The Associated Press is reporting, and no doubt with considerable satisfaction, that Francis has charged so-called climate change deniers with being “perverse” concerning what he considers “one of the most worrying phenomena our humanity is experiencing.”
If only the Humble One’s propensity for dabbling in pseudo-science and name-calling was our biggest problem!
In a message to the Conference of States Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, His Greeness said (while quoting himself – one of his other favorite pastimes):
Unfortunately, many efforts to seek concrete solutions to the environmental crisis are often frustrated for various reasons ranging from denial of the problem to indifference, comfortable resignation, or blind trust in technical solutions (cf. Encyclical Laudato si’, 14).
We should avoid falling into the trap of these four perverse attitudes…
Francis reiterated his support for the Paris Agreement and its (allegedly) “clear path of transition to a low- or zero-carbon model of economic development,” exhorting the assembly:
I would like to reaffirm my urgent call to renew dialogue on how we are building the future of the planet.
Make no mistake, the planet “we” – meaning, Bergoglio & Co. – “are building” is the City of Man; one not just unlike the City of God, but rather one actively opposed to it.
The bottom line here is staggering and yet simple.
In his book, “The Fourth Secret of Fatima” (2009 English Publication, Loreto Publications), Italian journalist Antonio Socci offers details of a radio interview of Fr. Malachi Martin (who had read the Third Secret of Fatima) and his exchange with a caller:
A listener intervenes on the precise content of the Secret: making reference to confidences received from a Jesuit, he speaks of a Pope who “would be under the control of Satan. Pope John was reeling, thinking that it could have been him.” Father Martin responds: “Yes, it seems that this person would have had a means of reading or would have been given the contents of the secret.” Then he got to the heart of the matter: “it is sufficiently vague to cause hesitation, but it seems to be that.”
Can we be absolutely certain that the Third Secret of Fatima concerns a pope under the control of Satan?
No.
I’m not even sure how anyone can be absolutely certain that Francis is actually the pope!
That said, there can be no doubt whatsoever that Francis is – if not under the control of Satan – the Evil One’s most powerful servant alive and active in the world today.
With nearly every Bergoglian initiative – from the Synod charade, to the Year of Mercy masquerade, and his numerous ecumenical endeavors – if one but scratches the surface, there one will find evidence that Satan is writing the script.
And when I say “scratch the surface,” I mean just that – a mere scratch is all it takes.
A simple internet search of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (unfccc.int) reveals the undeniable presence of the diabolical:
Population Growth as a Variable
- “These false arguments [against coercive birth control and abortions] must no longer hold the poor to ransom. Globally, population growth is primarily driven by coercive pregnancy: where women and couples are not given informed choice to avoid pregnancy … Indefinite population growth is physically impossible on a finite planet. It must stop at some point: either sooner through fewer births by contraception and humane, pro-active population policy.” [Emphasis in original]
Ways to advance the goal of gender balance in the UNFCCC
- “…the creation of a fund to ensure that rural and poor women can access abortion services.”
Operationalizing a Gender-Sensitive Approach in th Green Climate Fund
- “An external evaluation of the Global Fund’s Gender Equality Strategy and Sexual Orientation and Gender Identities Strategy in 2011 pointed out that rather than relying on individual staff members, the implementation of gender-mainstreaming has to be understood as a Secretariat-wide priority.”
The curious can do their own internet search and within minutes unearth countless citations of a similar nature; more than can be read in a single day.
So, how bad is it?
After pledging his support for the efforts of the UNFCCC, and by appearance the endorsement of the Holy Catholic Church, Jorge Bergoglio – cashing in on his papal bella figura, whether real or imagined – concluded his message saying:
“This commitment is supported by the wise providence of God Most High.”
It’s high time for the milk-drinkers among us to throw away their sippy cups and come to terms with the bitter reality that is staring every authentic Catholic square in the face:
Satan has taken up residence in the Vatican.
Louie!
Please add this wonderful little video to the end of the article! It is most apt, and I highly recommend it to everyone as sometimes satire is the best way to put everything into context!
http://meddlingcatholics.com/2017/11/14/world-satirical-animated-video-pope-francis-interview-pt-1/
Yes i agree.Bergoglio is under the control of Satan,as is The Vatican, and it is very ,very dangerous indeed.Bergoglio mouths obscenities on a daily basis and his rhetoric,and tone and content are very disturbing.Pray,Pray,Pray.
If Bergolio is under Satan’s grip, so is every conciliar V2 NO prelate. You cannot criticize Bergolio without comdemning the entire post V2 structure and all who are associated with it and all who blaspheme the Bride of Christ by calling these apostates Catholic.
https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/the-green-pope-isnt-who-you-think-it-is-30552
“Can we be absolutely certain that the Third Secret of Fatima concerns a pope under the control of Satan?”
.
I concluded years ago that Third Secret speaks of a pope who is completely possessed and under the control of Satan. Not an antipope who is possessed, but a real pope who is possessed. That would explain why Sister Lucy, an child-like innocent soul, was unable to write it down.
If one is truly under the control of Satan than one would obviously not be culpable for anything they did after having been “under control”. I contend that jorge, like almost all vatican 2 prelates (and “priests), is simply a no good bum.
LOL…a possessed pope. Yeah, thats what it is. I guess his immediate vatican 2
predecessors were “possessed” as well?? You have a future in stand up comedy.
Another blog entry, another conspiracy theory.
You really think that God would permit the papacy to be controlled by the Devil?
I agree with Rich here, I’ve noticed that with virtually everything bad that’s being said about Pope Francis, Archbishop LeFebvre has already said something similarly rotten about Pope John Paul II and even Pope Paul VI years ago. Here follows an example of one such quote by Arch. LeFebvre in 1986 while PJPII was “leading” the Church. “The crisis is profound, cleverly organized and directed, and by this token one can truly believe that the master mind is not a man but Satan himself. For it is a master-stroke of Satan to get Catholics to disobey the whole of Tradition in the name of obedience.”
That’s well done. Thanks.
“God Himself made the Church a sharer in the divine magisterium and by His divine benefit UNABLE TO BE MISTAKEN.” Pius XI, Divini Illius Magistri, 1929
“NO ONE, therefore, UNLESS IN COMMUNION WITH PETER can share in his authority, since IT IS ABSURD TO IMAGINE THAT HE WHO IS OUTSIDE CAN COMMAND IN THE CHURCH.” Pope Leo XII, Satis Cognitum
“We ENACT, DETERMINE, DECREE and DEFINE (invocing infallibility) that IF EVER at ANY TIME it shall appear that ANY BISHOP…PRIOR TO HIS PROMOTION OR HIS ELEVATION AS CARDINAL OR ROMAN PONTIFF! HAS DEVIATED FROM THE CATHOLIC FAITH OR FALLEN INTO SOME HERESY…the promotion or elevation, even if it shall have BEEN UNCONTESTED and by the UNANIMOUS ASSENT of ALL THE CARDINALS, SHALL BE NULL. VOID. and WORTHLESS…”
“Those thus promoted or elevated shall be deprived AUTOMATICALLY, and WITHOUT NEED FOR ANY FURTHER DECLARATION, of ALL DIGNITY, POSITION, HONOUR, TITLE, AUTHORITY, *OFFICE and POWER….the laity…to avoid them as WARLOCKS, HEATHENS, PUBLICANS, and HERESIARCHS. NO ONE AT ALL…may infringe this document…or by rash presumption CONTRADICT IT. IF ANYONE, however, SHOULD PRESUME TO ATTEMPT THIS, LET HIM KNOW THAT HE IS DESTINED TO INCUR THE WRATH OF ALMIGHTY GOD AND OF THE BLESSED APOSTLES! PETER AND PAUL…” Cum Ex…Pope Paul IV
If the above applies to Bergoglio, then it is already PROVEN to apply to all these recent imposters. Simply refer to their heretical works prior to their “elevation”! Simple!
Don’t you see, by connecting yourself in ANY WAY to this OBVIOUSLY FALSE religion, and its PROPONENTS, as well as connecting yourself with ANY mere “Catholic” SECT not sent by Peter, you separate yourself from the true CHURCH.
These Masonic wolves playing “Catholic Church” have shoved all of the teachings such as the above into the catacombs, and the false teachings of Vatican II down our throats so that no one even KNOWS any longer what the TRUE CHURCH teaches about our circumstances, or where to even look. And we wonder at the immense confusion on just this one blog??
The Great Apostasy began 60 years ago! Connect the dots to prophecy! We are ALL guilty! Pray and BEG God for THE TRUTH! Let go of everything you think you know because truly you know NOTHING!
I am NOT a Sede. There is one last position – the most abhorred and persecuted of them all – but once God opens your eyes, it all becomes CRYSTAL CLEAR, but you must LOVE THE TRUTH and give ANYTHING for it. It also happens to be the forgotten one taken by the TRUE and FAITHFUL Catholics during the French Revolution.
Please for the love of God, if anyone desires to be a Catholic and to be saved, study at least the following documents, then come back and tell us how Francis is Pope, your local Bishop is bishop, and how you’re receiving valid Sacraments at your N.O. parish or trad sect, and how YOU know better than these HOLY POPES:
Apostolatus Officio, Pope Paul IV
Satis Cognitum, Pope Leo XIII
Mirari Vos, Pope Gregory XVI
Mystici Corporis Christi, Pope Pius XII
I do hope this helps someone.
Lord save us, we perish!!!
“Conspiracy theory” is a talismanic, hypnotizing, Pavlovian term designed to arrest all thought and discussion, similar to today’s ubiquitous cries of “RAAAAAAACISM!!!!” (Sadly, those pitiful white ethnomasochists now known as cuckservatives are most susceptible to melting away in quivering cowardice after hearing this latter word.)
Yes, God would allow the papacy to be controlled by the devil, just as he allowed St. Peter to deny him and just as he allowed a stinking Judas among The Twelve. Much more could be mentioned.
And OF COURSE he’s under the power of Satan. Anyone who is not in a State of Grace is under the power of Satan. That’s what our Faith teaches us. I can only HOPE and PRAY that I am in a State of Grace. Faith and Hope: I believe it was Our Lady of La Salette who stated a time would come when that would be all that we would have. It’s not in the future – it’s now and has been such for the last 50-60 years.
Does it make any difference if he is. I tend to be with Rich here, I think he’s a no good bum. A Marxist/Peronist/Globalist/atheist bum.
I shudder: it’s blasphemy to say that he is the Vicar of Christ…His Mouthpiece on earth…that the Holy Ghost would utter such vile blasphemies out of the mouth of the one who is to teach, guard and protect the sheep! Not lead them to eternal damnation!
You wrote: “I am NOT a Sede. There is one last position – the most abhorred and persecuted of them all – but once God opens your eyes, it all becomes CRYSTAL CLEAR, but you must LOVE THE TRUTH and give ANYTHING for it. It also happens to be the forgotten one taken by the TRUE and FAITHFUL Catholics during the French Revolution.”
For the love of God, don’t be obscure! Tell us plainly what this position is! (Home-Alone-ism?)
This is considered infallible: We declare, say, define and pronounce that it necessary for the salvation of every human creature TO BE SUBJECT TO THE ROMAN PONTIFF. – Pope Boniface VIII ( Unam Sanctum)
So Simple Beggar my question is how is it possible TO BE SUBJECT TO THE ROMAN PONTIFF thats NECESSARY for our salvation if there has been no ROMAN PONTIFF for last 60 years? And why would he state it this manner if he thought there was even a remote possibility that there could be no ROMAN PONTIFF in the future?
should read “ABSOLUTELY necessary for the salvation”, which makes conclusion of his statement about being SUBJECT TO THE ROMAN PONTIFF even more powerful.
Evangeline, but not as you write “he” meaning Pope Francis because Rich also included ALL VII prelates which logically would include ALL the VII popes.
Which makes Bergolio’s own refusal to be subject to the Roman Pontiff, an office he could have apparently occupied, all the more damnable and diabolical. Contemplate the malice of this man’s heart and will for a moment—a will so warped and prideful that he is capable of completely blocking out the tremendous force and grace of the Petrine Office. A devil-inspired man determined to use the Holy Office to in fact destroy the Catholic Magisterium and the Church along with it.
