In light of the continued calumnies of Michael Voris and Fr. Paul Nicholson (otherwise known as Mr. Carroll’s Merry Band of Pusillanimous Puppets), I offer here the following video from several months back. It tells you all you need to know about their character.
Look, if there’s any sure sign that one is a false prophet who is laboring for something other than the propagation of truth, it is when that individual steadfastly refuses to directly engage the very people who’s alleged positions they attack. That describes the cowards mentioned above perfectly. At least as of this writing…
So at this, please allow me add this public challenge to the mix yet again:
Michael Voris (prior to his not-so-mysterious about face) had me on air a number of times as what he called “an expert” on Vatican II. (I make no such claim.) Since unwillingness to “accept” Vatican II is central to so much of his case against so-called “traditionalists,” I will gladly pay my way to that infamous warehouse in Ferndale to go on live air with Michael once again, this time to discuss why no Catholic in their right mind should accept Vatican II whole and entire as the price for so-called “full communion.”
If, indeed, Michael is up to the challenge, who here would like to see that program?
Just wondering…
Love to see that Louie, won t hold my breath though. Poor M.V., before the confusion, I was so grateful to hear the truth spoken so beautifully, so eloquently by him. I gave up watching Micheal as I waited for naught to hear him say something, anything about Jorge, who is the biggest threat to catholics , ever. Yeah, just what we need is more caving in to vii. God bless you Louie, truth is the greatest charity towards poor M.V, many Hail Mary s can t hurt either.
Yes, I would like see Louie discuss the VII question with Michael Voris on TV, as long I don’t have to become a “Premium” subscriber to see it!
Such an interview would certainly put an end to the echo chamber environment that CMTV has become. This week’s insane volley of ceaseless SSPX attacks really borders on a pathology of psychiatric proportions.
It would appear that Louie is not the only Catholic calling Father Paul Nicholson to a charitable Catholic debate and Father Nicholson prefers to hide.
http://tradcatknight.blogspot.com/2015/09/fr-paul-nicholson-cowardly-modernist.html
The reality of the matter is the tactics of Father Paul Nicholson and CMTV are Marxist. Father Paul Nicholson and CMTV are using Marxist agitational propaganda.
Father Paul Nicholson and CMTV are both opus dei agitational propaganda outfits aka (Marxist attack dogs in Catholic outfits) Opus dei is the Marxist hammer inside the Church.
The supernatural reasons for the attacks are 1) The Social Kingship of Christ 2) Consecration of Russia to my immaculate heart Mary. Satan does not want Catholics to know about 1) The Social Kingship of Christ 2) Consecration of Russia to my immaculate heart Mary. These attacks from CMTV and Father Nicholson are attacks on the two hearts in the natural order. The SSPX works for 1) The Social Kingship of Christ 2) Consecration of Russia to my immaculate heart Mary. This is why Satan has his puppets attack.
Our counter revolutionary attack against the revolutionary puppets of Satan
(Father Paul Nicholson and CMTV) should not be “reactionary” (Marxist phrase used by CMTV) to their attacks it should be a 100% infowar about the 1) The Social Kingship of Christ 2) Consecration of Russia to my immaculate heart Mary.
Ave maria!
“in the end my immaculate heart will triumph”
Blessed Virgin Mary
Love to see a good old theological thrown down at high noon! I’m off to get a tub of buttered popcorn and a brew so I’ll be ready.
Fr. Nicholson has his opinions and I have my opinions. In my opinion the day the Church adopted the false precepts of the Second Vatican Council, God withdrew His Sanctifying Grace from the Church of Rome and “nothing’ they have blessed, “no one” they have consecrated has received Our Blessed Lord’s Sanctifying Grace. The Church of Rome today is an Apostate Church and not until the Pope together with all his bishops [in concert] keep God’s Commandment to Consecrate Russia to Our Blessed Mother’s Immaculate Heart will Sanctifying Grace return to Rome and it’s prelates.
Sorrowfully, I also believe it is going to take a Road to Damascus event to get Fr. Bergoglio’s {as he likes to call himself} attention.
Bishop de Galaretta wrote, ” the error will be misleading, and seductive, less obvious and more subtle, in short, much more dangerous . . . able to deceive even the elect.
The error is more ambiguous and dangerous when it collects more to the truth, such as counterfeit currency.” He wrote this during the reign of Pope Benedict and even today you find this in various “Traditional” priests and media personalities “formed” during Pope Benedict’s time. I hope they are just misled, confused, or got a scruple. However they do pull truth close to their errors so that ordinary Catholics believe them to be perfectly sound, then they attack the SSPX, confusing the sheep and keeping them away from truly good shepherds who love their souls. For instance a good example of state of emergency in the Church is Fr. Z wanting Pope John Paul to be a Doctor of the Church. Talk about confusion! I would not go to him for confession because what if I had kissed the Koran? What if one of my past sins was to believe the Church was still waiting for Her unity or that we all pray to the same god under different names?
Bring it on Louie! However, when CM.com can’t even handle legitimate comments on their site, deleting anything that is denouncing their attacks, I highly, highly doubt that they would consider a live debate. Twelve months ago I would have been prepared to accept martyrdom for CM; boy have things changed. They treated me, a premium subscriber of 3 years (until two days ago), very poorly deleting all my legitimate, without malice comments to do with the Society. I had to cut the lines before they used more of my money to produce that kind of injustice. Sad , really sad.
Go for it, Sir….do this as quickly as possible. I’d take off work to watch it.
It’s so important that you do this as quickly as possible. Call him out every couple of weeks…Re-post the challenge and then re-post the re-post. Get Michael Matt to moderate it, or even Chris Ferrara. Call MV out from behind his TV cameras and studio and place him in front of someone elses’ microphone. Get him away from the safety and security of his own studio.
In speaking of Opus Dei, you may be dealing with the other wing of the socialist dialectic, much better financed, and encompassing Spain (the home of Opus Dei), Argentina, the new apostate Germany, the P2 lodge, and connections to the American CIA (Operation Gladio). See:
http://spitfirelist.com/news/is-a-deep-falange-at-work-in-spain-and-argentina/
This could be a very deep rabbit hole.
One-on-one might be too ambitious, but say Louie and two panel member vs Voris and two panel member of his choice. Round 1…….
I would not watch. I know that you hold the correct position, Mr V. That’s enough for me.
Watching discussions on TV is frustrating because, just when Mr Right is going to prove his point, Mr Wrong interrupts, shouts, derails the thought and off we go on an unrelated subject. It’s always the same.
The ‘franchise’ is the Novus Ordo Institution, or more specifically, the entity of the Novus Ordo heresiarch who rules over the N.O. Institution, and both Nicholson and the SSPX are benefactors.
–
The thing is, that Nicholson like his hated SSPX, are brothers in communion. Brothers in communion with which ever latest Roman Heresiarch is doing the work of belial. Their alligeiance, therefore, must be to belial, and not Christ. What part of ‘there can be no concord between Christ and belial’, is difficult to understand? This is a Catholic Truth.
–
The evidence for the non-Catholicity/beliacal nature of the Roman Heresiarchs for the past fifty years is also irrefutable, but this evidence does not fit in with the predetermined agenda of those who profess obedience=recognise as truly given by Christ for the benefit of the faithful, the Novus Ordo Complex. Meanwhile the heresiarchs have contradicted Christ’s True and Evident Church, in the evil doctrines they espouse and the evil worship they enforce, and the evil disciplines they have infected the formerly Catholic dioceses of the planet with – in their continued and evident enmity to Christ and His Church. Nicholson and Bp Fellay both ‘recognise’ Jorge Bergoglio as the Highest Moral Authority on earth; they both affirm to the world that Jorge Bergoglio is Christ’s Holy Ghost protected Vicar, unable, by the power of the Holy Ghost, to mislead the faithful on matters of Faith and Morals or to universally promote any sort of evil…on this score, the only real difference between Nicholson and Bishop Fellay, is that Bishop Fellay is a validly ordained priest able to confect the Sacrament; Nicholson, however, a Novus Ordo presider is, to the True Church of Christ, a layman, with no such gift.
