of Satan to represent them to the world? He did not begin the destruction of the primacy of the pope, making it the laughing stock it has become under him; it began when Satan infiltrated the institutional church in Vatican II with its new practice of “collegeiality” which effectively reduced the office of the pope to nothing more than the spokesman and promoter for the all of the various and varied “reforms” or changes demanded by the cardinals and bishops who all have their own theology, philosophy, and “pastoral” ideas on what will be taught and how they will run their dioceses or institutions, while in the case of Francis, promoter of his own twisted and diabolical theology and philosophy, although the same could be said of JPII and Benedict. Thus, the true role of the papacy has disappeared in the minds of most Catholics and now, the pope is either a god himself who can do no wrong, or he has no real authority over them if he says or does something they personally do not agree with.
So the papacy has become merely either a man who has the same status as God or a man one does not need to obey if he says something or acts in a way that displeases the individual. You can pick which one you like.
But referring to the subject of female ordination, the stage has already been set by introducing into the Novus Ordo the idea that the priesthood of the laity is on par with that of the priest. Are not the laity already deemed to be “ministers”. What do you think the real purpose of this diminishing the role of the priest was for other than to put into the mind the future of women priests? Also related to this is the “ecumenical” priority of the leaders which has never been about conversion to the true faith, but adoption of the heresies and practices of the heretics and schismatics into every single practice of the Church which over the years, has become a growing reality.
What? Vague?? It is not vague at all.
Everyone knows that it gives permission for unrepentant public adulterers permission to receive Holy Communion, AND make INVALID confessions due to lack of firm purpose of amendment. Are you the only one left who is not quite sure what it says?
It is purported papal teaching, and the content of this “teaching” is that it permits something gravely contrary to the Faith. It promotes sacrilege and apostasy.
Francis says, “Listen to Schonborn on Amoris”.
Schonborn says “It’s magisterial”.
The jig’s up, Columbaa. It’s time to face facts head on. There is a man prancing about in Rome wearing a white cassock who is not the Pope.
Prior to Vatican II, the type of papal document the pope chose determined how much authority he intended to exercise.
The most solemn on down:
The preceding list indicates the order of authority that various papal documents traditionally had.
Since Vatican II, the content and context of the document determine the degree of authority and not just the type of papal document. If the pope intends to definitely teach the universal Church on a matter of faith or morals, then he is expressing his supreme authority as head of the Church.
Well said, I agree 100%.
Catholics need a Pope. How do we get a Catholic Pope? Found a Latin Mass for the sacraments and now I need a catholic Pope. It is important.
Evangline: Five or ten years ago? This Protestant raised Catholic convert prior to Vatican II (thank you Lord) was one of only a few who were shocked when the Catholic Holy Sacrifice of the Mass was changed into a Protestant/Masonic/Modernist liturgy worshipping man.
Fifty years ago was the real shock to the few of us who, through the grace of God, understood then exactly what was coming down the road. Nothing the institutional leaders did five years, ten years, or forty years ago could be more shocking-at least to me.
As long as it’s not “binding”, then according to the narrative, Francis gets to keep the Chair of St Peter warm until “the Church” declares otherwise.
Now, who’s going to decide which group of Cardinals constitute “the Church” in that increasingly unlikely event??
I absolutely agree with both of your agreements.
According to Michael Voris (“Catholic Counting”) 30 million Americans now call themselves “former Catholics” who have left the Vatican II religion, a rate of bleeding people that is so high that in 3 years “former Catholics” will outnumber the people calling themselves “Catholic.” Fully 1/5 of Catholics are over 65 and are not being replaced. Marriages are down 50% since the turn of the century, all of which no doubt is contributing to the 18% less priests since 2000 statistic. Couple those numbers with the complete de-masculization of the priesthood, and the liturgy, and the active screening out of traditional men, and you get the manufactured “priest shortage.” In its death throes, the Vatican II religion will ordain women. No one will complain because they are so used to seeing the altar girls , female “extra-ordinary ministers”, female lectors and pastoral assistants, and other busybodies already running the NO masses. This has drugged the people into seeing females in the sanctuary as normal. But it will backfire because men simply will not follow women priestess, and this will accelerate the death spiral of the Vatican II religion.