Bergolio in essense has rejected the authority of his own magisterium…..his own personal authority as Pope! He has done this by rejecting the Rule of Faith which lies at the essence and mandate of the Papal Office. As a public heretic he rejects the “Faith, apart from which, it is impossible to please God”—which flows naturally and necessarily from submission to the binding authority of the infallible Catholic Magisterium. He is in ESSENCE, “First Among Sedevacantists” in his total and complete rejection of the Papacy and is thereby properly rejected as a usurper and an apostate. Not only does not one sin by rejecting him as Pope, but one would in fact be sinning, if he did not do so.
Semper Fidelis, but by far Pope Francis isnt the first pope guilty of your accusations. Like I said earlier, everything you just condemned Pope Francis for Archbishop LeFebvre has already condemned, and even sometimes in worst terms, PJPII and PPVI for 30-40 years ago.
Have you read the history of the Papacy? There have been some very diabolical popes but fortunately there were also a goodly number of those right thinking religious who made sure they were eliminated and or replaced rather quickly. I wonder hos many right thinking men are in Vatican City now , given the fact that it ranks the highest city state by number of resident pedophiles in the world.
That is just pedophiles, what about those who are active sodomites? Appears pretty diabolical to me and to God if you read the Book of the Apocalypse.
http://torontocatholicwitness.blogspot.com/2017/10/breaking-vatican-city-state-is-ranked.html
Being under the power of Satan due to an unclean soul is much different than actually being possessed. Even those of us who are in the state of grace are constantly susceptible to Satan as that is the nature of man.
Sede’s do not reject the papacy. Sede’s reject anti-Catholic interlopers who claim the Seat. Sedevacantism is NOT a “branch” of Catholicism, it is simply Catholicism. Papolatry and the truth of sedevacantism are like oil and water. True Catholics (have to) bow down to the papacy regardless of who occupies it AS LONG as that man is a legitimate pope. Sede’s like myself bow down to the Papacy but NOT to the heathens who have falsely claimed to be the “pope” for the last 5 plus decades.
Hello Louie,
Our Lady of La Salette comes to fruition. I would love to see you make a YouTube video, I subscribed to your channel and it’s been awhile since you’ve uploaded one, this would be a good topic of conversation.
Given some of the obscene comments made by Malachi Martin ,I would believe nothing he says .his description of the Passion of Christ “He bled like a pig” ,what man of God would make comments like this ,other comments are too disgusting to mention. http://mauricepinay.blogspot.ie/2012/10/the-final-nail-in-malachi-martins-coffin.html
As Our Lady said at La salette , Rome will become the seat of the antichrist, funny how no one really believes her.
According to Our Lady the answer is a big YES
I agree with you, zara. Malachi Martin cannot be trusted.
Call me Jorge blog has a MASSIVE amount of information against this man.
If you are not a sede, then who do you believe is Pope?
Johnjobilbee, by your logic, no one is Catholic during interregnums since there is no Pope to be in union with. The standard sede position does not propose that there will never be a Pope again. Its just that these heretics cannot be true Popes based on their words and actions.
The fact of the matter with all of the popes since John XXIII is that not one of them have been formal heretics. Material heretics? Oh yes, and how. All of them.
Pope Francis is certainly on the threshold of formal heresy at this juncture. If he crosses the threshold then it’s almost certain he will abdicate the office of Peter. People much more better versed in canon law than I concur on this matter, so I trust their judgement.
As far as all these armchair sedevacantists who comment on here (and elsewhere online) are concerned : My grandfather used to say “If it looks like a duck, and it walks like a duck, it is a duck.” The same hold for the pope. If he wears the white cassock, lives in the Vatican, and was elected in conclave, then until otherwise proven he is the pope. And it’s NOT your place to either judge him, much less depose him. If he talks nonsense, just ignore him and do what’s within your purview to help others to see his nonsense for what it is. Most of what the pope says anyway (particularly these globe-trotter Popes we’ve had in recent decades) has little bearing on the Faith. In any case, the Church, and ultimately Christ, will judge him in due time. Not YOU.
That said, The church isn’t the pope. It’s the Mystical Body of Christ. Peter is Christ’s vicar; he’s not the Head. The Church will survive even if Peter runs amok, denies Christ, and/or his See is vacated. Don’t fret and fuss and fume about it endlessly. Yes it would terrible. Yes, some people will lose their faith. And yes, it could even be the beginning of the end of all things. But keep YOUR faith, keep YOUR sensus fidelium, resist the world, and seek out priests of the Church who offer the Mass and the other sacraments for YOUR sanctification and then BE AN ALTER CHRISTI, not a bitter neg-head.
I mean, did you really think that being a Catholic was going to be easy? Did you think it would all be High Masses and some fabled Great Catholic Monarch? No. It will be Calvary and the Cross and betrayal, because He told us so and because it was His lot before us. There is no resurrection without the Cross.
The Cross will never cease to be a scandal to even the most ardent Catholic until he or she truly embraces it.
By your logic Herman, we can also say, “If he looks like a heretic, acts like a heretic, speaks like a heretic, he is a heretic.” Your anecdotal wisdom from your grandfather cuts both ways. Christ did tell us that it is what comes out of ones mouth that defiles one. I would rather base my opinion on Bergolio on what he says and does then on what he wears or where he lives. In fact thats a good example because the imposter doesnt even live in the Papal apartments. Nor does he wear the customary red shoes of a Pope. So what are we to make of that?
This simple as a,b,c and crystally clear. Note the end of the Malachi quote.
Jesus: “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.”
Jorge Bergoglio: “No one is condemned forever.”
Inspired word of God in St. Paul to the Galatians: ” I marvel that you are turning away so soon from Him who called you in the grace of Christ, to a different gospel, which is not another; but there are some who trouble you and want to pervert the gospel of Christ. But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed. As we have said before, so now I say again, if anyone preaches any other gospel to you than what you have received, let him be accursed.”
Inspired word of God in Malachi 1: 6; 2: 7-9, 17: “A son honors his father, and a slave his master. If I am a father, where is the honor due me? If I am a master, where is the respect due me?” says the LORD Almighty. It is you priests who show contempt for my name. . . . And now, you priests, this warning is for you. If you do not listen, and if you do not resolve to honor my name, says the LORD Almighty, I will send a curse on you, and I will curse your blessings. Yes, I have already cursed them, because you have not resolved to honor me. . . . For the lips of a priest ought to preserve knowledge, because he is the messenger of the LORD Almighty and people seek instruction from his mouth. But you have turned from the way and by your teaching have caused many to stumble . . . So I have caused you to be despised and humiliated before all the people, because you have not followed my ways but have shown partiality in matters of the law. . . . You have wearied the LORD with your words. “How have we wearied him?” you ask. By saying, “All who do evil are good in the eyes of the LORD, and he is pleased with them”
As for me and my house, we’ll stick with Jesus.
Guy McClung, Texas
Good Friday morning Herman Newtick,
Please consider the following proof to follow, of the reality as Truth, that the so called, “second vatican council”, teaches material heresy as manifest heresy, and it is manifest because the so called, “conciliar popes and bishops”, hold it as their own teaching, for the past 52 years and counting, as they continue to propagate it unaltered in its material heresy, as though it could ACTUALLY BE the teaching of the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church. I pray that you will see how Lucifer and his slaves, who are the so called “conciliar popes, cardinals, and bishops”, have twisted this reality as Truth. As is evidenced in what you wrote here, you have fallen into deception, as have all as all of the so called, “Recognize and Resist” contingent, from Archbishop Lefebvre unto this time. Firstly you wrote:
“The fact of the matter with all of the popes since John XXIII is that not one of them have been formal heretics. Material heretics? Oh yes, and how. All of them.
Pope Francis is certainly on the threshold of formal heresy at this juncture. If he crosses the threshold then it’s almost certain he will abdicate the office of Peter. People much more better versed in canon law than I concur on this matter, so I trust their judgment.”
This is in error, as proven by the material heresy as manifest heresy, which the document, “Lumen Gentium”, in point 16 itself teaches. This is simply one example in the “conciliar” documents of material heresy being taught formally, as manifest heresy thus, for the past 52 years, as it has been and is taught by this facade of the Catholic Church, by each and every “pope in union with his bishops”, as they hold this heresy to be the teaching of Christ’s Church. This facade is all dressed up in the temporal edifice, formerly occupied and controlled by the One, True Church as founded by Jesus Christ on Peter, while at once this facade is devoid of all things Christ Jesus, His holy and perfect Sacraments, which He alone created as ex nihilo, for the sole purpose of our salvation. As to insure the loss of the Holy Sacrifice, which could still have been offered by truly as validly ordained priests, the false pope, Montini as Paul VI, changed the form of the Sacraments in June of 1968, which by its very nature thus, changed the intent of the Sacraments, as given to His Church by the Son of God. You cannot change metaphysical “form” without changing its metaphysical “act” (as “form” is in “act” not “potency”), which is what the sacraments as Sacraments do, and as given by Jesus the Christ, as intended thus by Holy Mother, His Church, in their “act” to do, which is the “intent” of Jesus the Christ.
Christ’s Mystical Body and spotless Bride, His Church, cannot teach heresy. Any Baptized person who holds the One, True Faith, as the “visible” Church in this world and free of the reception of the “operation of error” to believe lying as Truth, knows with the certitude of offering their very own life for this belief, that this is impossible for the Catholic Church to do, by the divine command of the Son of God made true Man in Matthew 16:18, and as taught by the true Church thus, over the centuries.
And now, as copied and pasted from the proof as written in this space days ago, here is that same proof of material heresy, as taught by a so called “pastoral council”, and as to be “pastoral” is to “give guidance”, which is to teach.
“JPeters: No dogma has been changed. They’re all still on the books and they are adhered to by many within the Church, such as myself and everyone I associate with. There is certainly confusion, as there was during the Arian crisis, but this is to be expected from time to time, since the Church is run by sinful men. If you read the history of the Church, you will find periods in which the Church appeared to be lost, but it always recovered and came out stronger than ever.”
At JPeters behest, please now examine the material heresy as manifest heresy, which the Luciferian council of so called vatican II taught, as to be pastoral is to give guidance, which is to teach. As any human person who holds the One True Faith within his deepest interiority understands with divine certitude, through that same divine light of Faith, that gift both freely given by the Holy Ghost and completely undeserved by the miserable human creature, as in Matthew 16:18, when the Church defines or TEACHES on Dogma and Morality, it carries with that teaching the divine charism of Ecclesiastical infallibility, as given not by the formulae of men which is gnostic from its essence, but by the divine Act of the Holy Ghost, protecting Christ’s Mystical Body, His spotless Bride the Church, from any iota of any iota of error. The reality as Truth is that if the true Pope with his true Bishops TAUGHT at any time in union, ANY IOTA OF ANYTHING, which places an affront to that which has been previously defined and rests then in the authentic Magisterium, they simply cannot be the prelates of the One, True Church, because if they were, then the gates of hell indeed prevailed against Christ’s Church, which we know is perfectly as infinitely impossible, because Almighty God gives that Reality as Truth its being in Matthew 16:18. Further, consider the command of Jesus the Christ in Luke 22: 31,32:
“And the Lord said: Simon, Simon, behold Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat: But I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not, and then, being once converted, confirm thy brethren.”