–
Stalin was responsible for a lot innocent deaths. If we are to take seriously the immortality of the soul and the reality of eternal punishment, how on earth can we profess the Shepherd of immortal souls to be Wojtyla-aka-a-Stalin-of-souls, or Montini-aka-a-Mao-Tse-Tung-of-souls, or Bergoglio..?
–
Nicholon’s/Voris’ take on the SSPX is as dangerous and non-Catholic as the SSPX’s take on the Holy Ghost-protected-Indefectible-Bride-of-Christ.
The documents of Vatican II —- either entire documents or statements within them —-must be formally condemned. Vatican II is not a fait accompli. If a bat of God’s eye encompasses a millennium, then what is 50 years?
PS. another big difference between SSPX (validly ordained priests) and Nicholson (a N.O. layman who presides at the N.O. services), is that Nicholson doesn’t dismiss the man he believes to be a Pontiff (the evident Catholic truth that no such man could ever be a Pontiff not withstanding.
You know I would love to see that challenge, Louie. However, unfortunately, the timing now seems poor considering upcoming events, including the Papal trip to Cuba, the U.S.A. and the resumption of the October 2015 Synod on the Family. I think there is way too much on Voris’ plate.
Having said that however, the menacing shadow of Vatican II will surely be present in the upcoming weeks. We will surely be seeing its rotten fruits. Fr. Nicholson, Fr. Rosica, Card. Kasper and all the modernist crew repeating their nauseating mantra in favour of putting into action the ‘spirit of Vatican II”. We look forward to your steady, prayerful and honest analysis of them.
Agree, but further, neither is the Novus Ordo Instituion a ‘fait accompli’ – no one is obligated to accept belial as if it was given by Christ. The evil VII, the evil Novus Ordo worship and discipline and the evil Novus Ordo Heresiarchs may seem the ‘Catholic’ universe to all too many folks of a generation, but they are little Nero’s of wretched past and present memory that all folks with any sense of the faith, including Nicholson who must have some sense, should reject as ‘warlocks, heathens and publicans’:
–
Cum Ex Apostolatus Officio Paul IV: “Castellans, Prefects, Captains and Officials, even of Our Beloved City and of the entire Ecclesiastical State, even if they shall be obliged and beholden to those (heretics (in our day, the N.O. prelates)) thus promoted or elevated by homage, oath or security; shall be permitted at any time to withdraw with impunity from obedience and devotion to those (heretics (in our day, the N.O. prelates)) thus promoted or elevated and to avoid them as warlocks, heathens, publicans, and heresiarchs (the same subject persons, nevertheless, remaining bound by the duty of fidelity and obedience to any future Bishops, Archbishops, Patriarchs, Primates, Cardinals and Roman Pontiff canonically entering).” Treat Bergoglio and his ‘fathers’ in the VII anti-Catholic ‘faith’ as a “warlock, heathen, publican, heresiarch’.
–
Matthew 18 “And if he will not hear the church, let him be to thee as the heathen and publican…” These ‘warlocks’ “will not hear the Church” – they spend and have spent their lives trying to choke the life out of the Bride of Christ as if they were the Boston Strangler.
–
http://www.traditionalmass.org/locations/
I think it was cheap of CMTV to simply state in passing the grievances of Bishop Lefebvre over Vatican II and the NO Mass as though those two issues are no longer relevant and now water under the bridge. We have lived and suffered from the damages brought on by both those disasters. And let’s not kid ourselves, influential and powerful factions at the Vatican, and the Pope himself, are still actively trying to shove that drivel down our throat.
Lord Jesus Christ have mercy on us. Our Lady of Akita and Fatima pray for us.
“I think it was cheap of CMTV to simply state in passing the grievances of Archbishop Lefebvre over Vatican II and the NO Mass as though those two issues are no longer relevant and now water under the bridge…” (agree, although, you say cheap, I say ‘sold out’ – moral consciousness of the actions is God’s domain to judge, the manifest act is ours to acknowledge and jugde accordingly.)
–
Relegating truth and evidence to the category of ‘water under the bridge’ has been so effective for the Modernists, they are not going to stop employing that tool any time soon. The ‘syllabus of errors’ was
relegated to the ‘water under the bridge’ category by Ronacalli/JohnXXIII, Montini on through to Mr Bergoglio.
–
The Indefectability of the Bride of Christ in her faith and worship is never ‘water under the bridge’. The safeguards that the Council of Trent through to Pope Pius XII put in place to prevent the universal Church being sold novelties in the Rites of Ordination and Worship has been relegated to ‘water under the bridge’ according to every N.O. heresiarch and every N.O. presider, and, sadly, indirectly or even directly, supported by the policly of ‘any belial will suffice as a lynchpin’ by the SSPX when it comes to the Roman Pontiff. As St. Bellarmine teaches us:
–
“A pope who is a manifest heretic automatically (per se) ceases to be pope and head, just as he ceases automatically to be Christian and a member of the Church. Wherefore, he can be judged and punished by the Church. This is the teaching of all the ancient Fathers who teach that manifest heretics immediately lose all jurisdiction.” De Romano Pontifice, St Bellarmine.
–
http://catholicharboroffaithandmorals.com/Mission%20Statement.html
I reckon the crux of the matter is where we lay up our Treasures. It would seem, Michael Voris has laid them up with his personal benefactor – the reason why is known to God, but the results are loud and clear for us to see.
–
VII and its heresiarchs lay up their treasures upon an entirely different ‘reality’ to the True Peters and the True Bride. I reckon most SSPX in positions of responsibiliy might know this, but perhaps the concept of ‘romanitas’ is their own VII.
Dear Salvemur…
” and the evil worship they enforce..”
1)Do I understand you correctly as saying the Novus Ordo Mass
(receiving the Body, Blood Soul and Divinity of our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ ) is being labeled now by you as ” evil worship”?
2) Is this a so called official ” sedevacantist ” viewpoint?
“Evil worship”??
Seriously??
dear EM
I am not answering for salvemur. Rather-just noting a point.
* **
It should not, and indeed cannot, be assumed that consecration actually takes place in the Novus Ordo mass. When the words of consecration are spoken as a narrative, ( which is most often the case considering priestly formation post ViI,) it manifests a defect of intention hence rendering the mass invalid. (i.e. the Miracle of Transubstantiation does not take place.) This was pointed out not at first by a detested sedevacantist, but rather Ottaviani himself & others.
Here we are not even considering the **evil** protestant elements which make up that mass, which include destruction of the Venerable Roman Canon by re-labelling it the “Eucharistic Prayer.” The following video and the book of which it is part, (recommended by many a commenter on this site other than sedevacantists, BTW) may help you & anyone in beginning to study this:
*****
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xiN69bEDv-Y
Peace be to you.
EM. Phew. If you are asking this question…seriously. Have you researched the Novus Ordo Mass, which was invented, with the help of Protestant and Jewish advisors, in the 60s based on many decades of ‘antiquariantist’ propaganda by anti-Catholic ‘ecumentists’ throughout the 20th century?
–
If you have and if you have equally put as much effort into understanding the Mass of All time protected at the Council of Trent, why are you asking me this question?
PS. Those folks who woke up in the arms of Lutheranism in the 1600s probably thought St Francis de Sales was a waste of space. What, Luther and his mass, evil…?
–
Seriously. No question. The N.O. Mass is evil. The Promulgators fot the N.O. Mass are evil, and the poor pawns of the N.O. are being screwed over as surely as those new Lutherans were screwed over. But that’s all in the past, and God and His Church are subject to constant updating, right? The vacancy of the Chair of Peter is a Catholic Truth. That the Chair of Peter can universally promulgate Protestantism is not.