You are completely correct Melanie. The Church needs a Pope. The Church is “owed” a Pope. Look at the chaos and confusion that abounds when there isn’t one!
We are the laity, the sheep in the pen. Our duty is to keep practicing the same Catholic religion that was handed on since the Apostles – the most obvious aspect of that is the Traditonal Mass and Sacraments.
We are not the hierarchy. It is not our duty to figure out how to get another Pope. There are ways for the Church to provide Herself with a visible head, but this whole situation is unprecedented, so we have to just sit tight.
We hold fast to tradition as much as it applies to our state in life. If you try to figure out the whole mysterious mess we are in, you might go over the cliff. Many have done so and fallen into despair.
We just wait at our post that God has given us and stay in the fold until things clear up. Listen to the true teaching of the Church, and refuse to hear strangers and hirelings.
Here’s something for you: John 10:1-5
Amen, amen I say to you: He that entereth not by the door into the sheepfold, but climbeth up another way, the same is a thief and a robber. But he that entereth in by the door is the shepherd of the sheep. To him the porter openeth; and the sheep hear his voice: and he calleth his own sheep by name, and leadeth them out. And when he hath let out his own sheep, he goeth before them: and the sheep follow him, because they know his voice. But a stranger they follow not, but fly from him, because they know not the voice of strangers.
Here’s a question, personally, I believe “invincible ignorance” taught by Pope Pius IX is a heresy, to me it’s really at the root of all the heresies of today, especially by making EENs into a meaningless formula and including the ones with AL because the argument is pretty much based on the principles of so-called “invincible ignorance”. Should I believe there has not been a Pope since Pope Pius IX?
Looks like Jesus was the only man ever on earth with the authority to appoint a Pope (Peter) without a predecessor or apostolic succession. And as far as I know neither in Scripture or Tradition, which as Catholics we are suppossed to follow, is this scenario of brand NEW visible Church after a broken line of apostolic succession, ever prophesized. Like I said as far as I know never heard it, I’m open to correction though.
These answers are knowable yet. I’m not going to try to solve the riddles of our time. I am not intelligent enough for that, so I will keep the Faith, the traditional Mass and the traditional Sacraments from traditional Priests, and refuse submission or obedience to men who are manifest hirelings. The rest is way over my head.
God’s in control and has ordained for us to live in this time of history. Not much we can do about it except hold to what was always held.
Since the essential propitiatory-sacrificial nature of the Mass was supressed in the Novus Ordo, then we don’t need the “presider” to act in persona Christi as one excercising the ministerial Priesthood of Christ. So women presiders at a Novus Ordo is no big deal.
The Novus Ordo will self destruct as you say, being nothing but another man-made religion.
Papal Subject: but how can you get the sacraments if there hasn’t been a pope for nearly 60 years?
“What if a pope attempted to introduce the ordination of women into the Church; decreeing that such is henceforth to be considered valid?”
That isn’t the way this pope operates.
In order achieve the hoped for result, the pope does not need to decree anything. All he needs to do is not act against those who step over the line.
It works incrementally.
First, allow women “deacons,” and allow them to be present in the sanctuary during Mass. This gets people accustomed to seeing women at the altar.
Then allow them to preach… sometimes. That will grow.
Then have the women deacons standing next to the priest at the time of the consecration, perhaps with hands extended, perhaps reading some of the text.
Slowly but surely, let canon law be altered, deleting references to sanctions against those who ordain women and women who seek ordination.
As people get more and more accustomed to seeing women deacons on the altar during Mass, the groundwork is laid for a bishop or two to take the step, although it will be done discreetly, of “ordaining” a female.
Once the news gets out, the pope need do nothing about it. The majority of “Catholics” will have already agreed with the idea of “women priests,” and the pope need not decree a thing about it, for or against.