Any Catholic who holds the One True Faith as free of the “operation of error”, knows that if there is found to be any iota of heresy within that which is masquerading as a Council of Holy Mother Church, whereby a purported Pontiff is defining and/or TEACHING (read as “pastoral council”) in union with his purported Bishops, that it simply CANNOT be, with divine certitude, a Council of the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church. As if that could occur within a true Council of the Catholic Church, then Her indefectibility has been breached and that is ontologically impossible by the divine command of Christ Jesus. The so called “Second Vatican Council” teaches heresy as heresy in Lumen Gentium, the “Dogmatic Constitution on the Church”. It does this at point 16, which reads:
“Finally, those who have not yet received the Gospel are related to the People of God in various ways. There is, first, that people to which the covenants and promises were made, and from which Christ was born according to the flesh (cf. Rom. 9:4-5): in view of the divine choice, they are a people most dear for the sake of the fathers, for the gifts of God are without repentance (cf. Rom. 11:29-29) (sic). But the plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Moslems: these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind’s judge on the last day…”
Now to unpack the heresy. “But the plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator…the Moslems:..” The Catholic Church teaches now and unto the end of time as indefectibly that the singular, as only, as one, “plan of salvation”, includes the Catholic Church as the One True Church, outside of which there is no salvation, as “extra ecclesia nulla salus”, deFide. Let’s distill it down now to its fundamental subject and object. The subject is the “plan of salvation” whose object is “the Moslems”. This so called “Second Vatican Council” then teaches, as it is “pastoral”, in its “Dogmatic Constitution on the Church”–“Lumen Gentium”, that the object of Christ’s plan of salvation through His One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church, IS THE MOSLEMS. This satanic statement is unutterably stunning as it is breathtaking. It only gets worse in the second half. This second vatican council of Lucifer then commands: “…,and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind’s judge on the last day…”. This demonstrates the hubris of Lucifer himself: “…,and together with us…”, with “us” as those who “hold the Catholic Faith”. This council from hell develops conjecture abridged with the logical fallacy of the non-sequitur, the likes of which causes the cosmos to shudder, in the fear of the Righteous Wrath of Almighty God. “…,and together with us they adore the one, merciful God,…”. The summa and summit of heresy is to be found in this last piece. “…together with us”, means together with those who hold the One, True, Catholic Faith. It also means together with the Catholic Church thus. Together with the Catholic Church, the Moslems, “adore the one, merciful God,…”. Just who is the god which the Moslems adore? Their god is a singular deity devoid of divine Persons. How is it then that the Catholic Church adores the “…one, merciful God…”, together with the Moslems, who objectively adore a singular god, devoid of divine and Triune Personhood? They simply do not as they cannot, with divine certitude. Our Blessed Lord and Savior, our Redeemer and King of the Cosmos, which He created ex nihilo, tells us about the final disposition of those who deny Him as “I AM”. Jesus the Christ commanded that—He who denies Me, I will deny before my Father and He also commanded–Anyone who denies Me, denies the One Who sent Me. As the Moslems deny Jesus the Christ, Son of the Living God as God Himself, subjugating Him Who simply Is, to the level of mere creature as “prophet” and in fact a lesser prophet than the satanic “Mohammad”, they will be denied by Christ on their day of Particular Judgment, as they deny Him and by His command thus, deny the Father Who sent Him. So what god is left for the Moslems to adore but a singular god as Lucifer.
It should be pristinely as patently evident to anyone who holds the One True Faith, free of the “operation of error” thus, that the Catholic Church cannot speak of such evil as the privation of the due good, period and end. The Catholic Church CANNOT deny Almighty God Himself in His Triune Godhead, period and end. This “Second Vatican Council” from the bowels of hell itself, denies the Triune Godhead through their ipso facto proclamation of Almighty God in His Three Divine Persons, Who as One Intellect and One Will in Himself, and as Truth and Love Himself, as Deus Caritas Est, to be a singular god, the same god which those who hold a Satanic religion espouse.
Lastly then, Herman Newtick, you close your comment in reality as Truth, as you wrote:
“That said, The church isn’t the pope. It’s the Mystical Body of Christ. Peter is Christ’s vicar; he’s not the Head. The Church will survive even if Peter runs amok, denies Christ, and/or his See is vacated. Don’t fret and fuss and fume about it endlessly. Yes it would terrible. Yes, some people will lose their faith. And yes, it could even be the beginning of the end of all things. But keep YOUR faith, keep YOUR sensus fidelium, resist the world, and seek out priests of the Church who offer the Mass and the other sacraments for YOUR sanctification and then BE AN ALTER CHRISTI, not a bitter neg-head.”
In closing, what we have as existentially manifest in our very midst and for the past 59 years, is a church which is dressed up externally as the “Catholic Church”, while at once it is evident that the church which parlays this claim, simply cannot be the Church of Christ and therefore it must then be, as it only can be, the church of the Antichrist, as it remains the summa and summit of Lucifer’s deception. For there can be no greater deception, then for all but all of the Baptized 1.2 billion who profess to be Catholic, to actually as literally have fallen into manifest apostasy, while believing the lie as the Truth, that this conciliar, creature beast thing from hell, could actually as literally be, the One, True, Church founded by Jesus Christ, outside of which there is no salvation, deFide. To be in apostasy of course, is to be outside His Church, even if you believe that you are in it, as this is, “to believe lying”, as though it is Truth. This is the, “Great Apostasy”, as prophesied, and as we are living it. Christ admonished His disciples for knowing the signs of the weather, while at once not knowing the “signs of the times”. All those few who yet remain the world over, who hold the One, True Faith in their deepest interiority, and hold it there in love, as they remain as Christ’s visible Church in this world, can only do so by the reception of His grace of perseverance, and thus free of the “operation of error” (2 Thess 2) to believe lying, which takes souls to hell, as prophesied by Saint Paul. You see Herman Newtick, in reality as Truth, the so called “Sedevacantist” belief, does not profess to claim any “Pope as Pope” to be an heretic, and thus to have deposed himself, as those who hold this belief know with true Magisterial certitude, that the Baptized must submit to the teaching of the true Roman Pontiff without question or resistance, with the pain of suffering an eternity in hell as in schism, which is in opposition to Caritas, to Charity. What the belief is founded in, is the reality that a church which professes to be the Church, One, True, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic, and yet teaches material heresy as manifest heresy for 59 years and counting, simply cannot be the Catholic Church. Since this conciliar church, as hideous creature from hell thing, devoid at once of all things, True, Beautiful, and Good, cannot be the Church founded by the Son of God as the True, the Beautiful, and the Good, as Christ’s Supernatural Society of the faithful in this world, the Church Militant, the popes who profess to be “Popes” never have been as they never could have been, as this thing is not the Catholic Church. I pray this helps. In caritas.
They can say what they want about Malachi Martin now because he is dead. I knew the man and he was genuinely concerned about what Catholics, especially young Catholics would have to face in the new millennium. He left the Jesuits after Vat 2 because he saw where they were directed. RBK was institutionalized for mental problems but everyone seems to blame Martin for his wife leaving him. There is more to that story which is why Kaiser never publicly peeped until Malachi died.
As far as working for Bea while in the Vatican , it was his assignment .
Perhaps that is why he exited ? He certainly did not know Bea as well as one would think since he was surprised that the FBI questioned him in the hospital as to why Bea traveled with fake documentation.
One thing he did do was alert the laity to the sodomite creature clerical clique in his “Windswept House”, which opener the locked doors of so many minds laboring under a false piety.
He also finished a last book .called “Primacy” which was blocked from distribution by one very false friend whom I believe to this day , was appointed to watch him and make sure he did not spill the entire can of worms which had the book gone into print, would have done. But here we are , with our Jesuit Pope , learning first hand for ourselves.
The very fact that we ask the question as to whether Bergoglio is under the control of Satan is, in fact, an answer unto itself.
Is the length of your wind limitless?
Beautiful words Herman. You nailed it as far as sedevacantism goes.
And only yesterday Francis I, during an Euthanasia Conference at the Vatican, said that the last word should be with the patient and not the doctor, with no mention of God who gives and sustains all life until He decides to take it.
What does anyone expect from someone who said that Jesus ‘made himself the devil’?
Francis is being “dictated to by Satan” and needs to be removed, not least for his own good, if necessary by force.
Catholic men, especially those with military experience, when are you marching onto St Peter’s Square, demanding the abdication of this usurper of the Papal Throne, murderer of souls and enemy of Christ?
What better cause to give one’s life for?
Saint Peter and Saint Paul, pray for us!
I love how Herman scolds the sedes for “judging” the pope, however he himself has no problem making his own judgments vis a vis the pope. In his first paragraph he states and declares that no conciliar pope is a formal heretic but that they are simply material heretics. Who are you to judge, Herman? You see Herman and fellow RRers, your hypocrisy rises to the forefront with every “judgment” you pronounce against sedevacantism. For if we have no “authority” to say a man is pope or Catholic, then you have no “authority” to say he is pope or catholic. So please come up with some better arguments. I know with each passing day Bergolio makes your task harder and harder, but you need to come up with something new. Take a page from the NO crowd. They have no problems with novelty.
And if by chance Bergolio were forcibly removed, the same old heretics pretending to be catholic cardinals would just elect another heretic imposter like Cupich and the Fr Z types will start reading blaise thru benedict all over again and the lie will continue. The modernist are not going to self correct. You must avoid the entire NO apparatus and seperate yourself from them and their heresy. To remain in union with heretics is to be a heretic, no?
My thoughts, exactly.
How will you, TA, observe the upcoming Holy day of obligation, Dec.8?
I said it way back when it came out, but the “ecocyclical” was more alarming and damning than the anti-family synod. It shows his total commitment/complicity in the whole NWO program.
One word: Antipope.
Dear Fleur de Lis,
Back in the day when I was attending the local diocesan church, I naively asked the pastor what the Mass times were for Dec. 8th because it was not listed in the bulletin. He said he was unaware that Dec. 8th (Feast of the Immaculate Conception) was a holy day. This was one of my first clues that it was time to exit.
Not sure nothing would change, if there was an army of Catholics to reckon with.
As it stands the whole world is witnessing a “pope” destroying the Catholic Faith and Catholics merely standing by and letting this happen.
Why did the sedevacantists not act sooner? There is an imposter pope in the Vatican (or – according to the sedes – there have been a few of them since 1958), with no meaningful open challenge by the sedes in all those years.
Oh, I almost forgot, sede blogs like CMJ and NOW actually encourage their readers to get the popcorn out and sit back and enjoy the spectacle.
Our generation of craven cowards will be severely judged.
Lord have mercy on us.
Ursula,
The SSPX, under the current leadership, is witnessing a “pope” destroying the Catholic Faith and they are not just standing by and letting this happen, they are looking for recognition from this apostasy. That is what is so baffling and disturbing. Hopefully, the SSPX will get new leadership in 2018 and get back on track to “restoring all things in Christ.”
I am fortunate to have an SSPX and sede chapel within an hours drive. But even so, my obligation is to make the day holy. There is no authority to command faithful Catholics only Tradition. There are no Bishops left with jurisdiction except possibly in the Eastern Catholic Churches. I do not know if their rites of ordination were tampered with after V2. Welcome to the Great Apostasy.
Ursala, the best way to combat the modernist imposters is to delegitimize their authority. Which is exactly what the sede position attempts. However, we are totally ineffective since the vast majority of our fellow trads insist on calling these heretic imposters Catholic. It is quite frustrating to watch Bergolio deny his Catholic faith on a daily basis only to have the Michael Matts of the blogosphere keep propping Bergolio and his modernists henchmen up. You too, Ursala are guilty as long as you keep insisting that Bergolio is the actual Pope. For if he is Pope, then no power on earth has authority over him. But if he is an imposter, then the local dog catcher has enough authority to toss out the Arch Heretic Bergolio.
Tom, where have I ever ‘insisted that Bergoglio is the actual Pope’? In my posts today I called him “Francis I” and “imposter”.
In previous posts I have stated that someone who declares that “Christ made himself the Devil” cannot possibly be the Vicar of Christ.
I don’t have all the answers, but I know that the current situation is untenable, and that by God’s permissive Will we now have the shepherds we deserve (whether they are valid/invalid, licit/illicit, true or anti-pope(s)/bishops will be determined by the Church when it has been restored or at the General Judgement, whichever comes first).
Francis I needs to be removed before he does further incalculable harm and before any restoration can happen.
Yes, Herman, good and inspiring words about being Catholic. Definitely not for the faint of heart. What do you think your grandfather would say about the other pope, Benedict? Really, what, because I would like to know. Thank you for your inspiration!