Dear Louie,
On one of your recent previous blogs re Voris, I commented that Voris was merely a distraction from the real issues which threaten the Catholic faith. While these sentiments do have some validity, I must admit that I eagerly look forward to a debate between you and Voris who has declared himself the absolute authority on the status of the SSPX. However, I don’t think he will accept the challenge unless it was pre-taped, pre-scripted and he had the right to edit, dub or distort the exchange in any way possible. Voris can be compared to a boxer who only steps into the ring to show off his gyrations with no one else in the ring to challenge him. It’s very sad when you think about it. His childish obsessive behavior makes him look pretty silly.
PS. There are very strong Catholic arguments for why the man given an N.O. ordination is not a priest, but even if he were ordained, like an Eastern Schimatic, his prayers would ‘have no efficacy’.
–
“The Priest, in reciting the prayers of the Mass, speaks in the person of the Church, in whose unity he remains; but in consecrating the sacrament, he speaks in the person of Christ whose place he holds by the power of his orders. Consequently, a priest severed from the unity of the Church celebrates Mass, not having lost the power of the order, he consecrates Christ’s true body and blood, but because he is severed from the unity of the Church, his prayers have no efficacy.’ St Thomas Aquinas.
–
EM, if you are determined that the heresiarchs who contradict and dismiss as ‘water under the bridge’, the Catechism of Trent, the Council of Trent, the Code of 1917, the Roman Rite of Ordination, the Syllabus of Errors, then I guess you can rest easy that there is nothing serious in what I comment.
Dear my2cents,
I’d want to see that too, in a way, but for (obviously) different reasons, which is a whole other conversation which we are not having now !!!!!!!!
Pope Innocent III: “If a future pope was to change all the rites of the sacraments, he would put himself outside the Church.”
–
Poor Innocent. We all know better, right?
Or put another way:
–
CAN A HERETIC BE POPE FORMALITER?
–
The answer to that question, set in the concrete of Catholic Doctrine, is: No.
–
Therefore Montini was not Pope;
–
Therefore VII was an invalid, false Council;
–
Therefore everything that flows from VII is invalid and false;
–
Therefore the NO mass is evil worship.
–
Therefore the answer to your question is: Yes!
–
Seriously. For Pete’s sake, if Mary ever had a little Lamb.
St Arnold of Soissons – pray for us.
!!!!!!!
On WDTPRS today, I noticed the following two comments:
1) “[W]e also should not deny that [the SSPX] are in a decidedly bad canonical situation and confusion abounds about their status”; and,
2) “This is one of the reasons why we will never unite and accomplish goals, whereas libs set aside small differences and… take over. We need to draw together! Leave aside small differences”.
I believe that what unites “libs” is their firm intellectual conviction that, to put it simply, a personal God does not exist. I also believe that what ought to unite Catholics is our firm intellectual conviction – demonstrated in public by diligent rational argument – that He does (and has revealed Himself to mankind as taught by the Church).
To put it another way, I believe that those with whom we ought to be exclusively visibly united should be participating in this arduous enterprise in some way – even if it means having a little less “joy” from time to time.
With this in mind, I recall the words of the late self-styled “anti-theist” Christopher Hitchens, when he was introduced to a supporter of the SSPX (David Allen White) during a radio debate:
“I think we should understand that I’m not arguing with one of those a la carte Catholics this time. You’re the real thing, aren’t you?”.
Ever mindful,
Yes the new mass is evil. I am not a sedevacantist. The new mass is evil because of what it is lacking. Something can be evil or a evil by what is lacking. The new mass is lacking much of what the true Roman rite contains. The new mass was created by a Freemason and Protestant minsters for the purpose of making the new mass more friendly to protestants that is evil. Catholic rites can’t do that objectively. True Catholics rites can never destroy Catholic Faith.
The schismatic Russian “Orthodox” liturgy is valid meaning transubstantiation takes place but it is evil because the Russian Orthodox are in formal schism for over 1000 years.
Satanic black masses can also be valid meaning that transubstantiation takes place like in the Russian “Orthodox” liturgy clearly the black mass is evil so is the new mass:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opMuVJcud7M
The fact that the bread and wine is changed into the Body, Blood Soul and Divinity of our Blessed Lord does not mean it is worship that is pleasing to God. Only the Traditional Catholic rites of both the east and west are true worship pleasing to God. Why? God handed those rites to us via his Church via Tradition.
The new mass is not Traditional therefore it is evil and illicit. The Russian “Orthodox” liturgy is Traditional but is it illicit meaning the Bishops and Priests are Bishops and Priests but they offer the the sacrifice out side of communion with the true church while holding to schism and heresy.
Catholics should never attend the new mass in a active manner. We can be there for weddings and funerals but we can not participate.
Yes, I’d LOVE to see that program.
dear piokolby,
You state:– “The schismatic Russian “Orthodox” liturgy is valid meaning transubstantiation takes place but it is evil because the Russian Orthodox are in formal schism for over 1000 years. –” So glad you brought this up & took the time to do it. As I said in another comment in another post, validity is not the issue. I don’t know if this has been your experience, but I’ve found this point is very hard to make without causing animosity toward your reader/listener.-but you made the point graciously, IMHO. Also the following point you made well: “Catholics should never attend the new mass in an active manner. We can be there for weddings and funerals but we can not participate.” I would only add that by our behavior we ought not to cause scandal by indicating (or pretending,) that we’re participating out of fear or human respect. It would be good to for example sit in the back, say a Rosary with zero attention to the non-Catholic service taking place, etc.
Here is an interview with Father John Emerson given to the Wanderer in the early ’90s which goes a long way to explain what happened between the Vatican, The Priestly Fraternity and the Society of St. Pius X – not yesterday, but at the time just after the consecrations.
–
http://realromancatholic.com/2013/07/14/fr-john-emerson-fssp-speaks-on-the-original-sspx-break-with-rome/
–
Father Emerson was one of the original priests in the Society of St. Pius X, but like some others, decided to request a way to stay with Rome. That way was opened to them. There were others who decided not to take the way offered, and the SSPX that we see today is the result.
–
After reading Father Emerson’s interview I see now that the SSPX had the opportunity to live the Catholic life and formation they desired, but they did not take it. I have no idea of the motives from this long distance of time.
–
In my personal opinion the SSPX position has hardened over the past 25 years and may have lost the original point of the whole exercise. We must remember that the Fraternity has grown steadily, invited by bishops, formed in Tradition, using the missal of 1962, and serving their parishes completely as if Vatican II had never been held. I know this from 15 years attending such a parish. The evidence of graces received because of obedience is there.
–
My personal belief is now that the SSPX are in schismatic position – I put it like that because there is such confusion coming out of Rome about their actual canonical status that it’s not really correct to say they are in schism. And what does it matter? They are ‘outside.’
–
I personally believe they had a chance to do what the Priestly Fraternity has done so successfully all these years: remain with Peter, do what they were formed to do, and help grow faithful Catholics.
–
The obedience the Fraternity gives to Rome has NOT resulted in a watering down of faith, or scandal, or abuses. This obedience has, for 25 years, seen good fruits. It is sad to say that the disobedience (and lack of trust in Providence) in the SSPX has resulted in division and rancour.
I forgot to say that nasty comments about this whole issue, on BOTH sides, is simply a lack of charity. Personal attacks are a distraction from the principles involved.
–
We are to work as hard as we can to right wrongs, but we are to love our enemies and do good to those who hate us. The way we do good to them is to guard their reputations as if they were our own. The way we love our enemies is to deal with them while they are wrong in the way we will deal with them when they see the right.
–
What would we say to Father Nicholson when he sees the light and ceases, with tears in his eyes, to speak in such a nasty way? What will we say to Michael Voris when he has a conversion of heart and works out his apostolate with more sense and charity?