Nevertheless, it will be a fait accompli.
Yes, I hear you but are we going to be saying this for the next 60 years without a Catholic Pope? Because that will be a mess or can we possibly move things along a bit here? Tom A below seems to think its up to the faithful. How about Brannon? Isn’t this guy a Catholic? Maybe we can start looking into whether the previous administration, Hillary Clinton, Podesta, had any hand in the “resignation of Ratzinger and then elevation of Bergoglio?” The Church is supernatural but what goes on here on Earth falls under the very natural expanse of human crimes that can be very readily dealt with by humans. I see no reason to throw up our hands and leave it to Divine intervention. God helps those who help themselves, didn’t our mothers tell us all that? We’ve got a real evil son of a gun pretending to be the Roman Pontiff of the Holy Catholic Church and we are supposed to just say, “Ah well, God will sort this out.” I mean do we see someone getting robbed and beaten and say, “That is so wrong, I am just going to watch as God sorts this out.” This is our Holy Mother the Church and we just sit in our Latin pews and wait until God sorts this out? That’s just crazy.
Hate to say this but looks like sede’s are banking on a “God of surprises”
So, purely hypotheticaly speaking, why couldn’t a Catholic Priest be appointed a Pope? He certainly would have a predecessor whoever that may be and why would there be no apostolic succession? I’m not clear on where you see the broken line of apostolic succession. I thought that I read somewhere that the Pope doesn’t even have to be a Priest but I could be wrong there. There are Catholic men on Earth, I know that.
The plan organised by Masonic clergy and implemented by current holders of office, is clearly being rolled out. From the heads of the papacy, as Our Lady indicated at La Salette onwards, their determination is to reduce – dissolve Christ as was the Protestant heretics plan to the base, kite flyers, all is leading a stunned sheepfold in the direction of perdition. One would have thought that countermanding the Ten Commandments via AL at that level of promulgation, would of itself been sufficient loss of faith, by the promoters of such heresy and unbelief. But this must come as Papal Subject bought to our attention, Christ himself said these false shepherds would come – more than one it seems- and that they must not be followed. Watch and pray but do not follow them. He will rid His Church of such men as time passes. The Church Militant and Suffering a joined to do this inevitable task, its a pity we have to live in the Age when this occurs, but that’s by design and not by choice. I’m grateful the host of this site and the very good contributions its draws in these dread filled days, that remind us of out duties to God and others close to us, yea even out enemies, who would try to sway us away from Catholic tradition and the truth. Thanks Loui, one and all.
Which is why one must disassociate oneself from all things V2 and NO. No exceptions. It is not a virtue to be in communion with a heretic.
As far as I’m concerned AL or women ordinations still pale in comparison to what PJPII said in 1985 to the young muslims of morocco: “Both of us worship one God, THE ONLY GOD.” While following PJPII during his papacy I always believed that the things he said and did against the First Commandment etched his name in stone forever as the worst Pope ever no matter how bad Pope Francis or any other Pope in the future would be and I still believe that. P I will give Pope Francis credit , however in succeeding greatly, even with “trads”, by blinding and desensitizing them to the horrendous crimes the Popes/Church hierarchy have been committing against the 1ST Commandment the last 50 years with speeches like this one I’m posting by PJPII which nobody even blinks an eye about any more. This is also why Pope Francis mainly attacks the other commandments like the 6th and 9th because PJPII has already utterly destroyed all the 1st Commandment has always stood for within Catholicism anyway . Well, now it’s time for Pope Francis to move on destroying the other 9. https://w2.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/en/speeches/1985/august/documents/hf_jp-ii_spe_19850819_giovani-stadio-casablanca.html
Because if there hasn’t been a Pope for 50 years, since I dont see how its possible to say Pope Francis was automatically deposed as Pope without saying the same exact thing for all the post-VII popes who committed same exact heresies or worse, than how can there be any validly ordained bishops or priests? They’d have to be like 110 years old to go back before VII to be valid.