The sede’s are right about Francis. Any Trad who thinks that a public apostate can retain command of the Catholic Church will find his position collapse under the weight of its own error. The Infallible Catholic Magisterium cannot be denied: no public heretic can retain his office in the Church. The R&R crowd no longer have a shred of credibility. Canon Law law is also firm on this point. The modernist church of man has publicly defected from the Catholic Faith first and foremost by denying that the Faith is fact Divinely Instituted, binding, and universal and For All. The deny the essence of the Faith. They demand their protestantized eucharist be For All but not the Divine obligation of the Faith. They have created a false cult of man worship. This fact is irrefutable to anyone with any semblance of an intellect.
Infallible Magisterial Teaching:
“But the mission of the Church is to save that which had perished. That is to say not some peoples or nations, but the whole human race, without distinction of time or place…. You are not to be looked upon as holding the true Catholic Faith if you do not teach that the faith of Rome is to be held.” Leo XIII Satis Cognitum
My apologies Ursala. I misread and went off without re-reading your post. Please forgive me.
Apology accepted, thank you Tom.
Thank you, Tom A.
Is the CMRI sede? I recently discovered a church within an hours drive, but am brought to tears thinking they have no authority and my confession and Holy Communion will be for naught
If validly ordained, then the Church supplies the jurisdiction in times of crisis. It doesnt matter if its sede or SSPX, they have no ordinary jurisdiction.
Ursula, please understand that I am not trying to be argumentative, and I do not disagree, for a moment, with anything you’ve said about the man who current sits on the Throne of Peter. Any serious Catholic who has been paying attention to what has been happening in the Church today should know this. It’s just that I genuinely have a difficult time seeing why he is “different” than the earlier men who were elected pope since Pope Pius XII.
While this man may is certainly disgraceful, and maybe even Satanically-controlled, I have a difficult time believing that he is “different” (as opposed to “worse”) than many (or even all) of the post-Conciliar men who were elected pope. John XXIII was the man who actually called the Council that triggered the current debacle, and Paul VI is the one who shoved the Novus Ordo Mass down our throats. John Paul II endorsed and proclaimed Universalism and gave us Assisi and its fallout. Were these actions not even more destructive to the faith than anything Francis has implemented?
Much more could be said about the anti-Catholic behavior of these earlier men, including the others who were elected pope since Pope Pius XII, but you get the point. Still, we (and I include myself as one who does not claim to be a Sedevacantist) seem to accept all these earlier men as “legitimate” popes and single out only Francis as the fraud or the anti-pope. Is it simply because Francis makes many more intemperate and outrageous statements? Is it only because of Amoris Laetitia and Laudato Si? If so, are we not reaching our conclusions based more on media coverage and “offensive beliefs” than specific actions that might support our beliefs?
And again, please don’t consider this post as either a defense of Francis or a criticism of your position on this matter. If anything, I’m asking why are we not just as outraged and just as willing to declare the earlier popes anti-popes as we do Francis? While I reject the Sedevacantist argument on what I understand as being sound Catholic reasoning, Tom A’s thinking seems to be far more consistent than mine––not that “consistency” is the be-all and end- all. Nevertheless, perhaps you have more enlightened thoughts on this issue and if so, I’d appreciate it if you’d be so kind to share them with us.
Tom A, speaking of interrugnams, maybe here’s an analogy, when a Pope dies, it could be said he’s dead “ipso facto” but even than we can only know this for sure after someone with Church AUTHORITY officially declares it. And even the church AUTHORITY would first have to wait for the AUTHORITY of a doctor to declare him officially dead just like they do when anyone dies.
So AUTHORITY is logically how God wanted to set things up in society starting first and foremost with Adam and Eve as an example as the AUTHORITY of parents in a family. And everything else since has logically been based on the model of an AUTHORATIVE family : governments, businesses, sports, any and every type of organization one can think of that strives to be orderly and succcessful. This is the logical principle started by God, including with His Church, that unfortunately sedes reject and as almost everyone from beginning of time realizes (of course, excluding sedes) will always only lead to the most chaotic scenario imaginable, even worse than the scenario of having Popes “under the control of Satan.”
The topic heading begs a deeper question.
Can any prelate no matter how senior, change or modify the truths of Christ without having first rejected Him and thereby placing himself under the control of the demon, (‘I will not serve’)?
Yes, johnjobilbee, authority is key to a well ordered society. The Church is the perfect society, founded on Jesus Christ. Today we witness chaos and the unstoppable promulgation of heresies from Rome. The Vatican is rife with sodomites. This chaos belies a lack of competent authority thus reinforcing the sedevacantist opinion. When a Pope dies, objectively the see is vacant when his last breath is expelled. Yes, the faithful need a competent authority to declare him dead. This authority is needed to remove doubts by declaring what is objectively true. The authority simply declares what God had objectively made manifest. The status of Bergolio (pope or not pope) is objectively made manifest by Divine Law. Sede’s hold the opinion that God has already deposed him or never permitted him to attain the office in the first place. We also hold that there is no competent authority to declare these facts for the same reason Bergolio is not Pope (Divine Law). Chaos is what we have. It is not what God wills for us, but it is a consequence of man dethroning Christ for the Cult of Man. These chaotic times were predicted by Our Lady at Fatima and La Salette.
More half-truths as usual. http://m.ncregister.com/daily-news/on-climate-change-pope-francis-builds-on-his-predecessors-positions#.Wg4sblko5qU
Dear Tom A,
You say: “validly ordained” — how would one determine that?
What about the Four Marks?
I ask in all honesty.
Irishpol: “Were these actions not even more destructive to the faith than anything Francis has implemented?” Well, here’s how I believe Archbishop LeFebvre already answered that question long ago during Pope John Paul II papacy: “…because the faith is being DESTROYED by men of the Church. By the Pope himself, the cardinals, the bishops, priests and nuns. It is the wholesale, worldwide, and RADICAL DESTRUCTION of the faith.”
So this was over 30 years ago when Pope John Paul II ( the Pope himself) and his dubia cardinals were the so-called “men of the Church. (as Arch. LeFebvre calls them) leading the charge towards the “wholesale, worldwide, and RADICAL DESTRUCTION of the faith”, which is why when I hear dubia cardinals and their Tino followers constantly complaining about Pope Francis as if he is the first Pope ever just now during last 4 years starting to DESTROY the Church I almost have to LOL but only if it wasn’t so disengenous of them to make such absurd comments or maybe, giving benefit of doubt, they are recent converts or something like that and just have no idea what Arch. LeFebvre said or who and what he was desperately fighting against.
So who will be the Catholic Church’s Knight in Shining Armor coming to the rescue? Is he on the horizon or no where to be seen. At this point, I haven’t got a clue. St. Michael the Archangel stood up to Lucifer. Let us pray to St. Michael and Our Lady to put an end to this horror. I don’t see any other answer. Dubias and “corrections” are futile when you are dealing with demonic forces. Heaven help us.
Dear Fleur de Lis,
The safe path is to stick exclusively with clergy who have been ordained in the traditional rite, by a Bishop who was made a Bishop and Priest in the old rite.
This would be the SSPX, SSPV and the CMRI. This would exclude the FSSP and the ICKSP, who are ordained in the old rite but by a bishop consecrated in the new rite.
When St Paul commands us, as Divine Law, to hold fast to tradition, this means all of it, including Holy Orders. There is always a penalty for going against Divine Law, and that may well mean invalid, or at best, doubtful Sacraments in this case.
Due to the unprecedented nature of the crisis, where the great apostasy is caused by what appears to be the authority of the Church Herself (which is why the deception is so wide spread; such a thing is actually impossible), the ordinary jurisdiction which ought to be in operation through the diocesan bishop has largely broken down.
So Our Lord supplies jurisdiction to the remaining truly ordained clergy to administer the Sacraments in this extreme necessity.
Fleur, we know with certitude that the Rites of Ordination and of all the Sacraments were valid prior to the 1960s. As far as the validity after the 60s? Well we only the words of modernists to go by. All the sacraments were vandalized by the modernists to the point that most of them are now doubtful.
I think all these quotes used by sedes about popes being excommunicated “ipso facto” or losing their office automatically could be like any laws or law books wheras they inform us of the laws with the logical assumption that logically someone in authority must enforce them. Example maybe in sports you could read something like in the rule book that it’s “automatic ejection” for a pitcher that intentionally throws at a batters head. But logically we know that even thousands of fans at a game, knowing the written rule, and despite that a pitcher may have even thrown at a batters head 4 times in a row, still only an umpire in AUTHORITY has to make the call no matter how obvious it may be to the fans the pitcher broke the rules in rule book or all kinds of chaos would break out every single game. In other words its less chaotic to have the worst umpire of all time than having no umpire at all to avoid and to protect against this type of chaotic situation from happening in the Church thats why I believe the Church teaches NO ONE (especially lay people who are even below the bishops that can’t) HAS AUTHORITY or can depose of a Pope no matter how bad because it would make a bad situation even worse and more chaotic. That makes perfect sense to me and why I conclude our punishment is not having any pope but just really bad ones. Not a perfect analogy I know but this kind of explains at least one reason I cant accept sede beliefs.
2 Cents I am with you in your sentiments here.
I think things are much farther along them we even know.
Pray the Rosary daily !
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=AXl8PPBGwiY
Irishpol, I agree with your and johnjobilbee’s comments. Of course Francis is only taking the revolution forward, at an accelerating pace, at multiple levels at any one time, and more open about his anti-Catholic ideas. In addition to being a heretic and blasphemer, there are also doubts about the resignation of Benedict XVI and questions about the manner in which Bergoglio was elected, as well as an unprecedented situation of two “bishops in white”, living at the Vatican, with the ‘pope emeritus’ behaving more pope-like than his “active” counterpart.
At least Francis’ predecessors were publicly seen to honor Our Lord, especially in the Eucharist.
The most tragic omission in history is the fact that Catholics did not protest visibly and strongly enough when Paul VI introduced the Novus Ordo Mass. An army of people praying the rosary in or near the Vatican for the intention of preserving the Mass of Ages and of the Saints might have been enough at the time…But does failure to act in the past justify continued inaction?
Thank you, Cortez. Yes, excommunication from this false church is a badge of honor! Double excommunication is even better!
Thank you for this Cortez !
Ursula, your comment that Catholics did not protest visibly and strongly enough when Paul VI introduced the Novus Ordo Mass struck a chord with me since I was alive then.
You must understand what influences were at work at the time. First, Catholics had already been subjected to the liberalism within the hierarchy, at least in the U.S., in Germany, France, Italy, Belgium and other countries prior to Vatican II. In other words, Catholics were already being indoctrinated into the synthesis of heresies, Modernism, and being catechized by a majority of the hierarchy who were liberal and amenable to the changes the revolutionary forces (Freemasons, Communists, Socialists, Progressives) who even Popes Gregory XVI, Leo XIII, Pius IX, Pius X, Pius XI, and Pius XII were unable to eradicate.
Secondly, you must consider that as Catholics, we must be obedient to legitimate authority. What do you think the average layman could have done if he/she protested to his/her liberal, Modernist bishop and what do you think the response would have been? He/she would have been told in no uncertain terms that this is the teaching of the Church now and one must obey the Pope and the Bishop. This was, in fact, the response the few of us in my parish were given at the time. (Tragically, this parish was established by faithful, hardworking Polish who had, for generations, contributed their money and their labor to build the church and supply almost everything in it.) We few were also ostracized by the majority who went along with the “reforms” as they said they were being faithful to the Pope and our Bishop and we were simply troublemakers that might want to join another religion!
You see Ursula, I was raised a Protestant and joined the Catholic Church, against the wishes of every member of my family, when I was 18 so I saw how the Novus Ordo was transformed into a Protestant, man-worshipping service and no longer the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass that was one of the determining factors in my conversion. To me, it was always an abomination. After I did some extensive research, I learned why and by whom this transformation occurred and it is nothing but diabolical.
What happened was the forces of evil used our duty and responsibility to obey authority against us and used the tactics always used by revolutionaries to con Catholics into believing nothing had changed.