Addressed to Ever mindful:
EM–since your second question alluded to what is the sedevacanist position, perhaps you’ll consider listening to audio, (which very, very briefly-it must be noted-) explains the sedvacantist position located here:
****
http://mhtseminary.libsyn.com/conference-understanding-vatican-ii-by-bp-sanborn
****
If , after listening, you should wish to discuss it further ( or if anyone else wishes to discuss it further of course,) let any one of us know here whom you are aware holds to it &perhaps, as per Louie’s request-we can discuss at more length in the forum.
May the Peace of His Majesty Our Lord Jesus Christ, a Peace not of this world , be to you.
If someone told me that I was not “in full communion” with the Rome of today, I would take it as a compliment.
Barbara,
No the FSSP’s failure to condemn the errors of Vatican II and the new mass is the schismatic & heretical position: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vX75xiW2Z54
Father John Emerson betrayed Our Lord and Archbishop Lefebvre. Now Voris is using his work to attacks Catholics in 2015. Shame on the FSSP!
I think someone discussed this issue of “full communion” awhile back. I’ve just been reading about a philosophical principle that fits – it’s called the excluded middle: a thing either is, or is not, no middle ground is possible. Between “be” and “not be” there is no third possibility.
–
We are in the middle of a revolution in the language. “Full communion” with Rome means just plain old Faithful Catholic. “Not full communion” is nonsense. Out of communion with Rome is the state of being non-Catholic.
–
The heterodox in the Church now seem to be fostering this kind of “third way” especially in their desire to “walk” with sinners until some time in the future when the sinner will stop sinning.
–
One is either in mortal sin, or one is not. There is no middle state. When we allow those heterodox prelates to mist our eyes by using nonsense we have to call them out. There are principles of reason. Reason is given to us human beings so we can know our nature, and our end. If we don’t use it, or misuse it we fall into error.
Well, I guess I’ve been told! I see it all so clearly now…
dear salvemur,
“———–on through to Mr Bergoglio.” Yes, indeed salvemur, “——-on through ——–“—to that almost afterthought of a man, Bergoglio– just another everyday walking around woefully devoid of the True Faith Modernist, head of the Modernist Sect borne of VII.
SHOULD I STAY OR SHOULD I GO?
So if the Catholic Church really can’t disappear because Reinhard Marx defiles St. Peter’s with his goat’s foot, are you really sure you want to leave? (And picking “x” and calling it “The Church” is psychological self-jiu-jitsu, if we’re honest. As Abraham Lincoln asked, “If you call a dog’s tail a leg, how many legs does a dog have?” The answer is four. Just because you call a thing something doesn’t make it so.)
If Catholics can leave the Church any time they’re really, really sure the Church is wrong, then you should be able to cite clear and relevant statements from numerous saints, popes and councils directly in support of that proposition.
But there is no authority for that proposition, at least none that the Bear is aware of. Why, then, friend — and the Bear means that most sincerely — would you take such a horrible risk against the entire weight of tradition?
On the other hand, what harm can come from exercising the virtues praised by all saints: humility and obedience? You can be a scandalized Roman Catholic, while being a humble and obedient son or daughter of the Church. Do you really think God will punish you for remaining in His visible, institutional Church that traces continuity back to Peter? (The Bear could go on in this vein, but it is Catholic Apologetics 101, and most of his readers can probably do it better than he can.)
If your answer is the SSPX, the Bear sympathizes. Of course things are a mess in our little slice of time. But more to the point, isn’t there a paradox inherent in the SSPX option? Forget the fact their priests have no faculties for hearing confessions except what Francis the Merciful feels like giving them — temporarily.
No, the real paradox is that people want to flee to the SSPX because the Church is corrupt and washed up, and the SSPX is traditional. Yet the first thing they say is that SSPX isn’t in schism, and remains part of the Church in good standing! They decide to leave the Church, and at the same time insist they’re inside the Church. And good for them! The Bear thinks that shows a healthy instinct, however illogical.
“Bad But Stay”
We’re finally at the important part!
The Bear is holding a fish to get your attention. This is the important part.
The better answer is to de-couple “bad therefore leave” altogether. Such a link is by no means logical or inevitable. We aren’t programmed “bad therefore leave” with our children. We aren’t programmed “bad therefore leave” with our spouses, or our countries. (Remember all the Hollywood liberals who were always threatening to move out of the country if Bush got elected? Even they didn’t follow through.) Why should we have programmed our brains to “bad therefore leave” when it comes to the Church?
Please, reprogram your brain to “bad but stay.” “Yes, this is bad. I recognize that, But all that means is that a bad thing is happening in the Roman Catholic Church, for reasons beyond my understanding. I am still a faithful Catholic and this is still the Church (you know, the place with the fancy buildings filled with untrustworthy schemers, but also Jesus). Therefore, of course I shall stay.”
The Bear shall stay no matter what, yea, even if Francis the Merciful and Beneficent marries two Catholic priests in front of Bernini’s baldachin in St. Peter’s. And he will be no less scandalized than any of his readers. But Bears are stubborn that way. This too shall pass. And were the Church that God Himself built one day to fall down and crush a humble Bear, do you believe God could justly punish poor Bear for doing what He told him to do in the first place? Maybe the inscrutable sovereign being worshiped by the Mohammedans could, but not the Catholic God. (And, yes, the Bear does believe in a Catholic God.)
We can suspect Noah is a drunken reprobate and the Ark is leaking at the seams, and threaten to jump overboard. We may even rechristen a piece of driftwood floating on the horizon “The Ark.” But others shall wonder, and remind us that there’s only one Ark, and we’re already on it. If they are our friends, they will do nearly anything to keep us in the safety of the Ark. That is the spirit this plea was written in, so please forgive an old Bear if he cares about his readers and may have hugged them too tightly, or growled a little too growly.”
http://corbiniansbear.blogspot.co.uk/2015/09/schism.html#comment-form
piokolby,
totally agree on the FSSP-those quintessential wolves in sheep’s clothing. On of our sons left their very first seminary established in Wigratzbad, Germany. He simply could not sign on hook line & sinker to VII & the NO gag order. We thank God every day that he did not do so.
Barbara,
–
I have not finished reading the entire interview you linked to (past midnight where I live), and I already came across some pretty dubious statements:
-” Indeed. we can continue to critique, without polemic, those parts of Vatican II which appear to us not to be in clear accord with tradition. And we are doing so. And Rome expects us to do so. It’s not a problem.”
[HUH????]
-” Rome wants traditionalists around the world to see that Rome is serious about giving traditionalists all their legitimate rights within the Church.”
[Really??? Like in some parts of the world where the SSPX priests are the only ones offering the Mass of the Ages for the faithful? (Not sure now – but until recently in Portugal the SSPX were the ONLY ones offering the TLM)”
It seems like some highly dubious statements to make, and I just got to the early portion of the interview…
–
In response, you might want to take a look at this:
“A Question of Principles: SSPX vs FSSP”
http://sspx.org/en/news-events/news/question-principles-sspx-vs-fssp-3062
Barbara,
That kind of smug comment speaks volumes. The FSSP is accepted by men that pray with non Catholics for a reason. The FSSP has “full communion” with modernists and ecumenists for a reason. The FSSP is given faculties for a reason. The reasons are wicked. The reasons are of the spirit of Judas.
Your smug comment “Well, I guess I’ve been told! I see it all so clearly now” makes you look like you do not care about doctrine, truth or Our Lord. Catholicism is not only about the appearances of Tradition (smells and bells). Catholicism is not only about unity and obedience. What the FSSP as a group has is the appearance of unity and obedience. What the FSSP has a group is the appearance Tradition (smells and bells).
The FSSP objectively gave up the Faith and doctrinal truth in 1988 with the document ecclesia dei and they signed their heresy officially in 2003 with the FSSP constitutions.