Yes because JP2 was a modernist, so is Francis and Benedict. So was JP1, Paul 6 and John 23. Modernism as we all know is an heresy as authoritatively taught by many Popes especially Pope St Pius X. And heretics are not Catholic and Popes have to be a Catholic. Modernists are heretics and cannot be Catholic. I know, ACT will jump in here and give some excuse as to why the modernists in question are not heretics until some other heretic declares them a heretic.
I might be wrong about how old a priest woukd need to be but I believe you need cardinals to select a Pope and everyone cardinal has been appointed by either Pope JPII, Benedict or Francis and all could be considered automatically deposed for heresy. If I’m wrong about this maybe a sede could help explain to me how we could start off fresh with a brand new Pope and Church really.
What about the Bishops and Priests consecrated by Archbishop Lefebvre? Why would they not be considered valid?
So what if some evil doer poisoned or somehow killed every Cardinal say in a conclave? This could happen practically speaking, you think that’s it, the Church has no way of ever having a Pope without Jesus Christ Himself visiting to appoint a new Pope for a whole new Church. That makes no sense. Wouldn’t you just go to the next in line of authority?
I guess they would be but honestly, imo, I don’t agree with some of the stuff I’ve read on there web although off hand I can’t think what is was. And let’s face it, if the leaders of the ORIGINAL Church that Jesus established with the promise of the protection of the Holy Ghost can fall onto error why should we think the SSPX leaders could not fall into error some day also. I hate to say this but in these days, imo, it’s every man for himself so pray as much as possible and study traditional Church teachings as much as possible and if we are sincere I have to believe God will lead us to the truth somehow. Hopefully, by the grace of God we can accomplish these things. Other than that we all, well, at least I know I, need to be as St. Paul said “working out our salvation with fear and trembling” and, unfortunately this stuff can become a distraction to that sometimes even needing to question myself in the reasons for as to why I’m talking about them.
Thats the problem like I said earlier, and if I’m wrong somebody correct me , but sedevacantist don’t believe there is any longer a “line of authority” since they say there hasn’t been a Pope or any apostolic succession for over 50 years so personally I don’t know who would have authority to appoint this new Pope other than Jesus Christ. Although sedes make a lot of good points this is one of the reasons i just can’t buy into it.
Funny and wishful thinking.
But laymen cannot ordain anyone.
The novus-ordo church is not the Catholic Church.
One theory is that it could come down to the faithful of the Diocese of Rome to elect a Bishop.
Melanie, according to Sacred Scripture, what we are experiencing is a plan of God’s and it was foretold. God’s ways are not our ways.
This article posted on a sedevacantist website explains why we are suffering through this time of confusion and evil. It includes Church teaching, teachings of popes, and cites Sacred Scripture.
Johnjobilee: Please read this article which not only provides the verses in Sacred Scripture that predicted the time in which we live but the true sedevacantist position on the papacy, which is that which the Church has always taught.
I think Bergoglio is having a lot of fun playing the “Heresy Game”. How heretical can I get without any consequences? He must have installed a soundproof laughing room at the Vatican where he could really let loose every time he opens his mouth.
Katherine, Of course God’s ways are not our ways but that doesn’t stop us from doing our best. If we see something wrong we should act. If it is God’s will that our actions fail then they will. We’re not going to mess up a plan of God’s by doing what we know is right. This paralysis caused by God’s plan is mystifying me. Jesus knew God’s plan and told His disciples to stand down. He knew God’s plan because He is God. We are not God so how can we say, “This is God’s plan, stand down.” I don’t get that thinking at all. We should do what is right and God’s plan will unfold regardless.
We HAVE a Pope: Pope Benedict XVI. His resignation was forced (a fact made public) and therefore invalid. The “sign” is his retention of the title and garb.
Otherwise, the sedevacantists are correct. It’s one or the other.
Another clue is the 3rd Secret of Fatima that was released in 2000, where it states there was a “Bishop dressed in white,” and “we had the IMPRESSION that it was the Holy Father.” Bishops don’t dress in white, now do they?