Johnjobillbe: “I think all these quotes used by sedes about popes being excommunicated “ipso facto” or losing their office automatically could be like any laws or law books wheras they inform us of the laws with the logical assumption that logically someone in authority must enforce them. EXAMPLE MAYBE IN SPORTS YOU COULD READ SOMETHING LIKE IN THE RULE BOOK THAT IT’S “AUTOMATIC EJECTION” FOR A PITCHER THAT INTENTIONALLY THROWS AT A BATTERS HEAD. But logically we know that even thousands of fans at a game, knowing the written rule, and despite that a pitcher may have even thrown at a batters head 4 times in a row, still only AN UMPIRE IN AUTHORITY HAS TO MAKE THE CALL NO MATTER HOW OBVIOUS IT MAY BE TO THE FANS the pitcher broke the rules in rule book or all kinds of chaos would break out every single game.”
.
JPeters: Perfect analogy! The “ipso facto” loss of jurisdiction for a pope happens only when the Church (the umpire) renders a judgement that he is a heretic. That is when he ceases to be pope. It doesn’t happen before the Church render a judgment, any more than a pitcher who intentionally throws at a batter’s head is automatically ejected from the game before the umpire renders a judgment.
.
If we apply the idiotic SV “reasoning” to your excellent baseball analogy, every time a fan personally judged that a pitcher intentionally threw at a batter’s head, they would have to conclude that the pitcher was automatically ejected from the game – even if he remained on the mound and continued to pitch! The SV would simply pull out the rule book, point to the section on “automatic ejection for throwing at a batters head,” and then declare, on their own authority (and contrary to all evidence) that the pitcher was now out of the game. Your analogy is perfect.
.
The fact that the pitcher threw at the batter’s head has to be judged by an authority before the automatic penalty has any effect, and if the authority does not render a judgment, the pitcher remains in the game. The exact same is true for a pope who falls into heresy. Until the Church renders a judgment, no automatic loss of jurisdiction occurs.
.
And if anyone rejects the analogy based on the idea that it is forbidden for the Church to “judge” that a pope is a heretic, and then, based on this, concludes that a heretical pope must fall from office BEFORE the judgment is render, you are wrong. The Church IS permitted to render a certain form of judgment against a pope. This is proven from the fact that numerous popes have requested that the Church “judge” them when they were accused of a crime they knew they did not commit.
.
These popes willfully submitted to the judgment of a council to clear their name, which proves that it is not absolutely forbidden for the Church to judge a pope. What the Church cannot do is “judge and punish,” or “coerce” a pope. But it can render a factual judgment if he is suspected of heresy.
Thanks for this, Katherine, you have been one of the relatively few who have tried to do something at the time.
It is indeed frightening how thoroughly this has been planned, so long ago, and how these revolutionaries have conditioned us, so they could carry out the takeover of the Church Hierarchy with very little opposition.
All the more reason for the Church Militant to act now!
We need both an army of people praying the Rosary AND and a military force.
Well as a fan in the stands Im perfectly comfortable to make the call that the game is a sham and I’m not sitting around waiting for the crooked umpire to continue throwing the game 1919 World Series style. I’m taking my popcorn and leaving. If you fools still want to waste your money supporting a an openly crooked league that threw out the rule book back in 1962 go ahead.
As a Roman Catholic I’m capable of seeing Bergolio as the apostate he is (an objective fact) and refusing to acknowledge him as pope. Simply because if I follow that man’s teaching then I’m headed for perdition. Can I walk into the Vatican and depose him? Of course not, but I’m honor bound to Our Lord to reject a man who himself rejects the authentic and infallible Magisterium of the 265 Popes that preceeded him. You guys are nothing but mutineers, following a man who has overthrown the King’s orders and commandeered his vessel. This is plain for all to see. Who will the King punish when he gets hold of the mutineers?
Good Sunday evening JPeters,
What you and all those who identify themselves as the cadre of, “Recognize and Resist” believers, continue to do incessantly as pertinaciously, is to suggest that anyone as anyone can place an affront to the teaching of a true Pope in union with his Bishops, anywhere as anywhere, and still remain in the Church, as opposed to being in schism from the Church latae sententiae, consequent to the placing of an affront to the Charity of which the true Vicar of Christ preserves in toto. This is perfectly contrary to the perennial teaching of the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church. Provide one example whereby prior to the “second vatican council” as from hell and not Heaven, any prelate or laymen individually or collectively sent letters indicting a pope of heresy as material heresy, then made manifest from his writings in an Encyclical (Amoris Laetitia) no less, and if this did occur, where they themselves were not later found to be heretics and/or schismatics?
In your unmitigated hubris, you as all the “R and R” contingency, manifest the existential realization of the reception of the “operation of error”, in an ipso facto understanding, of which Saint Paul himself prophesied would indeed have being in its due time, to believe the lie as Truth, and further he said that this reception will lead souls to “perish”. Jesus the Christ commanded that we will know them by their fruits and again, that we will “KNOW them”, as by their fruits (as an ipso facto recognition of them, by their fruits). He commanded us in Matthew 7:15-21 thus:
“Beware of false prophets, who come to you in the clothing of sheep, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. By their fruits you shall know them. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit, and the evil tree bringeth forth evil fruit. A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can an evil tree bring forth good fruit. Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit, shall be cut down, and shall be cast into the fire. Wherefore by their fruits you shall know them. Not every one that saith to me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven: but he that doth the will of my Father who is in heaven, he shall enter into the kingdom of heaven.”
And thus JPeters, do you actually posit claim to be doing the Will of the Father, by “recognizing and resisting”, the one man which God Himself has ordained His Vicar on earth, if validly placed into His true Church, and as freely accepting the Chair of Saint Peter, to guard and protect the One true Faith in Charity from one iota of one iota of error, this spotless, Mystical Body and Bride of Christ Jesus, His Beloved Son? If you stake your claim to this reality, and as this reality is objectively contrary to the Will of the Father, that is to place an affront to the Vicar of His Son in His true Church, and that by “recognizing and resisting” him in his teaching in union with his Bishops, as an Encyclical objectively is (a Pope teaching in union with his Bishops, period and full stop.), then Christ Himself has already warned you of your eternal disposition—“shall be cast into fire”.
Christ also warned those who claimed that He came to bring peace, as He commanded that He came not to bring peace but the sword, as it is in division, that the truth springs forth and is plainly seen. These realities are hard, as the “Bread of Life Discourse” is hard, and most of His disciples left Him then as well, as only the Twelve remained. You remain perfectly as fully blinded to what the reality as Truth is, in regard to the true Sedevacantist position, which is in fact not placing a judgment upon a true Holy Roman Pontiff at all, as no one on earth has the power to do in fact (but only in theory has this been proposed), as those who hold the One, True Faith within their deepest interiority—that which remains of the Church Militant—as the visible Church in this world, know with the certitude of offering their very lives for this belief.
In closing then, the true Sedevacantist will never stake claim for himself, nor for any other human person or persons in the cosmos, as to be able to judge a true Holy Roman Pontiff as to be an heretic, materially or formally. What do you posit Christ Jesus our Lord and our King to have meant when He commanded: When the Son of Man returns, will He find any faith left on the earth? Do you really believe, really and truly, that He meant there would be 1.2 billion Baptized “Catholics” on the earth? To suggest so is simply absurd on its face. The Great Apostasy, which we now find ourselves as existentially within, by virtue of its very nature as “Great” and as “Apostasy”, means there will be few Baptized left on the face of the earth, who actually hold the One, True Faith within their hearts and to do this, one must be free of the “operation of error” to believe the lie as Truth, which causes the souls then in Apostasy to “perish”, as proclaimed by Saint Paul. The “big lie”, which all but all today believe, as they fall victims to it while receiving the “operation of error”, is the greatest lie that has ever befallen this earth. That lie, is the creature beast thing from hell, which calls itself “Catholic”, as the so called “conciliar church”. While at once all dressed up temporally as the “Church” and while also fully controlling the temporal edifice, it is perfectly devoid of all things Christ Jesus, the Sacraments, as it simply CANNOT be the Catholic Church, as it teaches heresy in its council from hell, as the so called, “Second Vatican Council”, does. This has been proven in this combox space, as “Lumen Gentium”–point 16, remaining yet without challenge.
Finally then, as the Catholic Church cannot place a literal affront to its very Creed, which identifies Almighty God as being Three Divine Persons in One God, and as so called “Lumen Gentium”–the “Dogmatic Constitution on the Church”– does at point 16, which is to deny God in His Triune Personhood, as “Lumen Gentium”–16, actually as literally declares that the “Moslems”, “…together with us they adore the one, merciful God”. As “Lumen Gentium” at point 16 makes this objective claim, the “God” which the “second vatican council” there declares the One True God as Three Divine Persons to be, is the singular deity god of the “Moslems”, a false god, a demon thus. This is the only possibility to be known with ontological certitude, as one “esse” deemed to be the same as another “esse”, must reduce then to its least common “esse”, once proven in objective fact, not to be in reality as Truth indeed, “the same esse”, as the “same God”, as the council from hell claims, “…together with us, they adore the one, merciful God. So I pray you see JPeters, for the purpose of your very own eternal salvation, that the true Sedevacantist position casts no judgment upon any true Pope nor does it accept anyone who does so, as you and all of your “R and R” cadre of believers claim to be possible. Rather, the true Sedevacantist position simply acknowledges in this time that the “Church” which calls itself “Catholic” teaches heresy, as it embraces the council from hell unedited now for 52 years, and in that embrace it continues to reference that council in its “papal” documents over those same 52 years, fully engraining that heresy unto itself. As this “thing” cannot be the Catholic Church founded by Jesus the Christ, Son of the Living God as God Himself, those who claim themselves as “pope” of this same “thing”, are simply not the “Pope” of the “Catholic Church”, as the Church simply CANNOT both “be the Catholic Church” and “not be the Catholic Church”, at the same time and under the same respect as “Catholic Church”, with the ontological certitude of the law of non-contradiction. In His peace. In caritas.
Katherine and Ursula,
What you are saying here reminds me of Archbishop Lefebvre’s words:
“Satan’s masterstroke is to have succeeded in sowing disobedience to all Tradition through obedience.”
Johnjobilbee and Jpeters, where your baseball analogy falls apart is in the premise that the Pope is subject to an earthly umpire. There is simply by de fide Church magesterial teaching, no earthly power or authority over the Pope. The pope can hit all the batters he wants and no one can throw him out. Now if he hits batters and then calls it a strike, it becomes obvious that the game is rigged. This is what us fans in the stand are witnessing. The “umpire” is not following the rule book at all. When that happens, the game is no longer baseball, it become corrupt. You can hang around 9 innings thinking its baseball, but you will only be fooling yourself.
When there are black masses and pop concerts at St Peter’s that are chock full of satanic symbols – it’s hardly a stretch to suppose that there’s a fair number of people inside the Vatican who have signed up with Lucifer. Ergo there most definitely are people who are willingly and knowingly under satan’s control and are 100% culpable. Read Chiesa Viva and when understand the truth of what you’re talking about you’ll be able to make informed judgements. You’re confusing demonic possession with being a card carrying Luciferian.
Given that today’s world makes the people of Sodom and Gomorrah look like a bunch of wimps I’d say that God has ‘withdrawn His Mercy’ from an ungrateful, selfish, willfully blind people who have decided to ignore the Sacrifice Jesus made on Calvary in favor of following the evil one. To show us what happens when we reject God HE is now showing us how MUCH we need Him. It’s not “allowing evil” it is a good hefty dose of tough love!
Since, in spite of the warnings of Fatima, Akita, Lourdes, Guadeloupe, La Salette, Our Lady of Good Counsel and countless Saints, things are getting worse by the day, the next stage is the Chastisement. Whether it is the “Annihilation of nations” as promised by Our Lady or the 3 days of darkness – it isn’t going to be pretty and NO-ONE will escape it. We can’t say we weren’t warned.
To prattle about “conspiracy theories” shows that you have no clue what’s just around the corner.
Whenever there is a bad pope [ or string of bad popes ], the Chair of St Peter is NEVER vacated. St Peter resumes his position as Head of the Church. Christ promised “I will not leave you orphans!”