When I think of the FSSP as a group I think of the words of Our Lord “And every one that heareth these my words, and doth them not, shall be like a foolish man that built his house upon the sand” St. Matthew 7:26
The FSSP and the other ecclesia dei groups are built on sand. A classic modernist tactic is the exaggeration of one truth to the exclusion of another truth. What truth is excluded? The social Kingship of Our Lord Jesus Christ. How does the FSSP live out this exclusion? The failing to expose and condemn the errors of Vatican II. These errors are religious liberty,ecumenism, and collegiality.
What truths are exaggerated? Unity & obedience & the smells and bells. Without Christ and his truth unity, obedience, & the smells and bells are useless illusions.
The SSPX will not give up fighting for the social Kingship of Our Lord Jesus Christ. We must have a Catholic State and a Catholic King. Christ must reign! The FSSP in it’s acceptance on the new mass and Vatican II gives up the fight for social Kingship of Our Lord Jesus Christ.
The social Kingship of Our Lord Jesus Christ is a 1st Commandment issue. The FSSP may not omit this part of the Faith for false unity and faculties from the revolutionaries.
Without truth unity is an illusion: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TcdfFbh33Rw
de Maria numquam satis,
I am happy your son got out of the FSSP seminary. I know people who have their sons in the FSSP seminary and my heart breaks for them and the boys. This is a salvation issue.
Many good souls can not see that the FSSP is objectively heretical. Sadly some see it and fall for sedevacantism. Which is a false choice. Others fall for the other lie that modernism is Catholicism and that new church is the Catholic Church and they stay with the FSSP. These times are tuff.
Any man called to the Priesthood should only go to the SSPX or the Resistance seminaries as long has they have the Faith. The FSSP seminaries are a hard red light for Catholic men.
Barbara
“full communion” is the equivalent of half pregnant.
Ever mindful,
The councilor Church is not the Catholic Church. Modernism is not Catholicism. We are dealing with two churches and two religions:
http://gloria.tv/media/rt9332KiHZS
I must have missed the ‘nasty’ comments. There are certainly a lot of very direct comments, which is a helpful way to get to the truth.
Ken said, “The Church of Rome today is an Apostate Church…”
–
Very true, which means it is not the Bride of Christ. But we know from Catholic Truth that the Church – One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic – is also visible. Given that it does not exist in the Novus Ordo, which is a universally defective and heretical institution, we have to know where the Church is?
–
The answer to this that the Church continues with the true priests and faithful who keep the faith, offer true worship as handed on to them and watch and pray for the vacant of the Petrine See to come to an end.
–
“The scission, the separation, the divorce of societies from God, which is given by St. Paul as a sign of the approaching end (“…nisi venerit discessio primum…”) will become each day more absolute. The Church, though of course still a visible society, will be increasingly reduced to individual and domestic proportions. She who in Her young days cried out: “the place is strait: give me room wherein to dwell,” will see every inch of Her territory under attack. Surrounded on all sides, as the other centuries have made Her great, so the last will strive to crush Her.” Cardinal Pie (1815-1880)
piokolby,
Obviously we disagree on the matter of sedevacantism. I’ve no problem whatsoever with you saying stuff like “fall for” with regard to the position.
***
That indirect insult, piokolby, might cause resentment in a less stalwart warrior than the average (if you will,) sedevacantist, who is used to such left handed & not so subtle disparagement. No, no one “fell” for anything.
***
The chronological time to which I referred is a time shortly after Lefebvre’s consecrations decades ago. Indeed an overall timeframe wherein Lefebvre talked sedevacantism himself. We loved the Archbishop, still do & we were there. This is as good a time as any to mention that it’s well known today that numerous FSSPX priests are non una-cum & are at the ready to take the flying leap of logic post-October where Bergoglio will have his fest. (pun intended.)
All this said , though, I jumped in here for the purpose of reiterating your warning on the FSSP, damage doers par excellence. Not at all to spar with you on the deeper issue of sedevacantism.
Peace be to you.
dear EM-
The position you (from what you write) hold is the well-known Recognize & Resist, a position Mr. V. takes., also The Remnant , CFN et al. This position holds that the Church not only, as you put it, can be subject to a “bad thing” happening to Her, but can also suffer damage. This position also infers that such “damage” can be “fixed” at some future date.
However other Catholics (sedevacantists mainly but also others,) hold that The Church is the Bride of Christ, Forever Undefiled. She suffers no damage. Of fornication She is incapable. That which deviates from Her True Teaching is not of Her & is not borne of Her. IOW, the heresy of Modernism is incapable of penetrating Her.
This is why, when one reads or hears Catholics who hold this latter position, one notes that the current “pope” is almost (but not precisely) irrelevant & is not the focus of the conversation. Rather, the heresy of Modernism & the Conciliar non-Catholic entity (or “church”) which was borne of the Modernist council is the focal point.
When reading & hearing those of the former position, one observes an almost opposite stance is expounded upon..
Further treatment of this, to abide by Louie’s guidelines, I’d be happy to discuss with you any time in forum format dear EM. Until then, I hope you’ll listen to audio I suggested in an earlier reply to you, bc that , IMHO, would enhance any further discussion possibly lying ahead.
Peace be to you.
EM, as piokolby points out, the N.O. is not the Church, therefore refraining from the N.O. and holding to the Faith means one is choosing to stay in the Church of Christ. The True Church has been exiled by the N.O.
–
The sedevacantist argument is about knowing where the Church is, what the Church is and holding fast. The Popes of Christmas Past told us clearly and plainly where and what the Church is. In the absence of a True Pope we must hold to the Perennial Magisterium. That means all the novelties wrought by the Novus Ordo heresiarchs are to be rejected by the True Catholic. These men, being heretics, have no jurisdicition – ipso facto. This is what the Church and her True Peters have taught from the beginning:
–
St Robert Bellarmine, Doctor of the church (1542-1622): “A pope who is a manifest heretic automatically ceases to be pope and head, just as he ceases automatically to be a Christian and a member of the Church. Wherefore, he can be judged and punished by the Church. This is the teaching of all the ancient Fathers who teach that manifest heretics immediately lose all jurisdicition.” —— If we assent to this teaching of St Bellarmine, we must never give our assent to the Counterfeit Church. To do so is to choose belial over Christ. While the majority of folks calling themselves Catholics remain ignorant of many of these truths, nonetheless, the evil fruits of the Novus Ordo Institutution they knowling and willingly assent to.
–
One topical evil fruit of the evil tree of the N.O. is the annulment of marriages: Take a look at this: http://www.novusordowatch.org/wire/tradcast-008-is-here.htm
–
In 1968 (2 years after the close of the evil VII and before its evil fruits were manifest), there were 338 marriage annulments United States. Thirty years later, in 1998, once the fruits of the heretical and evil institution of VII, which exiled the True Church, had come to harvest, there were 50,000 annulments – an increase of 14,793%. And when Bergoglio’s VII/N.O. inspired ‘drive-thru’ annulments reach an N.O. parish near you on the 8th of December – the Feast of the Immaculate Conception (a slap in the face to Our Blessed Mother on the part of the wolves in shepherds’ cassocks), the sky is the limit with how ridiculous the N.O. counterfeit has to get before people wake-up and realise it is what it walks and talks like – a counterfeit Church with no authority from Christ. Meanwhile the authentic Church is exiled and reduced to ‘domestic proportions: “The scission, the separation, the divorce of societies from God, which is given by St. Paul as a sign of the approaching end (“…nisi venerit discessio primum…”) will become each day more absolute. The Church, though of course still a visible society, will be increasingly reduced to individual and domestic proportions. She who in Her young days cried out: “the place is strait: give me room wherein to dwell,” will see every inch of Her territory under attack. Surrounded on all sides, as the other centuries have made Her great, so the last will strive to crush Her.” Cardinal Pie (1815-1880)
salvemur,
thank you for this magnificent quote from Cardinal Pie. If one has eyes to see, they’ll surely note those few especially key words: “—strive to crush–.” And to strive is all of which (current times) are capable, for the Armor worn by His Bride is impenetrable, no matter how territorial any reduction.