Melanie of LaSalette stated, “At first, we will not know which is the true Pope.”
It’s time to connect the dots. We HAVE a Pope and it is NOT Francis and, yes, as laymen we ARE allowed to discern these matters and I suspect that it is more important than we might think that we do discern and do it fast.
We are either with Christ or against Him. This is a grand deception.
Well, if Benedict dies before Francis does, which is likely considering their respective ages, then what?
Well it seems to me that as long as there is one bishop left who professes the true Catholic faith and rejects all of V2 and the NO, then he is the Church. Cardinals and conclaves and Canon Law are but man made inventions to run a bureaucracy, none of which are Divinely instituted. The office of the papacy is divinely instituted but not the occupant. The occupant is determined by man and his methods. If only the trad Bishops would have the courage to hold a council of remaining faithful Bishops, they could anathematize everything since 1958, elect a new Pope, and let the chips fall where they may. At least then, the faithful Catholics will have a Pope and he can compete against the false pope for souls. Eventually the NO crowd will go the way of the Church of England and rot from within from the pestilence of sodomites. Of course the NO crowd will call us schismatic but frankly who gives a S@&$ what they think.
According to approved Catholic prophecy, and the clear signs of the time, the next Pope will be the holy French Pope, selected by St. Peter himself.
Benedict flees Rome in the company of a few Cardinals and dies a cruel death. The Pope which Pope St Pius X saw in his face frightful vision and who bore his same name (Joseph).
This holy Pope will restore everything…this after the coming Great Chasisement.
Agreed “2cents”. What were once vices are now habits. The technique seems to include pushing the “its so unfair for the downtrodden” envelope as wide as is humanly possible, then flying a wild card statement or position, then retreating into the shadows, allowing periti types to field the critisms, leaving the new paradym shift a half truth. By the passage of time, confusion and outright lies, their cause is fortified with heretical and Counter Church instructions. Diabolical deceptions done dirt cheap. Will the bulk of the faithful be fooled? The large body Catholic, importantly the heirachy, save four Cardinals, are silent. It beggars belief this can go forward, but since 1958-60, that’s what has happened, right under our noses. Even the elect?
The boldness of the attacks are striking, the outcome clearly disastrous on all sides. I guess, the scene is what a “loss of Faith looks like” as Our Lord posed to us in these last days. Our Lady of Good Success, ora pro nobis.
Fr Ratzinger hasnt fled Rome though ….and he has done nothing but back up Francis since he abdicated. This to me doesnt sound like a man who is a “true pope”. Fr Ratzinger was a driving force in the evil that got us here in the first place.
There may come a Frankish Pope who restores all, but I doubt Ratzinger the Abdicator will have any part in such a restoration.
Melanie: I am not suggesting that we do nothing, I merely pointed out the fact that what we are experiencing is God’s will, or it would not be happening.
We must do what we have always been required to do-stay faithful to Christ and to the teachings of the Church. Now more than ever, we need to be living and not just intellectually accepting, the Gospel. We need to be firm and unbending in speaking and acting in the truth. We will be persecuted if we love God. We will suffer greatly if we love God.
Whatever our vocation is, we must pray, do penances, make reparations, mortifications, and sacrifices for the love of God. We can never despair over how evil those who pretend to be shepherds have become. We must pray for them and for everyone.
God never wills evil. He permits evil, but does not will it. We are suffering the evils of the modern age not because God wills it, but because God permits us to suffer the consequences of our decisions. We as a culture have dethroned Christ from His Kingship and we are suffering the predictable consequences. We must be the instruments of God’s Holy Will and restore His Glorious Triumphant Church. It will not happen if the trads sit back with our tails between our legs and say we cant do anything about it because that fool Bergolio is Pope. He isnt! Stop saying he is!