Saint Paul said that “Even if an angel came down from Heaven and changed Sacred Scripture by one jot – LET HIM BE ANATHEMA!
Our Lady of Fatima said that the Apostasy in the Church would start at the top and that she wept because of the millions of souls hurtling to Hell because of bad priests and Prelates leading them astray.
Johnjo – with respect, you sound like one of those souls. When the Pope is preaching heresy you have 2 choices…..[1] Obey him no matter what and Dig up an old quote telling you must obey him no matter what, and stick to it like glue even if it means endangering your soul OR [2] Obey the Holy Spirit and Sacred Scripture. No man can serve 2 masters. The Chair of St Peter is never vacant. HE resumes his former position.
Thank you for your balance view. I’d say it wouldn’t be the first time that the Vatican bring out the heavy guns to discredit anyone who delves too deeply into the mire that exists just under the veneer ! Look at Cardinal Pell – a good man who was JUST about to take the lid off the Vatican Bank and lo and behold – within days decades old unsubstantiated claims of sexual abuse re-surfaced and he was on the first plane to Australia!
Pope Benedict openly criticized pope Bergoglio and Bingo! The next day 20-30 year old claims of sexual abuse surfaced about his brother when all he ACTUALLY did was slap a couple of choirboys for disrupting choir practice!
http://angelqueen.org/2017/11/19/seminary/
Another sad video.
You are in error Herman, and in fact you even contradict yourself….
You say:
“If he wears the white cassock, lives in the Vatican, and was elected in conclave, then until otherwise proven he is the pope. And it’s NOT your place to either judge him, much less depose him”.
My CAPS for emphasis for you also state:
“If he crosses the threshold then it’s almost certain HE WILL ABDICATE the office of Peter. People much more better versed in canon law than I concur on this matter, so I trust THEIR JUDGEMENT.”
Complete self-refutation of your anti-sede argument. Also, Canon Law itself only requires that the heresy be “public” and not “formal” for someone (YES even the Pope–See Canon 1488 of 1917 Code) to lose their office. New 1983 Code also uses the word “public” not “formal”.
This is for two reasons:
1. The open heresy of a member of the Church hierarchy is assumed to be formal, given the level of theological training plus the high level of responsibility that any Catholic priest, Bishop, Cardinal, or Pope is supposed to adhere to. They are not mis-informed or naive laymen and there heresy is infinitely more serious due to their positions of responsibility! Thus, the burden of proof is on the clergyman who comes off as a public heretic to prove he is Catholic, not on his accuser to prove him not so! Thus, there is no burden of proof on the Dubia Cardinals, only Bergolio. 400 days of willful silence later, the fact of his formal heresy is beyond any about.
2. Not every heretical cleric can reasonable be expected to be put on trial in a formal inquisition to ascertain the crime of heresy. There are times, a la the 1500’s or the 300’s, when clerical heresy is so rampant, that it is simply impossible to put every heretical Bishop on trial in a formal process. Thus, mere “public heresy” suffices for automatic loss of office. This is directly cited by the great Saint Robert Bellarmine who also applied this principle to Pope Liberius. Basically, regardless of whether or not he was an actual heretic, he appeared so to the Roman clergy, who in the Doctor’s argument were rightly to have rejected him as Pope in favor of Felix, since people can only be expected to judge externals and the facts as they see them. This passage of Bellarmine is NEVER cited by the R&R crowd as it completely disproves the requirement of some type of trial or stamp/judgement of “formal heresy” that they erroneously subscribe to. For Saint Bellarmine, as a Catholic in 2-17 I am completely within my right to reject Bergolio as a heretic, since he is so publicly and manifestly so. Full stop. As in the 4th or 16th Century, heresy is so widespread among the hierarchy as to render a formal judgement impossible under current circumstances.
TomA: “Johnjobilbee and Jpeters, where your baseball analogy falls apart is in the premise that the Pope is subject to an earthly umpire. There is simply by de fide Church magesterial teaching, no earthly power or authority over the Pope.”
.
JPeters: It is true that no earthly power has authority OVER a pope and therefore cannot punish or coerce him, but an earthly power can render a factual judgment that a pope has fallen into heresy. In fact, it is even true that an earthly power can render a factual judgment about a pope who is accused of other crimes, since this has happened many times with the approval of the sitting pope. This latter point proves that the factual judgment is not rendered only AFTER a pope falls from office (as the SV heretics claim), since these factual judgment were rendered against popes whose legitimacy no one denied.
.
Lastly, if you believe the phrase “the first see is judged by no one,” means the Church is forbidden to render a factual judgment about a sitting pope, then please cite a magisterial document that defines the phrase that way. I can guarantee that you will never be able to produce any such definition, since that is not how the Church understands the phrase. Factual judgments are permitted against a sitting pope, as Bellarmine himself teaches.
I fear you’re quite right.
Jpeters, churchmen can render any sort of judgment they wish, but it carries no weight seeing how no earthly power can judge the Pope. Churchmen in the past have rendered many judgments only to have the Pope comfirm or overrule them. So I am missing your point. If Burke wanted to, he could issue any sort of correction in any format he chooses. It will have no authority over Bergolio nor the universal conciliar church unless Bergolio agrees. Also, the judgment of fact issued by Burke declaring Bergolio a heretic (if it ever were to happen) would simply be an acknowlegment of the objective order. Yes it would be highly desirable to allieviate confusion and chaos but any formal declaration is not required for Bergolio to be deposed. Divine Law and authority would have already deposed him.
Ursula, your comment that Catholics did not visibly and strongly protest enough when Paul VI introduced the Novus Ordo, reminded me of the changes Pope Pius XII made to the liturgy for Holy Week and how controversial (to some) they were.
Some commentators have said that if not for these changes, there may not have been the Novus Ordo.
One commentator, for example, stated: “In short, the 1955 Holy Week reform, whatever the degree of Pius XII’s complicity in it, was a papally-backed mechanism for re-ordering the liturgy to incorporate the basic wishes of the progressivists and to begin implementing their ideas for future changes. That is how the will of Bugnini’s Commission triumphed – and thus inescapably stifled opposition.”
Note that Pope Pius XII established in 1948 a Commission for the General Reform of the Liturgy and named Fr. Annibale Bugnini its Secretary. Bugnini (some claim he was a Freemason) went about his task of overhauling the Church’s most ancient and venerable ceremonies.
Secrecy paramount, ethics thrown to the winds
Bugnini’s penchant for secrecy informed all his actions. He had been making clandestine visits to the Centre de Pastorale Liturgique since 1946, the year in which Pius XII requested Card. Carlo Salotti, the Prefect of the Congregation of Rites, to begin forming a project for the general reform of the liturgy.
Bugnini himself admitted that his Commission met “in absolute secrecy.” He transmitted selective information via Fr. Augustin Bea and Msgr. Giovanni Battista Montini (the future Pope Paul VI) “up the back stairs,” so to speak, to the Pope, kept the Sacred Congregation of Rites in the dark and sprang the first of the Holy Week reforms on the unsuspecting faithful in 1951.
In fact, so secret was the work of the Commission on this project that Bugnini (allegedly known as Brother Buan in Freemasonry) admitted that “the publication of the Renewed Order for Holy Saturday at the beginning of March 1951 caught even the officials of the Congregation of Rites by surprise.” If even the Congregation knew nothing of the projected Easter Vigil reform until it was formally proclaimed, one wonders at the integrity of Card. Clemente Micara who was simultaneously President of Bugnini’s Commission and Pro-Prefect of the Congregation of Rites. In fact, it was Micara who signed the Decree publishing the new Order of Holy Saturday.
This raises the question of collusion with Bugnini, and whether the Easter Vigil reform had been, as it were, stitched up between them.
Without such papal backing, the work of the Commission would have ground to a halt.
But with the power of the Pope behind it, Bugnini’s Commission became an end in itself, unchallengeable and unquestionable, the ultimate bureaucratic weapon against all objectors. It would grow into a global, powerful and unaccountable industry forcing the world’s Bishops, willy-nilly, to toe the Bugnini line.
And the truth is, it is not generally appreciated just how controversial the 1951-1955 Holy Week reforms were in their day. Historical records exist to show that they were vehemently criticized by many Bishops, priests and lay people on account of the radical nature of the changes then initiated.
Among the most outspoken critics was Msgr. Léon Gromier, a distinguished Prelate of the Papal Household and a Canon of St. Peter’s Basilica. As a consulter to the Congregation of Rites since the time of Pope Pius X, he was in a position to speak with authority on the Holy Week ceremonies. His knowledge was legendary on all liturgical subjects from bugia to buskins and falbalas to faldstools, which made him the strongest of advocates for arguing the case for the traditional rites.
Msgr. Gromier, who had been publicly criticizing the Liturgical Movement since 1936, gave a conference in Paris in 1960. In it he excoriated the 1955 Holy Week reforms, exposing the false liturgical science and the false reasoning behind them.
He did not hesitate to describe them as an “act of vandalism,” “an immense loss and an outrage to history,” “the negation of reasoned principles” and the product of a “pastoral mentality impregnated with a populist attitude, unfavorable to the clergy.” With reference to the liturgists who produced the reforms, he lamented that their “discretionary powers are vast, as are the abuses.”
Objections from Bishops to the interim Holy Week changes of 1951 poured into the Vatican with requests to leave the traditional rites intact. The final and obligatory reform of 1955 was vigorously opposed by more Bishops, for instance Card. Francis Spellman of New York and Arch. John Charles McQuaid of Dublin (on the grounds that it might destabilize the faith of the Irish people).
Among the laity, the Catholic newspapers of 1955-1956 were rife with objections (for example, The Catholic Herald and The Tablet. The novelist, Evelyn Waugh, who had converted to Catholicism, considered the changes ruinous to his spiritual life and a danger to the faith itself, particularly among simple folk. Writing in The Spectator in 1962, Waugh stated: “During the last few years we have experienced the triumph of the ‘liturgists’ in the new arrangement of the services for the end of Holy Week and for Easter. For centuries these had been enriched by devotions that were dear to the laity – the anticipation of the morning office of Tenebrae, the vigil at the Altar of Repose, the Mass of the Presanctified. It was not how the Christians of the second century observed the season. It was the organic growth of the needs of the people,” (apud Scott Reid, A Bitter Trial: Evelyn Waugh and John Carmel Cardinal Heenan on the liturgical changes, London: St Austin Press, 1996, pp. 24-25.)
But, disregarding warnings about the consequences of changing long-established patterns of worship – the new rites would endanger the habitual, ingrained attitudes to the faith of devout Catholics – Pius XII issued his new liturgical laws and instructions in Maxima Redemptionis in 1955, and made the traditional rites illegal:
“Those who follow the Roman rite are bound in the future to follow the Restored Ordo for Holy Week… This new Ordo must be followed…”
Pius XII used legislation to introduce arbitrary and unnecessary changes devised by revolutionaries. This put the law-abiding Bishops (who placed obedience to the Pope as their foremost duty) into an untenable position: They were thus maneuvered into implementing the reforms that they objected to on grounds of the Faith. In other words, giving them no choice but to comply forced them to act against their principles and their conscience.
And because Maxima Redemptionis legitimated the actions of progressivist clergy who had been implementing the reforms without the Pope’s authority for decades, it was a document fundamentally biased against the traditional rites.
Thank you again Katherine – I have read about the changes to the Holy Week on the rorate-caeli and traditioninaction websites, and now you have given me lots of additional information. It is so incredibly sad. How immensely painful it must have been to consciously witness all these changes over so many decades! Having been born after Vatican II, I only came to Tradition a few years ago. The realisation of what they have stolen from us, has been at times unbearable. At least we can offer up this suffering. And keep looking for the Truth!