Since we cannot avoid what is on the horizon come October, it must be noted that we hear explosive allusions to a possible “schism” taking place popping out all over with regard to that
“synod.” Let it not be said that a schism might forthwith take place affecting Holy Mother Church. No. Any schism that might occur will take place affecting the Modernist Sect only.
Honestly, EM,
I’m so glad this wasn’t written by you but rather the very popular bear. Upon unpacking the nonsense put forth in writings like this, that’s when I find myself defending, for example, the SSPX & other trads and here I am—a sedevacantist. If the bear wishes to categorize & make an attempt to elucidate w/regards to differing trad positions, the bear ought to at the very least, shall we say, get it right.
We watch and pray. Will the modernest sect ever convert? Or are they so ignorantly convinced of their ‘right’ to recreate Christ and His Church to fit an antichrist mold? or, alternatively, so hell-bent on consciously perverting the Faith in the minds of millions…?
The Priestly Society of St. Peter never got a Bishop for the Order, which they were promised in signing the deal with The Vatican.
The fact that agreeing to offer the NO MASS, is disturbing.
As I was at Holy Innocents RC Church in Midtown Manhattan on Sunday, September 20th, the Real Roman Rite was offered for all to see, where Priest acts “In Persona Christi” before God & NOT as mere Presider of a Liturgical Service.
The Church cannot both be and not be. In His merciful condescension to us, Christ mostly manifested his powers through visible signs, even using his spittle to cure blindness. The Church must be visible above all else although not of the world but in the world. How could Sedevacantists simply say there is no visible Pope and then simply wait. What are they waiting for? If they cared for souls, wouldn’t they attempt to move heaven and hell to establish an Anti-Pope with an eye to taking back the See of Rome? That has not been unprecedented in Church history. We weaklings cannot fathom there being a See of Rome without a Pope.
It is Catholic Truth that the Chair of Peter becomes vacant – hence the phrase sedevacante – is. A vacancy may simply be between the death of one true pope and the election of another true pope. But there have been extended vacancies in Church history. One thing for certain that the Church has never taught, is that a Vicar of Christ will pervert the Church universally.
–
Indefectibility. We trust God in this or we trust the new stories of a whore muddling through history as Christ’s ‘bride’…very protestant…
That should read ‘sede vacante – ist’ but word correct, like VII knows better.
Alarico, if we understood what the true priests and bishops have gone through to warn and waken the VII/Novus Ordo generation regarding the assault-upon/exile-of plain, visible Catholic Worship, Doctrine and Discipline, my ‘watch and pray’ comments could not undermine the real battle of real soldiers of Our Saviour…for our poor souls.
http://www.restorationradionetwork.org/season-4-from-the-pulpit-episode-40-satan-will-try-to-deceive-even-the-elect-part-1/
Alarico, if I’m not baaing up the wrong rock-climb, here’s a sede argument to ponder:
–
“The Church cannot both be and not be.” – Correct. The Church will be until the end of time.
–
“The Church must be visible…” – Correct. She is visible in her members. See the quote from Cardinal Pie above.
–
“How could Sedevacantists simply say there is no visible Pope…”
–
Sedevacantists do not say this. There is a visible pope – Bergoglio, but he is pope only materialiter, not Pope formaliter. He is the validly elected (designated) pope in Canon Law – the law of the Church promulgated and administered by men. But his authority as Pope, (jurisdiction), comes from God alone – not men – and that authority he forfeited ipso facto the day he committed his first sin of heresy. So he is a validly elected and designated pope without any authority, power,or jurisdiction.
–
The Succession of Peter remains intact – as Our lord and Vatican I said it would in perpetuity.
–
“What are they waiting for?”
–
We are waiting for Our Lord to resolve the situation according to His will.
–
“wouldn’t they attempt to move heaven and hell to establish an Anti-Pope with an eye to taking back the See of Rome? ” Certainly not! The Church of Christ is His Church alone, built on the Rock of Peter. A man made church built on an anti-pope does not bear contemplation.
–
“We weaklings cannot fathom there being a See of Rome without a Pope.”
–
Well, the See of Rome does have a pope – an heretical pope materialiter!
hi, Alarico,
Visibility is one of the most popular questions posed to sedevacantists. For Holy Mother Church- the sole purpose of visibility is to be The Beacon of Truth. The Apostles were the visible Church at one time. If tomorrow, only one Catholic were left & he held to the True Faith (not the Modernist Sect, ) he would hold Visibility. A visual-a very huge pile of dung is highly visible, but there isn’t an iota of Truth in it. If you’d like to further discuss your concerns, I placed an audio to EM & everyone above, if you’d like to listen. You’ll find it labelled by me: “addressed to EM.” We can have any discussion at length you’d like there ***as per our gracious host’s request-Mr. V.***
Also, I had a quite fun idea-
I read in a reply to a commenter on The Remnant that this week The Remnant is putting forth an (anti ?, we have to assume yes !)
position paper on sedevacantism. In hopes that it won’t be as totally boring as their former statements on the topic, maybe when it comes out we can rip it assunder right here together, again, in the forum!
May She, Mother of The Redeemer, hold you in Her Protection.
Alarico,
sorry,
above should read:
“—there -in the forum***as per our gracious host’s request-Mr. V.***
thanks, Alarico-for asking the things you did.
dear my2cents,
which means that you have retained your sanity, IMHO. For you & all, how about a teensy bit of levity by way of review-shall we?
http://thatthebonesyouhavecrushedmaythrill.blogspot.com/2013/12/the-pope-francis-little-book-of-insults.html
Dear de Maria,
I thank you for your kind heart…
Be kind, for everyone you meet is fighting a hard battle.
Plato
The heart benevolent and kind the most resembles God
Robert Burns
Me! Me! Me! *jumps up and down like a three year old offered candy*
I would L.O.V.E. to see you sit on air at CMTV and finally explain to the entire CMTV Novus Ordo audience that no Catholic in their right mind could ever accept V2 in it’s fullness.
Hoping that day comes soon:+) God bless you Louie!
Your welcome, de Maria. And thank you for your thoughtful replies to my capricious, impulsive and somewhat rhetorical musings. However, the thanks should herein first and foremost go to Mr. Verrecchio who graciously allows us to indulge.
Amen! I will eschew the hard pretzels less, like George Bush, the debate gets too intense and there’s no one in the room to perform CPR.
You are humble not when you humble yourself, but when you are humbled by others and you bear it for Christ
St Josemaria Escriva
Gary Michael Voris & Fr Paul Nicholson are like a couple of kids who hide behind a fence & throw rocks.
When spotted, they run away.
http://www.traditioninaction.org/religious/m040rpMotu.htm
Thanks for bringing attention back to the men of the motu inapproprios. Louie wrote: “Look, if there’s any sure sign that one is a false prophet who is laboring for something other than the propagation of truth, it is when that individual steadfastly refuses to directly engage the very people who’s alleged positions they attack. That describes the cowards mentioned above perfectly.” If only those who run like mice away from engaging with sedevacantists believed this.
–
“Faithless and flat, meaningless and moribund, Godless and gutless—welcome to the New & Improved Catholic-Christian Church Community of the Second Vatican Council.” So said a recent Remnant in their piece called the ‘The Sheer Stupidity of the Church of Vatican II’, which lauds Pat Buchanan’s latest head scratching about the crisis.
–
The thing is, all those who continue to apply to Holy Mother Church, that which belongs plainly to an apostate counterfeit institution which defected from the Bride of Christ fifty odd years ago are doing belial’s bidding, not Christ’s.