Katherine, 1)I read the article and some good arguments but if their interpretation that a Pope can NEVER lead the faithful into error than how’d we get into this position to begin with. There had to be a Pope somewhere, sometime that started this mess to begin with and went off track originally. That sounds like a contradiction to me so maybe you could explain. 2)Plus I thought infallibility kind of covered that argument anyway by saying that Popes were only protected from falling into error in very limited instances. The article acts as if Popes are perfect and can never fall into error even when they’re not speaking infallibly or “ex cathedra” I never heard that before 3) am I right the article is saying and what sedes are really saying is not just there is no Pope or just that the seat of Peter is empty but that the Catholic Church itself doesn’t even exist anymore.
Thanks Katherine, But I think I’m saying exactly the same, we shouldn’t despair over how evil those who pretend to be shepherds have become. Pray, yes, but if there is clearly a man barely even pretending to be Catholic on the throne of Peter through the machinations of a criminal enterprise than that should be dealt with. In my opinion, many should be arrested and locked up. Whoever is left can hold a valid Papal Conclave. However many times this has happened before doesn’t really matter. This is our watch now.
johnjobilebee: Their position is the same as what the Church has always taught-that the infallibility of the pope does not extend to every pronouncement he makes but in regards to faith and morality. Have any of the Conciliar popes condemned the Vatican II heresies on faith, i.e., ecumenism, religious liberty, the definition of the Church of Christ, the salvation of the Jews, false religions, etc.? – NO, they embraced them.
You ask how did we get into this position in the first place. How did we get into the position of the times when more than one person claimed to be the true pope? Through pride. Through listening and adopting the lies of the Devil.
1 Cor: 10:19: “For there must be also heresies: that they also, who are reproved, may be made manifest among you.”
In Haydock’s commentary on this passage he writes: “By reason of the pride and perversity of man’s heart; not by God’s will or appointment; who nevertheless draws good out of this evil, manifesting, by that occasion, who are the good and firm Christians, and making their faith more remarkable.”
St. Augustine wrote: “Let us use heretics not so as to approve their errors, but to make us more wary and vigilant, and more strenuous in defending Catholic doctrine against their deceits.”
You neglect to realize that if not for JPII and Benedict, there could never have been a man like Jorge Bergoglio.
Both of them led the way to the eventual loss and rejection of the true faith through their embrace of the false doctrines and heresies of Vatican II. But their gravest sin was their sin against the First Commandment through their public displays of idolatry as they prayed to and worshipped false gods and their demand that all Catholics do the same. And their second gravest sin was the claim that all false religions should be respected while disclaiming the truth that it is only the one, true Catholic religion which all men must believe in order to be saved.
Tom: Yes, of course God never wills evil but permits it. If what I said seemed to say otherwise, I apologize for not being clear. (And I protest the ambiguities of others-mea culpa, mea culpa.)
All Voris does is complain about these losses while defending the people who are responsible for them.
Katherine, I did not think you really were going down that road. Perhaps it was how it was worded. I strongly feel it will be the efforts of the lay faithful that will restore our Church. The trad clergy seem afraid to act. The NO clergy are for the most part sodomites and effeminates. It will take militant triumphalist Catholicism to win this current battle. We can not sit back, lament, and wait for Divine Intervention. I am tired of hearing that there is nothing we can do because it takes cardinals to elect a Pope or Canon Law forbids it. We are past all that, the faithful are left with Divine Law only. The modernists have gutted the Church. There is no more authority left to follow until we restore it.
To be fair, in the video that I referenced, he laid the blame squarely on the shoulders of “Your Excellencies”, the bishops. So I didn’t perceive that he defended anyone except himself in said video. When he blames the bishops he is correct, but not all the blame is theirs . There is plenty of blame to go around, (Popes, theologians, clergy, laity…etc.) I am aware that he will not openly criticize the “Pope” ; a mistake in my view, but I’m not going to waste my time telling someone how to run their private Catholic fiefdoms.
Katherine: what I was trying to say was that the article you posted seems to claim that Jesus’s prayer for Peter was powerful enough to cover all Popes ever from falling into error and so my question is how can this interpretation be true when we know a Pope or Popes have fallen into error?