Thank you very much, JPETERS, for better clarifying the point I was trying to make with my baseball analogy. Dominus Vobiscum
Very interesting, Katherine, never saw that info before but after reading also has to make one wonder (at least me anyway) about the credibility of one of the favorite sede sites on the internet Novus Ordo Watch who actually decided to make a video “to remember and honor” PopePius XII. Wow. https://novusordowatch.org/2017/10/in-memory-of-pope-pius12/
Also got me to thinking about something else, if it was true that a Pope is “ipso facto” due to heresy, which I disagree with due to sedes misinterpretation of what exactly “ipso facto” means when referring to a Pope, but for sake of argument say it is true than how is it that different sede groups have defined different Popes as when the seat became empty. For example I believe CRMI believe it started with Pope Paul VI and SPPV believe it started with PopeJohn XXIII but that doesn’t make sense if “ipso facto” is suppossed to be something so obvious for all to see and agree on that there doesn’t even need to be any declaration. And by reading Katherines article above it seems like one could make a good argument that it started with Pope Pius XII. So which one of these “authoritative” groups are right.
If we had a Pope, we could get answers to all your concerns. Your confusion only lends credence to the sedevacantist claim.
Katherine makes a good point. No doubt the moving of the Mandatum into the Holy Thursday Mass itself in 1955, was a major step in transforming the Mass into a “theater” rather than sacrificial worship.
Lay folk now saw that they were not really participating in a full way unless the priest invited them up on to the “stage” to perform for all to see. The 12 men getting their feet washed as Mass are the prototype of all the crazy innovations focused on “active participation of the laity” that soon follow. It is pure theater not suited to the Mass—it’s “look at me!” later on “hear me!” read the lessons ect. ect. The culmination of Renaissance humanism’s focus on man rather than God. The modernist called this the “communitarian focus” of the new religion.
ps….the transformation of the Sanctuary into a Stage was complete.
No confusion on my side at all once we realize the popes are the popes until they die which is THE ONLY WAY God lets us know they are “ipso facto”, “deposed” or no longer the Popes. Anything else is man letting us know when they are “ipso facto”, deposed and no longer popes despite sedes ridiculous claim that they are not doing that and since we know no man has authority to depose a Pope the sedes (or men) are contradicting this law by saying he is deposed. So “Recognize and Resist” as we know many great theologians and saints have taught in past seems to be the only option based on the fact that nobody has authority to depose of the Pope other than God and he obviously hasn’t done this for some reason with the last 5 Popes and I’m thinking maybe because their was really no one any better to take their place other than Arch LeFebvre and what was the chances of him getting voted in.
The only problem Johnnie is that no Pope has ever taught recognize and resist. So even if it were true that saints and theologians taught R&R (which is your erroneous opinion), it doesn’t matter one iota since no Pope ever confirmed what the theologians speculated. You really should spend some time reading Magesterial documents from actual Popes on what they taught about the Papacy and the laities obligation to assent to their teachings. Where you came up with “resist” sounds similar to “I will not serve.” Your position is “I will
not assent.”
Good Afternoon Tom A: Heres’s something from POPE Paul IV’s Cum Ex Apostolatus Officio: “In assessing Our duty and the situation now prevailing, We have been weighed upon by the thought that the matter of this kind is so grave and so dangerous that the Roman Pontiff, who is the representative upon earth of God and our God and Lord Jesus Christ, who holds the pillars of power over peoples and kingdoms, who may judge all and be judged by none in this world, MAY NONETHELESS BE CONTRADICTED IF HE BE FOUND TO HAVE DEVIATED FROM THE FAITH.”
How ironic that you quote a papal document, written during the Reformation, whose purpose was to enact legislation declaring that a heretic cannot hold office in the Church. Here is another quote from the Bull:
(vi) those thus promoted or elevated shall be deprived automatically, and without need for any further declaration, of all dignity, position, honour, title, authority, office and power.
Even the secular wikipedia understands the context of Cum Ex:
Cum ex apostolatus officio is the name of a papal bull issued by Pope Paul IV on 15 February 1559 as a codification or explicitation of the ancient Catholic law that only Catholics can be elected Popes, to the exclusion of non-Catholics, including former Catholics who have become public and manifest heretics.
The immediate provocation was Pope Paul’s suspicion that Cardinal Giovanni Morone, who was popular and expected to succeed him, was secretly a Protestant. Pope Paul IV believed that it was necessary to prevent or negate Morone’s possible election as his successor. He wanted to set it in Church law that no manifest heretic can lawfully hold the Office of St. Peter.
Interesting enough however, is the thought that the 1917 Code may have abrogated Paul IVs law:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/fromrome.wordpress.com/2015/02/20/to-what-extent-is-pope-paul-ivs-cum-ex-apostolatus-officio-still-in-effect/amp/
Too bad there isn’t a Pope to clear up this confusion.
And finally Johnjobilbee, the reason he may be contradicted if found to have deviated from the faith is because he is no longer Pope. The first part correctly reiterates the perennial teaching of the Church that no one may judge the Pope. Of course, if he deviates from the faith he may be contradicted and judged because he has lost his office (by Divine Law) and by the positive law of Paul IV and the 1917 Code of Canon Law, Canon 188:
Any office becomes vacant upon the fact and without any declaration by tacit resignation recognized by the law itself if a cleric:
4.° Publicly defects from the Catholic faith
Good Tuesday afternoon johnjobilbee,
What you remain patently as pertinaciously blinded to is the reality that firstly, this “thing” which calls itself the Catholic Church, simply cannot be what it deems itself to be. This so called “conciliar church” teaches material heresy, which is now manifest heresy as it continues to teach it and to reference the documents, in so called “papal” writings now for the past 52 years. See the proof of the utter heresy taught in “Lumen Gentium”–16 as written above to Herman Newtick and JPeters, who has yet failed to address it. We know with divine certitude that any “thing” which teaches heresy cannot be the Catholic Church, as Christ Jesus commanded this as such. The whole “Recognize and Resist” diabolical facade establishes itself in opposition to the true Sedevacantist position, by calling the starting point as the Pope, when in truth the actual first point of reference must, as it only can be, the Church. There is no “deposing” of a Pontiff required, as any man who calls himself “pope” of a “thing” which teaches heresy, cannot be the Pope of the Catholic Church, as the “thing” he declares his pontificate to rule over, is not the Catholic Church, as heresy cannot be taught by the Church established by the Son of God. If you cannot see this objective reality as the Truth which it is, then it is simply because you receive the “operation of error” to believe lying, as thought it could be truth. Christ commanded, “you will know them by their fruits”. I pray this helps. In caritas.
Tom A: even more interesting is that this papal document is directed to the HIERARCHY of Cardinals and Bishops, or those with authority not the laypeople like Tom A. or In Caritas which happens to be one of the major errors that is consistently committed by sedes, that is the encyclicals and quotes they use are without say and logically directed at those in the hierarchy or future Popes not the lay people.
For sake of In Caritas, Tom A., Rich etc. I was looking for a clause in this encyclical Cum Ex by Pope Paul II that states “And oh, just in case, if the HIERARCHY fails to live up to the duties of their offices by not officially deposing of the heretics destroying the Church than the responsibility will automatically, like ipso facto, become the responsibility of laypeople like In Caritas, Tom A. and Rich to officially depose the Church of all heretics” but unfortunately for them I couldn’t find any. Here you guys can check for yourself, if you find where that clause is please let me know. http://www.dailycatholic.org/cumexapo.htm
Good Tuesday evening johnjobilbee,
As you receive the “operation of error” to believe lying, you remain implacably blinded to the reality as Truth. What is it that you don’t understand about precisely what “heresy” is johnjobilbee? Further, what is it that you don’t understand about the divine command that the true Church simply cannot teach heresy, as commanded by the Son of God in Matthew 16:18? Every Baptized person is commanded to hold the One True Faith and to do so must recognize heresy as heresy. This has nothing to do with being a consecrated nor being a prelate, rather it has everything to do with actually being a Catholic and not just being deceived into thinking you are. Read the proof above of heresy as taught in “Lumen Gentium” at point 16. Then pray johnjobilbee. Pray to receive the grace of divine light to know with certitude that since the so called “second Vatican council” teaches heresy, as in one singular point of heresy being all that is required, because the Church founded by the Son of God CANNOT do such a thing which is perfectly as infinitely contrary to His very Being as Being Himself. Once you know unequivocally that this “thing” called the “conciliar church” teaches heresy in its document which it named, “Dogmatic Constitution on the Church”, you then know with divine certitude that since this “thing” cannot be the Catholic Church which speaks such evil as denying the Triune Personhood of God Himself, whoever calls himself “pope” of it cannot be the Holy Roman Pontiff. And this reality as Truth not because he is an heretic but because he simply doesn’t govern the Catholic Church. This is the summa and summit of Lucifer’s deception johnjobilbee and make no mistake, it is taking countless souls to an eternal disposition in hell, as prophesied by Saint Paul in 2 Thess 2 and as commanded by Jesus the Christ in Matthew 7. I pray this helps as our eternal salvation depends on holding the true Faith in our hearts. In caritas.
Tom A: word NONETHELESS is missing from your quote of Pope Paul iv which makes sense since you later add your own contradictory word “BECAUSE he is no longer Pope” but PPIV uses the word NONETHELESS (not the word BECAUSE as Tom does) which means IN SPITE OF but IN SPITE OF WHAT? We can contradict him IN SPITE OF the fact that he is NO LONGER POPE? Of course not, makes absolutely no sense. What he obviously means is We can contradict him IN SPITE OF the fact that he IS STILL the Roman Pontiff, has power over kingdoms and judges all.
Again Tom, can contradict him not BECAUSE he’s no longer pope but IN SPITE OF the fact that he IS still the Pope. Please stop changing and putting your own words in the popes mouth at least if you want to have an honest debate.
In Caritas in due respect you virtually never directly answer any of the questions asked. Pretty much some variation of the same standard answer all the time. For example earlier I asked that if ipso facto is so obvious to sedes that they need no DECLARATION as to when it actually happens than why on this blog alone have I heard at least three different opinions of which Pope was the first to have “ipso facto” seded. Maybe please directly answer just that one question for now.
Dearest johnjobilbee,
In Truth this has not one iota of anything to do with debate as to your argument versus my argument or as to any human persons’ argument. Literally as actually, the very salvation of our eternal souls depends precisely, as only, on the reception of the One True Faith into our will, freely and in love, as our perfectly miserable reflection of the One Who Is Love, as Deus Caritas Est. Truth is infinitely knowable, while at once infinitely unknown, except unto Himself as Truth Himself. Christ Jesus our Lord, our God, and our King, commanded in John 14 that human creatures will know Him, as those who hold the One True Faith, when He said: He who knows My commands and follows them loves Me, and as I am in the Father, you are in Me, and I in you. When we are “in” Truth Himself we know Him, as He commanded for us mere and perfectly miserable human creatures, johnjobilbee. Any ongoing debate rooted in human ideology, as it relates to this “conciliar church thing” from hell is Lucifer’s work, as the so called, “Recognize and Resist” position, induces the individual Baptized human person into the deception of believing that he has the power of the papacy within himself, to pick and choose what he should believe. And this seduction of power is such that he is literally as actually deceived into believing that he does hold immanently, the power of the Papacy thus, that power which was given by Almighty God to one singular man in this cosmos, at any given time.
We are commanded by Jesus the Christ not to participate in such debate as it is not ours to hold, as Truth is perfectly non-negotiable. In His Truth, as anything the Church teaches infallibly, there is no debate then, as debate there will take us to hell all day and everyday, and until the end of time. We are commanded by the Redeemer of this world to know His commands and follow them, not to decide for ourselves just what they are and then to follow what we choose, rather we are commanded to KNOW them and to FOLLOW them, as He commanded us in John 14.
Lastly then, He commanded that His sheep KNOW His voice and they follow Him and not that we debate about what His voice is, rather that we KNOW it when we hear it. These are the gifts of the Holy Ghost johnjobilbee, as Christ commanded in John 14, “The world will not know Him [the Holy Ghost] nor see Him but you will.”, and these gifts are not to be found thus in human ideological discourse nor debate, as the world does NOT KNOW Him (the Holy Ghost) and this as commanded by Jesus the Christ. There is no place for debate in any of this johnjobilbee, as debating the Truth is perfectly and gravely injurious to our souls. In the final analysis, it is about our perfect submission into His Truth as Truth Himself, and not about any debate about Truth Himself. We must pray, fast, and sacrifice, and all this in love of Him alone, and this is the only way in which we can receive His Truth as Truth Himself, as the gifts of the Holy Ghost. This is the formula which the true Church gives to receive the Holy Ghost. I pray this helps. In caritas.