–
Here’s a quote from Cardinal Manning from the mid 1880s: “I am well aware that the truths and principles of Revelation have been, by the common consent of the public men, formally excluded from the sphere of politics, and that to apply them as tests to the events of the world is regarded, in these days, as weakness of mind. They who reject Revelation are altogether consistent in judgment.” Cardinal Manning, “Christ versus Antichrist.” He was speaking of the war of the secular/satan’s-domain against the Church. This war continues with the Novus Ordo Institution as an important, if not the most important, arm of satan’s groups/cabals working to reduce and obscure Christ’s Church, her true priests, true worship and true teachings.
–
It occurs to me that Cardinal Manning’s true observations may be applied to the Truths regarding these enemies of Christ and His Church at this moment: “I am well aware that the truths and principles of [the Indefectibility of the Bride of Christ and the clear teachings of the Church from the Apostles, early Fathers, again reiterated by St Bellarmine, and plainly taught in Cum ex apostolatus officio, at Trent etc., through to Pope Pius XII, regarding manifest heresy and departure from tradition in doctrine and rites] have been, by the common consent of the public men, [with much zeal] excluded from the sphere of [public defense of Truth], and that to apply them as tests to the events of the [defection of Vatican II and revolutionary Novus Ordo] is regarded, in these days, as weakness of mind. They who reject [Church teaching by recognising an enemy of Christ as His Vicar and recognising as Church a counterfeit ‘faithless and flat, meaningless and moribund, Godless and gutless New & Improved Catholic-Christian Church Community of the Second Vatican Council] are altogether consistent in judgment.” Cardinal Manning, in his words, went on to ensure all those who thought him ‘weak minded’ that he had no intention of giving up.
–
PS. The more folks lament the heresiarchs as if they were popes, and lament the whore as if she were the Bride, the more they contribute to the obscuration, exile and reduction of the True Indefectible Bride of Christ. A heresiarch is never a Pope. A whore of an institution with phoney rites is never the Church.
Man, did you guys hear Fr. Rosica on Fox News with Chris Wallace. Fr. Rosica said about the Papal visit to America that Pope Francis is “Humanity …. coming to teach us how to be more human.” Cardinal Wuerl was no better preaching the New World religion. It could have been straight from the mouth of Pope Paul VI.
They both seemed so triumphant on the major cable outlet. Good grief! Don’t they realize they are the laughing stock of the Church’s enemies.
Dear Salvemur,
Happy feast day of stigmatised St Padre Pio
Canonised by St John Paul II
And may all 110 saints canonised by him pray for all of us
List of saints canonized by Pope John Paul II
This article contains the saints canonized by Pope John Paul II. Pope John Paul II canonized a record number of individuals (110) during his twenty-six-year reign as Pope from 1978–2005:
No. Saint Date of Canonization Place of Canonization
1. Crispin of Viterbo[1] 20 June 1982 St. Peter’s Basilica
2. Maximilian Kolbe[1] 10 October 1982 St. Peter’s Basilica
3. Marguerite Bourgeoys[1] 31 October 1982 St. Peter’s Basilica
4. Jeanne Delanoue 31 October 1982 St. Peter’s Basilica
5. Leopold Mandić 16 October 1983 St. Peter’s Basilica
6. Paula Frassinetti 11 March 1984 St. Peter’s Basilica
7. 103 Korean Martyrs 6 May 1984 Seoul, Korea
8. Miguel Febres Cordero 21 October 1984 St. Peter’s Basilica
9. Francis Anthony Fasani 13 April 1986 St. Peter’s Basilica
10. Joseph Tomasi 12 October 1986 St. Peter’s Basilica
11. Lorenzo Ruiz 18 October 1987 St. Peter’s Basilica
12. Dominic Ibáñez de Erquicia 18 October 1987 St. Peter’s Basilica
13. James Kyushei Tomonaga and 13 Companions 18 October 1987 St. Peter’s Basilica
14. Giuseppe Moscati 25 October 1987 St. Peter’s Basilica
15. Roque González de Santa Cruz 16 May 1988 Asunción
16. Alonso Rodríguez 16 May 1988 Asunción
17. Juan de Castillo 16 May 1988 Asunción
18. Eustochia Smeralda Calafato 11 June 1988 Messina
19. Andrew Dung-Lac 19 June 1988 St. Peter’s Basilica
20. Tommaso Thien 19 June 1988 St. Peter’s Basilica
21. Emanuele Phung 19 June 1988 St. Peter’s Basilica
22. Girolamo Hermosilla 19 June 1988 St. Peter’s Basilica
23. Valentino Berrio Ochoa 19 June 1988 St. Peter’s Basilica
24. Teofano Venard and 111 companions 19 June 1988 St. Peter’s Basilica
25. Simón de Rojas 3 July 1988 St. Peter’s Basilica
26. Rose Philippine Duchesne 3 July 1988 St. Peter’s Basilica
27. Magdalen of Canossa 2 October 1988 St. Peter’s Basilica
28. Maria Rosa Molas y Vallvé 11 December 1988 St. Peter’s Basilica
29. Clelia Barbieri 9 April 1989 St. Peter’s Basilica
30. Gaspar Bertoni 1 November 1989 St. Peter’s Basilica
31. Richard Pampuri 1 November 1989 St. Peter’s Basilica
32. Agnes of Bohemia 12 November 1989 St. Peter’s Basilica
33. Albert Chmielowski 12 November 1989 St. Peter’s Basilica
34. Mutien-Marie Wiaux 10 December 1989 St. Peter’s Basilica
35. Marie-Marguerite d’Youville 9 December 1990 St. Peter’s Basilica
36. Raphael Kalinowski 17 November 1991 St. Peter’s Basilica
37. Claude de la Colombière 31 May 1992 St. Peter’s Basilica
38. Ezequiel Moreno y Díaz 11 October 1992 Santo Domingo
39. Claudine Thévenet 21 March 1993 St. Peter’s Basilica
40. Teresa of Jesus of Los Andes 21 March 1993 St. Peter’s Basilica
41. Enrique de Ossó y Cercelló 16 June 1993 Madrid
42. Meinhard (eqipollent) 8 September 1993 Riga
43. Jan Sarkander 21 May 1995 Olomouc, Czech Republic
44. Zdislava Berka 21 May 1995 Olomouc, Czech Republic
45. Marko Krizevcanin 2 July 1995 Košice, Slovak Republic
46. Stefan Pongracz 2 July 1995 Košice, Slovak Republic
47. Melichar Grodziecki 2 July 1995 Košice, Slovak Republic
48. Eugene de Mazenod 3 December 1995 St. Peter’s Basilica
49. Jean-Gabriel Perboyre 2 June 1996 St. Peter’s Basilica
50. Egidio Maria of Saint Joseph Francis Anthony Postillo 2 June 1996 St. Peter’s Basilica
51. Juan Grande Román 2 June 1996 St. Peter’s Basilica
52. Jadwiga of Poland 8 June 1997 Kraków
53. John Dukla 10 June 1997 Krosno
54. Teresa Benedict of the Cross 11 October 1998 St. Peter’s Basilica
55. Marcellin Joseph Benoît Champagnat 18 April 1999 St. Peter’s Basilica
56. John Calabria 18 April 1999 St. Peter’s Basilica
57. Agostina Livia Pietrantoni 18 April 1999 St. Peter’s Basilica
58. Kinga (equipollent) 16 June 1999 Stary Sącz, Poland
59. Cirilo Bertrán and 8 Companions and Inocencio de la Inmaculada 21 November 1999 St. Peter’s Basilica
60. Benedict Menni 21 November 1999 St. Peter’s Basilica
61. Thomas of Cori 21 November 1999 St. Peter’s Basilica
62. Mary Faustina Kowalska 30 April 2000 St. Peter’s Basilica
63. Cristóbal Magallanes Jara and 19 other companions 21 May 2000 St. Peter’s Basilica
64. Román Adame Rosales 21 May 2000 St. Peter’s Basilica
65. Rodrigo Aguilar Aleman 21 May 2000 St. Peter’s Basilica