Johnjobilbee, I just dont know how you come up with the position that Paul IV means that a Pope can deviate from the faith and still be Pope. The rest of Cum Ex and the Canon 188 of the 1917 Code of Canon Law clearly state that the loss of office occurs at the moment of deviation from the faith. I fear you have again grasped at a straw that you believe gives you carte blanche to resist your Pope. The very purpose of the Cum Ex Bull was to prevent a heretic from becoming Pope. Can you find any other magesterial examples of the right and duty to resist? I would say that over the centuries the overwhelming teaching of the Church is that the laity assent to the Magesterium. Is there an encyclical on resisiting that we are unaware of? I would
wager that even Bergolio would agree that the laity must assent to his magesterial teachings. The NONETHELESS phrase seems to me a product of the still undefined theological position of whether a Pope can fall into heresy or not. One position holds that if if he does he was never Pope to begin with and others say he loses office immediately. Its a moot point suffice it to say that a heretic cannot be Pope and that is what Paul IV is teaching through this legislative act based on Divine Law. One only has to read Leo XIII, Pius X, Vatican Council, Code of Canon Law 1917, Pius XII, and others to ascertain this simple concept, heretics are not Catholic and they cease being Catholic ipso facto and not by any declaration from any authority. While declarations from ecclesial authorities seem like a logical function to inform the faithful, they are not required.
I’ve thought he was possessed by the devil since day one. Only Our Lady will deliver us from these evil times.
Tom A: “JPeters, churchmen can render any sort of judgment they wish, but it carries no weight seeing how no earthly power can judge the Pope. Churchmen in the past have rendered many judgments only to have the Pope comfirm or overrule them. So I am missing your point.”
.
JPeters: Let me clarify. To begin with, the Church is permitted to render a factual judgment, or a “discretionary judgment” (as Bellarmine calls it) concerning a pope. It can render such a judgment if the pope himself requests it when accused of moral crimes, or it can be rendered such a judgment against the wishes of a pope, if he is accused of heresy.
.
Such a judgment does not have authority OVER the pope, but it does have authority in the sense that it is rendered by the competent ecclesiastical authorities.
.
An authoritative judgment must be rendered before any ipso facto loss of ecclesiastical jurisdiction takes place. That is why Bellarmine himself taught that a pope will not lose his jurisdiction until he is “judged by man”. The debate over how a pope loses his office concerns whether he does so at the moment the Church renders a judgment, or if the Church must take an additional step by actually deposing him, after the judgment is rendered. That is what the debate concerns.
.
John of St. Thomas confirmed this in his essay on the loss of papal office due to heresy. Here is what wrote:
.
“It cannot be held that the pope, by the very fact of being a heretic, would cease to be pope antecedently to a declaration of the Church. It is true that some seem to hold this position; but we will discuss this in the next article. What is truly a matter of debate, is whether the pope, AFTER HE IS DECLARED BY THE CHURCH TO BE A HERETIC, is deposed ipso facto by Christ the Lord, or if the Church ought to depose him. In any case, as long as the Church has not issued a juridical declaration, he must always be considered the pope, as we will make more clear in the next article.”
.
Again, the debate is over what happens AFTER the judgment is rendered. Does he lose his jurisdiction at once, and the Church merely declares him deposed, or does the Church have to actually depose him? That is what is debated.
.
Regarding the “formal correction,” that is only one step in the process. Additionally, it would not suffice that the declaration of heresy comes from a handful of Cardinals. It would have to come from a general council, or at least the entire college of Cardinals. So, while Burke’s efforts are commendable, but they will not lead anywhere unless the entire episcopate joins him, which is very unlikely. God will have to resolve the situation himself, probably by means of the useful tool know as ISIS.
Tom, Johnjobilbee also misses the massive point that Paul VI’s C.E.A specifically NULLIFIES the power of the Cardinals to force a heretic on the Catholic Church. He specifically states that even if the vote of the College is unanimous and completely “by the book” legal, the heretical person IS NOT THE POPE and never will be.
This flatly contradicts his incipient legalism once more—C.E.A was not addressed to the Cardinals to somehow give them authority to impose a heretic pope—he completely misses the mark.
Also, since Cum Ex Apostolatus is DIRECTLY CITED by the 1917 Code in Canon 188 (which can be seen in the complete versions of the code–which also cites Pope Saint Pius V’s own Motu Proprio confirming Cum Ex Apostolatus) it is highly doubtful it’s intent was to abrogate it—rather citing a document means that the code is upholding it’s principle’s.
Significantly–Paul IV’s Bull was also confirmed by the Motu Proprio of Pope Saint Pius V in 1566—this is the answer to the Salza-type morons who try to dismiss this document as not having any authority and a one off fluke coming from a “crank” pope. They are as usual, asinine in their “scholarship” and completely in error. The 1917 Code cites it in Canon 188.4!!
Jpeters, the only problem with what you say is that it appears nowhere in Canon Law. Yes, it was debated centuries ago by the theologians you mention, but it was never codified that an ecclesial process was required. In fact, the exact opposite was codified in Canon 188 of the 1917 Code of Canon Law.
Also the reason it is difficult to pick a firm date on when each Pope ipso facto self-deposed is precisely due to the nature of the specific heresy we are dealing with, as outlined in Pascendi by Pope Saint Pius X. The modernists were very clever in couching their heresies. John XXIII never had one instance, but rather a cumulative series of heretical positions (clear with 20/20 hindsight) which lead him to effectively nullifying the constitution and Divine Mandate of the Catholic Church in favor of his heretical “medicine of mercy” approach—-i.e. the Church would no longer teach definitively on faith and morals but leave people up to their own devices to find the truth. His establishment of the Office of Ecumenism certainly contributes to his doubtful status as Pope, since it effectively redefined the nature of the Church. Lastly, the entire philosophy of Aggiornamento leads to heresy, by replacing the Holy Ghost with the ‘Spirit of the Age’ as the definitive guide for Catholics in the ‘modern world’.
Paul VI–probably when he imposed his heretical new Rites on the Church in December 1969 and also for having signed the heretical Vatican II documents.
John Paul II–probably when he imposed his heretical idea that the Catholic Church was completely re-invented by a totally new awareness of itself and its mission at Vatican II as outlined in Redemptor Hominis.
But since I am not infallible, I do not pass judgement as to specifics….what I cannot do as a Catholic is give ‘Catholic assent’ on all matters of faith or morals to the Revolutionary Popes since their orientation was blatantly heretical and damaging to the faith–not only in theory, but concretely given my own experience in the Conciliar Church. Therefore, in good conscience, they are all doubtful Popes lacking the legitimate, bidning authority of their office that must normally be assigned to Popes. Even the R&R crowd acknowledge this on the practical level—so there is not practical difference between us—only an important theological one concerning the very nature and purpose of the papacy. The “heretical popes” crowd is simply out to lunch that’s all.
Benedict XVI said and wrote many heresies before coming to the papacy, which goes strongly against him. Also his imposition of the Ordinairy Form and ultimate desire to destroy the Roman Rite through a Hegelian synthesis of the heretical new religion with the old, also go strongly against his being a valid pope. He is also a staunch support of the Revolution, so this more than anything else would provide enough cause to abrogate his papacy.
Lastly, Bergolio was a manifest modernist Jesuit heretic before he ever came to the throne, so he was never Pope. That, I am 100% certain of based on the dictates of faith and right reason. We know that a “great apostasy” was foretold with infallible certitude—the Greek meaning of “great” is closer to “total” than a measure of a number of people. So Aggiornamento would fit the bill as in fact being this “total apostasy”.
Dearest Tom A,
As Christ our Lord, our God, and our King of the cosmos commanded in Luke 22:31,32, Blessed Peter and his Successors CANNOT lose the Faith, as He commanded:
32: “But I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not: and thou, being once converted, confirm thy brethren.”
Anyone who receives the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Faith, as the faith of a child, knows the Truth of this command, as it pertains to Blessed Peter AND each and every Successor to the Holy Chair, as if it did not, the gates of hell would have prevailed against His Church, probably with the second Pontiff following Blessed Peter.
This is precisely as exactly the reason why Lucifer and his usual minions, all of them on their way to an eternity in hell, had to create the GRAND ILLUSION, that this “thing” as a literal creature beast from hell, which calls itself the “Catholic Church” since 1958 had to be devised, constructed, and executed as only it could be, from the mind of Lucifer himself. Lucifer and his principle minions, the Freemasons, have always taken satanic pride in “hiding these things right before your eyes”. This “thing” called the “conciliar church” or “post-vatican ii church”, this “thing” which finds its theology rooted in and as to be its very wellspring of exegesis, this diabolical “second vatican council” from the mind of Lucifer, is in Truth the church of the Antichrist, and it is “hidden” right before all eyes to see, as to be those eyes which can see, by the grace of divine Light alone.
For anyone to suggest that as Christ Jesus commanded Peter as the subject of His object, “My Church”, in Matthew 16:18, and for the Holy Church to have defined that infallibly as to mean not simply the “person” of “Peter” but also as the “subject” to be continued IN all of his Successors, while at once then to suggest that the command given Peter as, “thy faith fail not”, was meant for Peter in his person alone, places an affront to the Charity Who Is Jesus the Christ, the likes of which brings the wrath of Almighty God upon His creation. Would it have been that Saints Thomas and Bellarmine were alive today, there would be no question in their minds, as to this reality as Truth, as they are Saints of Holy Mother Church, given the divine Light of Faith as Truth. I pray this helps. In caritas.
Dearest Semper Fidelis,
Your very last sentence imparts the very meaning onto that which we know to be true in this as our time. You wrote:
“So Aggiornamento would fit the bill as in fact being this “total apostasy”.”
Because this is true and as it speaks as res ipsa loquitur, for all those with eyes given to see, you clarify in that very singular statement the explicit reason why there is no need, while in Truth there could never be a “need”, because we know as deFide that Peter in his Successors have no peer on this earth to judge them, to even speculate theologically that a true Pope can fall into heresy. Any as all of that theological speculation is precisely that and as “theological speculation”, it can as it is indeed doing, take souls to hell each and every day, all day long, and until the end of time. This type of speculation as precisely accomplished in this, as our time, demonstrates an hubris the likes of which caused the Fall of Lucifer and his angelic minions into hell, as “Non-Servium”. In caritas.
The problem is, well, these sedevacantist types really. Just. Don’t. Get. The papacy and what it is. I don’t doubt their sincerity. I’m sure many of them are pious. But nonetheless they don’t get it.
These same types are the opposite side of the same coin of the Opus Dei/ultramontanist/neoconservative Church in that they hold the same error in common: They believe the pope has some sort of grace or charism which overrides the fact that he is a weak human being. Just like you and me. Just like Peter who was called “Satan” by The Lord when scandalized by the fact that He had to die for our sins, and then later denied Christ and then hid out of fear when He was led away to His death.
It scandalizes them to think that a pope could possibly separate himself from the Church for the same reason that Peter was scandalized by Christ’s death on the Cross: the Church must suffer just as He did.
I will say it again and again: The Cross is a scandal to anyone who does not take up his or her own.
Magisterial statements speak of OBJECTIVE reality, not subjective culpability.
It is necessary for salvation to be united IN PRINCIPLE with the Roman Pontiff. One cannot be united with any particular Roman Pontiff when there is no pope–whether for three weeks or some longer period.
EENS means that nowhere outside the Catholic Church are there sacraments, licitly celebrated. EENS means that, objectively, insofar as the Church can judge, there are no Sacramental means of grace outside the Church. EENS does NOT mean that, in concrete reality, every person who is not a registered member of a Catholic parish goes to Hell.
Every living thing (on Earth), is made of carbon. The Carbon Hoax is a war on life. The goal of Bergoglio is the same as his puppet-masters: kill all but 50-500 million people on Earth.