66. Julio Álvarez Mendoza 21 May 2000 St. Peter’s Basilica
67. Luis Bátiz Sáinz 21 May 2000 St. Peter’s Basilica
68. Agustín Caloca Cortés 21 May 2000 St. Peter’s Basilica
69. Maria of Jesus in the Blessed Sacrament 21 May 2000 St. Peter’s Basilica
70. José Maria de Yermo y Parres 21 May 2000 St. Peter’s Basilica
71. Augustine Chao and 119 companions 1 October 2000 St. Peter’s Basilica
72. Katharine Drexel 1 October 2000 St. Peter’s Basilica
73. Josephine Bakhita 1 October 2000 St. Peter’s Basilica
74. María Josefa Sancho 1 October 2000 St. Peter’s Basilica
75. Luigi Scrosoppi 10 June 2001 St. Peter’s Basilica
76. Agostino Roscelli 10 June 2001 St. Peter’s Basilica
77. Bernard of Corleone 10 June 2001 St. Peter’s Basilica
78. Teresa Eustoquio Verzeri 10 June 2001 St. Peter’s Basilica
79. Rafqa Pietra Choboq Ar-Rayès 10 June 2001 St. Peter’s Basilica
80. Joseph Marello 25 November 2001 St. Peter’s Basilica
81. Paula Montal Fornés de San José de Calasanz 25 November 2001 St. Peter’s Basilica
82. Maria Crescentia Höss 25 November 2001 St. Peter’s Basilica
83. Leonie Aviat 25 November 2001 St. Peter’s Basilica
84. Alphonsus de Orozco 19 May 2002 St. Peter’s Basilica
85. Ignatius of Santhià 19 May 2002 St. Peter’s Basilica
86. Humilis de Bisignano 19 May 2002 St. Peter’s Basilica
87. Benedetta Cambiagio Frassinello 19 May 2002 St. Peter’s Basilica
88. Paulina of the Agonizing Heart of Jesus 19 May 2002 St. Peter’s Basilica
89. Pio of Pietrelcina 16 June 2002 St. Peter’s Basilica
90. Peter of Saint Joseph Betancur 30 July 2002 Guatemala City
91. Juan Diego Cuauhtlatoatzin 31 July 2002 Mexico City
92. Josemaría Escrivá 6 October 2002 St. Peter’s Basilica
93. Pedro Poveda Castroverde 4 May 2003 Spain
94. José María Rubio y Peralta 4 May 2003 Spain
95. Angela of the Cross 4 May 2003 Spain
96. Maravillas de Jesús 4 May 2003 Spain
97. Genoveva Torres Morales 4 May 2003 Spain
98. Virginia Centurione Bracelli 18 May 2003 St. Peter’s Basilica
99. Maria De Mattias 18 May 2003 St. Peter’s Basilica
100. Ursula Ledóchowska 18 May 2003 St. Peter’s Basilica
101. Józef Sebastian Pelczar 18 May 2003 St. Peter’s Basilica
102. Daniel Comboni 5 October 2003 St. Peter’s Basilica
103. Joseph Freinademetz 5 October 2003 St. Peter’s Basilica
104. Arnold Janssen 5 October 2003 St. Peter’s Basilica
105. Gianna Beretta Molla 16 May 2004 St. Peter’s Basilica
106. Luigi Orione 16 May 2004 St. Peter’s Basilica
107. Hannibal Mary Di Francia 16 May 2004 St. Peter’s Basilica
108. Joseph Manyanet i Vives 16 May 2004 St. Peter’s Basilica
109. Nimatullah Kassab Al-Hardini 16 May 2004 St. Peter’s Basilica
110. Paola Elisabetta Cerioli
Dear EM, and I don’t use the term dear lightly – Poor Padre Pio. His halo is used to elevate in the minds of the New Order many men and women who have and had no right to even be considered for sainthood, at any time or place. Wojtyla, of wretched memory, remains wretched from any authentic Catholic POV. Padre Pio’s memory has been exploited by more than two or three anti-Catholic agendas to date. The ‘saint factory’ of the Novus Ordo, that eliminated, at least in its Group Mind, the need for a devil’s advocate, or that pesky other miracle, or indeed any miracle, is a parade of error with a sprinkling of truth, just like the Novus Ordo – proper modernism = the synthesis of errors/heresies/lies.
–
The Church teaches that there are miracles and mirakles. Those which God approves in order to strengthen the faith in Truth are miracles. Those which are of the ‘working of Satan, in all power, and signs, and lying wonders’, are known to us because they are the spangly lights and fanfare around error.
–
I wouldn’t dare co-opt Padre Pio’s thought…I do know the tale about him supposedly predicting Wojtyla’s ‘papacy’ – but the fact is Wojtyla was a heresiarch, not a pope, and no tale attributed to Padre Pio to ‘authenticate’ him makes any difference. Public heresy, the worst blasphemy, strange doctrines, and unrepentant obstinacy in modernism…all the legacy of Bishop Wojtyla, whose son in a false-faith is about to hold an heretical service at the 9/11 site, whilst gettin’ jiggy wid various booty-shakin’ celebs and spouting more indifference to the Only Begotten Son of the Living God.
–
http://www.novusordowatch.org/wire/bergoglio-washington-usa.htm
hi, Ever mindful,
Your point’s been made (I think.) Although, one cannot be sure what your point is. The problem with the “canonization” of these saints is an ecclesiastical & of course canonical one. These problems are wrapped up in the Modernism which created a new religion, of which the post VII canonization process is part & parcel. Only two of these problems are the following-
1-flaming Modernists JPII, Ratzinger & Bergoglio were & are incapable of the act of creating a saint (to put it in non-ecclesiastic & rather crude lay language.)
2- The absence of the advocātus diabolī to prove heroic virtue is absent from the “new” canonization process. If we retreat from knowledge of these ommissions in the process alone, and there are more, we are deluding ourselves.
Hi, Alarico,
Yes, I heard it. Bergoglio is making his way up to my hometown, new york city. Alarico, you bring up a crucial & important matter in pointing to Rosica’s comment & I admire you for it. IMHO it’s an act of charity to alert other Catholics to it. Here (Rosica’s blather,) we see the manifestation of the very Vital Immanentism so imbedded in the heresy of Modernism, exhibited in various writings of post-conciliar occupants of the Chair who taught that Christ was so enamored of the human being that He became one.
It was nauseating to see Wuerl smiling gleefully in greeting Francis, standing beside our also gleefully smiling horrible excuse for a president. And you say, Alarico– “straight from the mouth of Pope Paul VI.” I say-exactly.
dear brethren
While we’re on the topic-
Let’s consider & perhaps discuss a study on “Pre and Post Vatican II Canonizations”;— Fr. Benedict Hughes (including the very serious issues surrounding syncretist Mother Theresa )
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=peYeQ23b0iY
Dear Alarico-
For your consideration: http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2015/09/21/pope-francis-pope-paul-vi/
Thanks, de Maria. An important Catholic reality check.
PS. Important quote from the vid/talk: “the Novus Ordo church wants its ‘saints’…in order the ‘canonize’ VII.”
–
This talk clearly and plainly shows the mixing of truth and error in order to ‘canonize’ error. There is no concord between Christ and belial, no handshake between Truth and error. Padre Pio, even Pius IX are arrogated (basically kidnapped) by the Novus Ordo church in order to give the aura of Catholicism to their ‘s-ain’ts’ of error.
–
There is no concord between Christ and belial.
In case anyone is wondering what “Vital Immanentism” is, here is a good article on it:
–
http://fssp.com/press/2011/04/immanentism-catholicism-and-religious-experience-by-d-q-mcinerny-ph-d/
–